December 31, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:31 PM

IF THE NOOSE FITS:

Khaddam’s Bombshell Tightens Noose Around Syria: Experts (Ahmed Fathy, December 31, 2005, IslamOnline.net)

The bombshell dropped by former Syrian vice-president Abdel Halim Khaddam on a possible Syrian role in the assassination of Lebanese ex-premier Rafiq Hariri has sent seismic waves in Damascus and would tighten the noose around the Arab country, experts agreed on Saturday, December 31.

“Khaddam’s testimony at this critical juncture in Syrian history has, in effect, sent shock waves across the country’s political landscape and ushered in grave consequences,” Syrian opposition writer Akram Al-Beni told IslamOnline.net.


I've still got a couple hours to be right about the regime falling in '05....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:01 PM

FIRST FARRIS HASSAN, NOW HER:

Response to “Why?” (Mike Luckovich, December 29, 2005, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

on 10-26, i did an illustration depicting the word “why” using the names of the 2,000 troops who had, at that time, died in iraq. here on this blog, the feedback from readers, both pro and con was enormous. in response, a young woman, an 11th grader, has created the response above. what do you all think?

This is getting embarrassing.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:01 PM

APPOINTABLE, NOT ELECTABLE:

Chalabi Named Iraq Oil Minister (Jonathan Finer and Naseer Nouri, December 31, 2005, Washington Post )

As a fuel crisis deepened in Iraq, the government replaced its oil minister with controversial Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Chalabi, whose poor performance in the Dec. 15 elections was a setback in his recent attempt at political rehabilitation.

Mr Chalabi had four strikes against him in Iraqi electoral politics: he's secular, he's too closely tied to Washington and Tehran, and he left when Saddam was in power. He'd have been an ideal transitional figure ffor us to put in power undemocratically in the Spring/Summer of '03--so long as Ayatollah Sistani agreed--but he never had a shot at winning popular elections.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:55 PM

THOSE WHO THROW LIKE FRENCHMEN:

BASEBALL’S PHONY CLASS WAR: Why blame Steinbrenner? (Russ Smith, NY Press)

Even though J.D. throws like a girl, the latest NYC celebrity is a huge plus for Joe Torre’s team, since he has few equals at running down fly balls in center field. His addition to an already packed lineup is ominous for the Red Sox and the resuscitated Blue Jays. It doesn’t really matter that he might resemble the Bernie Williams of 2005 in a few years since his addition has already made the Yankees the A.L. East favorite, at least according to most sportswriters. I’d be more chagrinned if Brian Cashman had landed a young, workhorse-starting pitcher, but there’s time for that, and time for Boston’s management to recover. At this point in Damon’s career, I’d rather have Cleveland’s Coco Crisp—and not just because he has the coolest name in baseball—leading off for the Sox.

My most immediate concern upon reading about Damon’s sensible nod to the club who offered him the most was breaking the news to my 11-year-old son Booker, who’s dreaded since last summer that Johnny, his favorite athlete, would leave the Sox. Though very disappointed, he took this turn of events in stride, saying, “I’ll always like Johnny, but I hope he pulls a hamstring on opening day and goes on the disabled list.” [...]

More seriously, how can you explain Jonathan Alter’s unhinged online Dec. 19 Newsweek column, in which he thunders: “We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.” And Joe Conason, in last week’s New York Observer, was just as hysterical: “Recklessly and audaciously, George W. Bush is driving the nation whose laws he swore to uphold into a constitutional crisis. He has claimed the powers of a medieval monarch and defied the other two branches of government to deny him.”

You hear, from certain elements of the Bush-hating media, about Constitutional crises as often as the absurd cliché that the Yankee ballplayers are the embodiment of “class.” No wonder Bill Kristol, the Weekly Standard editor who far prefers John McCain over Bush, to write in the magazine’s current issue: “What is one to say about these media—Democratic spokesmen for contemporary American liberalism? That they have embarrassed and discredited themselves. That they cannot be taken seriously as critics. It would be good to have a responsible opposition party in the United States today. It would be good to have a serious mainstream media. Too bad we have neither.”

But at least, as Alter and Conason point out, we do have a medieval dictator.


Is there any Yankee fan who thinks signing Johnny Damon was a good idea or any Democrat who thinks replacing George Bush with Dick Cheney would be good politics? These seem figments of media imagination.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:45 PM

OUT WITH THE NEW, IN WITH THE OLD:

2005: A Tipping Point?: It was a bad year for "New Democrats," but a good year for new democrats (Duncan Currie, 12/30/2005, Weekly Standard)

[R]epublicans had a bad 12 months. But their plight looks rather enviable when compared with the Democrats' current muddle. They are now the "No" party: the party of intractable opposition to George W. Bush. But while Democrats are brimming with antagonism for the president's agenda, they are bereft of the intellectual munitions needed to formulate their own.

Then there is the party's cleavage on matters of war and peace. "Defeating terrorism is the supreme military and moral mission of our time," says the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. Try telling that to the anti-Bush Left, whose proxies now dictate and jaundice the tenor of intra-party debate. Indeed, while it was a good year for new democrats in Iraq, it was a dreadful year for "New Democrats" in America.

Take poor Joe Lieberman. Only five years ago he was a few hundred Florida votes away from being Al Gore's veep. Today, Sen. Lieberman is perhaps the loneliest Democrat in Washington. The reason why is as basic as it is disheartening for party centrists: Iraq. Lieberman believes Bush has a plan for victory--and he believes that plan is working. For the MoveOn types, such comments would be heresy enough.

But Lieberman really set the cat amongst the pigeons when he questioned his party's attacks on Bush. "History will judge us harshly if we do not stretch across the divide of distrust to join together to complete our mission successfully in Iraq," he said in early December. "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril."

The left-wing blogosphere erupted--as did prominent Democratic leaders. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi each took a swipe, with Reid claiming Lieberman was "at a different place on Iraq" than most Americans and Pelosi saying she "completely" disagreed with him. Party chairman Howard Dean also reproached Lieberman, and threw his lot in with Congressman John Murtha's call for a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops. Liberal activists have even urged Lowell Weicker, whose Connecticut Senate seat Lieberman won in 1988, to challenge Lieberman in 2006 on an anti-war platform. That Lieberman's Iraq stance has apparently made him such a pariah affirms, once again, that this really is George McGovern's Democratic party.

Make that George McGovern and Frank Church's Democratic party, as witness the recent scrap over extending the Patriot Act and using wiretaps to spy on al Qaeda. Liberals' hostility to both reflects two impulses: their propensity, even in wartime, to make a fetish of ACLU-style civil libertarianism, and their desire to play "Gotcha!" games with the White House in hopes of derailing the Bush presidency.

Neither impulse is a responsible one. And each goes a long way toward explaining the public's lingering wariness of Democrats on national security issues. As blogger and Daily Standard contributor Ross Douthat has keenly observed, the spat over wiretapping just reinforces the perception that Republicans will err on the side of doing too much to protect Americans, while Democrats will err on the side of doing too little.


The Democrats weakness on national security matters rather little beside their weakness on economic security, their ostensible raison d'etre. Here's all you really need to know about what a wreck they've become: even the Tories, the original Stupid Party, have figured out that the only path to power in the Anglosphere (less Canada) is the Third Way. Meanwhile, the Democrats have decided that what worked for Bill Clinton is intolerable to them.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:32 PM

THAT SADDAM, WHAT A KIDDER:

Myth and reality in Iraq (The Boston Globe, DECEMBER 31, 2005)

When Craig Jeness, an official of the United Nations' election-monitoring mission in Iraq, confirmed Wednesday that the Dec. 15 parliamentary elections there were "transparent and credible," he was not only affirming the validity of the vote and the honesty of Iraq's own electoral commission. In a way, Jeness, a Canadian, was also doing a favor for the Sunni Arab political leaders who have been alleging large-scale electoral fraud.

Those leaders had been telling their followers that if they got out the Sunni Arab vote, they would win a share of representation commensurate with that of the major Shiite parties. This forecast was based on a myth that many Sunni Arabs tell themselves: that they are in the majority, as befits their previous role as the dominant group in Iraq's political and economic life.

Since there has been no real census in Iraq since 1957, no reliable figures are available for the current population. Most informed estimates, however, place the Sunni Arab share at 20 percent or less. Some estimates go as low as 13 percent.

Whatever the actual percentage may be, it is almost certain to fall far short of a majority. But it has become a matter of sectarian pride for Sunni Arabs to deny the likelihood that there may be three times as many Shiites in Iraq as Sunni Arabs.

The upshot of this persistent denial of reality is that the grass-roots supporters of the Sunni Arab parties find it hard to accept that, though they turned out in force for the recent elections, preliminary results indicate their parties are likely to gain between 40 and 50 seats in the new 275-seat national assembly. This is about the same portion that the Kurds, who make up roughly 20 percent of the population and who voted in large numbers, expect to receive.

It's as if blacks had gotten 20% of the vote after the end of Apartheid. It'll take the Sunni some time to get used to reality.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:29 PM

JUST PROVIDE THE ILLUSION OF DOING SOMETHING AND THEY'LL BE HAPPY:

New controls in place at all U.S. entry ports (Eric Lipton, 12/30/05, The New York Times)

With the installation of a new immigration control system at 18 border-crossing posts last week, the Department of Homeland Security has reached a milestone.

Every port of entry into the United States - land, sea or air - is now equipped with the system, US-Visit, which takes fingerprints and digital photos of many entering foreigners to check them against criminal and terrorist watch lists. The 115 U.S. airports with international traffic, as well as 15 sea and 154 land ports of entry, all now have the equipment, which is linked to a national computer network that in a matter of seconds can check a visitor's fingerprints against a database of known terrorists and criminals.

But most Canadians and Mexicans, in addition to U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, are not subject to the checks. As a result, only about 42 percent of people arriving at the airports or seaports must submit to fingerprinting. At land borders, the number is only about 2 percent. Because of those and other limitations, some question whether the program, which has cost more than $1 billion so far and could ultimately cost as much as $10 billion, is a worthwhile investment.

"US-Visit is an attractive showpiece, but it is not capable of delivering all that it is being sold to deliver," said Kathleen Campbell Walker of El Paso, vice president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Just wait 'til we Christo the entire border....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:59 AM

AS THE MANDATE SLIPS AWAY:

Journalists protest Chinese censorship (David Lague, DECEMBER 30, 2005, International Herald Tribune)

In a rare protest against an official media crackdown, about 100 journalists from one of China's most aggressive daily newspapers have gone on strike after the paper's editor and two of his deputies were fired, local journalists said Friday.

The editor of The Beijing News, Yang Bin, and deputy editors, Sun Xuedong and Li Duoyu, were dismissed Wednesday as part of what media watchdog groups describe as a sweeping government campaign to tighten control over the media and the Internet.

The striking journalists, about a third of the staff, stopped work on Thursday after editors from The Beijing News's conservative parent paper, the Guangming Daily, were appointed to replace Yang and his deputies.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:51 AM

GAY-BASHING NEVER GOES OUT OF STYLE:

A Chorus of Hoover Critics: More conservatives join the call to take his name off the FBI Building. (Johanna Neuman, December 31, 2005, LA Times)

Every year for the last three years, Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, has introduced a bill to strip J. Edgar Hoover's name from the FBI's headquarters — an initiative that has been largely ignored.

Now, however...the effort to rename the Hoover building is starting to attract more supporters, most recently U.S. Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman, a Republican who was a leader of the presidentially appointed commission on pre-Iraq-war intelligence.

"This country — and the bureau — would be well served if his name were removed from the bureau's building," Silberman, a Reagan appointee, told the 1st Circuit Judicial Conference in June.


Why not name it for John O'Neill instead?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:44 AM

GOD HELPS THOSE...:

Anguished by the Suffering, a Cleric Keeps on Talking: Pius Ncube is the chief Zimbabwean critic of leader Robert Mugabe. Some fear for his life (Robyn Dixon, December 31, 2005, LA Times)

Nearly a quarter of Zimbabwe's population has been pushed to the edge of starvation by five years of economic mismanagement and hyperinflation. Unemployment is estimated at 80%. A campaign this year by President Robert Mugabe's government to destroy squatter camps and street stalls left about 700,000 people homeless. Mugabe repeatedly has been accused of rigging elections to stay in power.

Witnessing all of this, Roman Catholic Archbishop Pius Ncube of Bulawayo has become the president's most prominent internal critic. He acknowledges that he prays for Mugabe's death.


It's always left to the Church to resist evil.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:41 AM

D'OH JONES:

Why Dow May Be Off the Money: The index's weak year raises concern, but some question its value as an economic crystal ball (Tom Petruno and Josh Friedman, December 31, 2005, LA Times)

any investment professionals remain bullish about 2006. They expect that the Federal Reserve soon will stop tightening credit and that energy prices won't rise much more, giving the economy room to run.

"We think the catalyst for further stock market gains will be what it has been: global and U.S. economic growth chronically stronger and more durable than most anticipated," said James Paulsen, chief investment strategist at Wells Capital Management in Minneapolis.

As for the Dow, many believe the 109-year-old index of 30 large, blue-chip companies hasn't been an accurate barometer of the economy or the broader stock market for the last two years.

Although the Dow lost ground in 2005, the average New York Stock Exchange stock was up nearly 7%. That also was the gain of the average U.S. stock mutual fund, according to fund tracker Morningstar Inc.

Shares of many smaller companies scored even better returns, which weren't necessarily reflected in the modest yearly gains posted by the broad Nasdaq composite index or the Standard & Poor's 500.

Jim Peoples, 61, a retired healthcare executive in Agoura Hills, estimated that his portfolio rose about 10% this year, thanks to healthy advances in smaller stocks and in such market sectors as energy.

"I've definitely done better than the Dow and the other indexes," Peoples said.

The Dow also was the weakest of major stock indexes in 2004, when it added just 3.2%. Despite that poor performance, the economy expanded at a brisk pace in 2005, and corporate earnings grew at a double-digit rate, on average.

The Dow has struggled as 16 of its 30 stocks fell this year.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:34 AM

WWII AS MODEL:

Truman Declares Hostilities Ended: 51 Statutes to Die Government's Power to Seize Plants and 1 1/2 Billion Taxes to Go: 18 of Laws End at Once States of Emergency and War Continue-Sudden Action a Surprise to Washington (BERTRAM D. HULEN, 12/31/46, The New York Times)

An Administration official who has worked closely on the problem explained the significance of the action informally at the request of The New York Times.

"The proclamation terminating hostilities affects fifty-one laws," he said. "Twenty-nine of these laws are of relatively little importance, and have not been used for some time. Those considered to be of some importance at the present time continue on for periods, the majority of which are for six months so that any need for certain laws in the immediate future will be satisfied by the additional period in which they will continue to be effective.

"The most important law affected is the War Labor Disputes Act, commonly called the Smith-Connally Act. It will end July 1, 1947. However, under the operation of that law the Government will be unable to take over any new operations inasmuch as hostilities have now been declared to be terminated. It can continue to operate, however, in the meantime in any industry now in possession of the Government--the coal mines and the tugboats on the Great Lakes.

"There are three technical 'states' that have existed since 1939. The first is the state of emergency that consists of limited and unlimited emergency and special emergency. Those are still in existence. The second is the state of war, the third is the state of hostilities, now ended.

"The termination of a state of emergency continues to be a joint responsibility of Congress and the President. That doesn't mean it takes concurrent action to terminate. But the President should consider the attitude of Congress, and Congress should consider the attitude of the President in so far as state of emergency is concerned.

"The termination of all of the states of emergency would be a more serious matter than the termination of hostilities. It would affect a greater number of laws and would also create serious questions of policy in various industries, wages in shipyards, for example. The termination of hostilities does not have that effect.

"The third and most important is the state of war. Termination of this would affect something in the neighborhood of 250 statutes and also would create a number of important policy questions. It must be worked out gradually between Congress and the President."

President Truman told his news conference the time had come when the Executive Branch should give up some of the powers exercised during the war. He then announced his proclamation, gave out a list of the laws affected, and read a prepared statement which emphasized that his action was "entirely in keeping with the policies which I have consistently followed, in an effort to bring our economy and our Government back to a peacetime basis as quickly as possible."

In a few instances, he continued, the statutes affected contained powers that should be maintained during peacetime or for the remainder of the period of reconversion and in these instances he would make recommendations to the new Congress. Also, he said, he would make recommendations to Congress. Also, he said, he would make recommendations to Congress "in the near future" with respect to the still-continuing states of emergency and the state of war itself."

Upon concluding the reading of the statement, Mr. Truman sought to bring the conference to an end by wishing those present a happy New Year and saying he would meet them at another press conference on Thursday afternoon. But he finally yielded to persuasion and replied to a few questions with answers along the lines of his formal statement.

Asked whether this was a step in his promise to cooperate with the new Republican- controlled Congress, he replied that this was co-operating with Congress.

The President's action was generally regarded here as chiefly important from the psychological standpoint. It was viewed as a move to demonstrate that he wants to be a constitutional President and not to hold on to excessive powers granted to the Chief Executive through emergency proclamations and a state of war.

In addition, it is looked upon as an example to other nations to return to a peacetime structure. In effect, it was remarked in political circles, the President has said to Messrs., Attlee, Stalin and others that it is time for all the countries to get back to normal.

Politically, the action was regarded as anticipating any move the Republicans in Congress might have made to put Mr. Truman into a position of clinging to powers that they want to take away. The President for his part now says that he will tell Congress in a few days about the powers he needs to retain.


16 months after al Qaeda surrenders and upon the election of a Democratic congress it would be appropriate for George Bush to likewise give up some war powers.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:29 AM

ANOTHER INSTITUTION BASTARDIZED:

In a Daring Leap, Ringling Loses Its Three Rings (GLENN COLLINS, 12/31/05, NY Times)

And now, ladies and gentlemen, children of all ages, step right up and meet the no-ring circus.

For the first time in its history, the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus will present a new show to its audiences without three rings, or two - or even one.

When the 136th edition of the circus opens on Wednesday at the St. Pete Times Forum here in Tampa, where Ringling maintains its winter quarters, the elephants, clowns, aerialists and acrobats will roam an arena floor. In as big a departure, the show will have a story line instead of being simply a cavalcade of acts.


Next they'll get rid of the little flashlights you twirl around over your head.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:21 AM

NOT EVEN HONEST ACCIDENTS CAN BE JUSTIFIED TO PROP UP AN EVIL SYSTEM:

In Worker's Death, View of China's Harsh Justice (JIM YARDLEY, 12/31/05, NY Times)

From the prison cell where he contemplated an executioner's bullet, a migrant worker named Wang Binyu gave an anguished account of his wasted life. Unexpectedly, it rippled across China like a primal scream.

For three weeks, the brutal murders Mr. Wang committed after failing to collect unpaid wages were weighed on the Internet and in Chinese newspapers against the brutal treatment he had endured as a migrant worker. Public opinion shouted for mercy; lawyers debated the fairness of his death sentence. Others saw the case as a bloody symptom of the harsh inequities of Chinese life.

But then, in late September, the furor disappeared as suddenly as it had begun. Online discussion was censored and news media coverage was almost completely banned. Mr. Wang's final appeal was rushed to court. His father, never notified, learned about the hearing only by accident. His chosen defense lawyer was forbidden from participating.

"All of you are on the same side," Mr. Wang, 28, shouted during the hearing, his father said in an interview here in the family's home village in northern Gansu Province. "If you want to kill me, just kill me."

On Oct. 19, they did. Mr. Wang was executed so quickly, and quietly, that it took weeks for the word to fully trickle out that he was dead. [...]

There is widespread suspicion, even within the government, that too many innocent people are sentenced to death.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:09 AM

SERPICO NATION:

Bank Robber Turned in by Sons Gets 40 Years (JOHN O'CONNOR, December 30, 2005, Associated Press)

To his family and neighbors, Alfred Ginglen was a pillar of community life. The married father and ex-Marine served in local civic groups, even working in town as an auxiliary police officer. But in his diary, he documented his other side: a life filled with prostitute visits, a secret girlfriend, a crack habit.

That life began to unfold in 2004, when his police officer son recognized his father in a surveillance image. Thursday, Ginglen was sentenced to 40 years in prison for a string of rural bank robberies after being turned in by his own sons. Authorities said he needed the money to support his double life.

U.S. District Judge Jeanne Scott called Ginglen's sons "the greatest credit of your life."

"They acted in an exemplary fashion under circumstances that must have been incredibly difficult," she said.

His son, Jared Ginglen, a Peoria police officer, said he had no regrets about turning his father in. Jared and his brothers, Clay and Garrett, have said their father always taught them to do the right thing.

"It had to be done," he said.


One of the great Leftist lies of the 20th Century -- adopted in large part because of their association with domestic Communism -- was that it can be morally proper to cover up crimes if they're committed by friends and/or family, an anti-ethos they share with the Mafia, the Klan, and the like. E. M. Forster captured it in its full vileness when he said: “If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.”


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:16 AM

AND SAFER:

Crime Numbers Keep Dropping Across the City (AL BAKER, 12/31/05, NY Times)

Crime has fallen across New York City for the 17th consecutive year, with subway crime down by more than 5 percent from last year and the number of recorded murders virtually certain to be the fewest in any single year since 1963, new Police Department statistics show.

Just one more way that America is diverging from the former West.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:54 AM

PROHIBITION BY DEGREES:

Repeat drunken driving arrests fall: 44 percent drop follows start of Melanie's Law (Stephanie Ebbert, December 31, 2005, Boston Globe)

Since Melanie's Law started cracking down on habitual drunk drivers, the number of repeat offenders being arrested has plummeted, records at the Registry of Motor Vehicles show.

Over the last two months, 1,051 repeat offenders were charged with drunken driving, down 44 percent from the same period last year, when 1,889 were charged.


Though seldom acknowledged as such, MADD started one of the most successful social/religious movements of the 20th Century.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:51 AM

WHY DO THEY WEAR SPIKES IF NOT TO CARVE A GUY LIKE HIM UP?:

Di Canio 'fascist but not racist' (BBC, 12/23/05)

Lazio striker Paolo Di Canio has defended the raised-arm salute that earned him a one-game ban by saying he is "a fascist but not a racist".


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:51 AM

THE GERMAN PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Muslims to face loyalty test to become German (Kate Conolly, The Daily Telegraph, December 31st, 2005)

Muslims intent on becoming German citizens will have to undergo a rigorous cultural test to gauge their views on subjects ranging from bigamy to homosexuality and honour killings.

In what is believed to be the first test of its kind in Europe, the southern state of Baden-Wuerttemberg has created the two-hour oral exam to test the loyalty of Muslims to Germany.

It is to be taken on top of the standard test for foreigners wishing to become German citizens, which includes language proficiency skills and general knowledge. It also requires applicants to prove they can provide for themselves and their families.[...]

Until now, all applicants have simply had to tick a Yes or No box to answer whether they feel loyalty to Germany or not.

But now they will be quizzed on their attitudes to homosexuality and Western clothing for young women, and whether or not husbands should be allowed to beat their wives.

Other questions covering topics such as bigamy and whether parents should allow their children to participate in school sports, have been classed as "trick questions," meant to catch people off guard.

Dieter Biller of the Foreign Ministry in Stuttgart, the state capital, said the test would help bureaucrats to form opinions as to whether citizenship applicants were suitable or not.

"It covers everything from sexual equality, violence, school sports and religious freedom," he said.

Torquemada would be impressed, but even if they give all the right answers, they still won’t be accepted as Germans.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

NOT:

4-way Manny frenzy: Execs buzzing over potential Mets megadeal (BILL MADDEN and ANTHONY McCARRON, 12/31/05, NY DAILY NEWS)

Manny Ramirez is eager to forget Boston, and Mets want him.
The Mets have been engaged in ongoing talks with the Devil Rays about reliever Danys Baez, but, according to multiple baseball sources, those discussions could bloom into a blockbuster four-team trade scenario in which Manny Ramirez winds up at Shea and similarly disgruntled slugger Miguel Tejada lands in Boston. [...]

The basics of the four-team deal that had the baseball executives buzzing yesterday and would appear to satisfy the needs of all four clubs would have Tejada and Tampa Bay's Joey Gathright going to the Red Sox to fill Boston's holes at shortstop and center field.

Ramirez and Baez would go to the Mets, giving them one of the game's best sluggers and a setup man. The Orioles would satisfy their need at shortstop by getting Julio Lugo from Tampa Bay and add pitching by getting Matt Clement from Boston and possibly Kris Benson from the Mets.

The Devil Rays, who have always been difficult to deal with, especially in complicated transactions, are seeking top prospects and young pitching and would be satisfied in that regard by getting third baseman Andy Marte from Boston and Jae Seo and Aaron Heilman from the Mets. In addition, the Mets would send Kaz Matsui to Tampa to give the D-Rays a stopgap shortstop replacement until prospect B.J. Upton is ready.


If the Sox are giving up Marte in a deal they're getting back at least Aubrey Huff from the D-Rays.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

SOME LIKE IT HOT (via Tom Corcoran):

Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure (Granville Sewell, 12/28/2005, American Spectator)

The first formulations of the second law were all about heat: a quantity called thermal "entropy" was defined to measure the randomness, or disorder, associated with a temperature distribution, and it was shown that in an isolated system this entropy always increases, or at least never decreases, as the temperature becomes more and more randomly (more uniformly) distributed. If we define thermal "order" to be the opposite (negative) of thermal entropy, we can say that the thermal order can never increase in a closed (isolated) system. However, it was soon realized that other types of order can be defined which also never increase in a closed system. For example, we can define a "carbon order" associated with the distribution of carbon diffusing in a solid, using the same equations, and through an identical analysis show that this order also continually decreases, in a closed system. With time, the second law came to be interpreted more and more generally, and today most discussions of the second law in physics textbooks offer examples of entropy increases (order decreases) which have nothing to do with heat conduction or diffusion, such as the shattering of a wine glass or the demolition of a building.

It is a well-known prediction of the second law that, in a closed system, every type of order is unstable and must eventually decrease, as everything tends toward more probable (more random) states. Not only will carbon and temperature distributions become more disordered (more uniform), but the performance of all electronic devices will deteriorate, not improve. Natural forces, such as corrosion, erosion, fire and explosions, do not create order, they destroy it. The second law is all about probability, it uses probability at the microscopic level to predict macroscopic change: the reason carbon distributes itself more and more uniformly in an insulated solid is, that is what the laws of probability predict when diffusion alone is operative.

The reason natural forces may turn a spaceship, or a TV set, or a computer into a pile of rubble but not vice-versa is also probability: of all the possible arrangements atoms could take, only a very small percentage could fly to the moon and back, or receive pictures and sound from the other side of the Earth, or add, subtract, multiply and divide real numbers with high accuracy.

The discovery that life on Earth developed through evolutionary "steps," coupled with the observation that mutations and natural selection -- like other natural forces -- can cause (minor) change, is widely accepted in the scientific world as proof that natural selection -- alone among all natural forces -- can create order out of disorder, and even design human brains with human consciousness. Only the layman seems to see the problem with this logic. In a recent Mathematical Intelligencer article ("A Mathematician's View of Evolution," 22, number 4, 5-7, 2000), after outlining the specific reasons why it is not reasonable to attribute the major steps in the development of life to natural selection, I asserted that the idea that the four fundamental forces of physics alone could rearrange the fundamental particles of nature into spaceships, nuclear power plants, and computers, connected to laser printers, CRTs, keyboards and the Internet, appears to violate the second law of thermodynamics in a spectacular way.


One of the most tran sparent ways in which Darwinism demonstrates itself to be merely an alternative religion is in its insistence that Earth and Mankind are unique. As Alister McGrath bpoints out in his devastating book, Dawkins' God, even a putatively rigorous materialist/Darwinist like Richard Dawkins insists that man alone can resist the dictates of his genes.



Posted by Matt Murphy at 12:00 AM

BOWLING ALONE? NOT US:

Thanks to everybody who signed up for the College Bowl Pick'em: We've got 22 participants, which is better than I expected for a registration-based game. I'll run a few contests during the next two weeks and invite people to pick scores. Winners get books -- what's not to like?

Good luck to everybody and to your teams unless you're rooting for Miami or against Nebraska.


December 30, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:27 PM

YOU CAN'T BREAK EGGS WITHOUT...:

Abortion Drug Adverse Events Reported: Reports Include Infection and Severe Bleeding (Salynn Boyles, December 29, 2005, WebMD Medical News)

The FDA received reports of 607 adverse events involving the abortion drug RU-486 over a four-year period, it was reported this week.

The adverse events included five reported deaths and 68 cases of severe bleeding that required transfusions.

Late last month, federal officials confirmed that five women who died of toxic shock syndrome within a week of taking the drug to induce abortions had the same rare bacterial infection. Four of the deaths occurred in California and one in Canada. Three of these deaths were not among those included in the FDA's 607 events.


For the Death Lobby these are just acceptable levels of collateral damage in the wider war.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:18 PM

THERE'S NO SHAME IN WINNING:

This is the country of Drake and Pepys, not Shaka Zulu (Max Hastings, December 27, 2005, The Guardian)

[T]he world's development in the past 500 years has been dominated, for good or ill, by what westerners have thought and done. Other societies, again no matter whether for good or ill, have been losers whose power to determine their own destinies, never mind anyone else's, has been small.

History is the story of the dominance, however unjust, of societies that display superior energy, ability, technology and might. If one's own people were victims of western imperialism, it is entirely understandable that one should wish to study history from their viewpoint. But, whatever the crimes of our forefathers, this is the country of Drake, Clive and Kitchener, not of Tipu Sultan, Shaka Zulu or the Mahdi.


And the End of History is, of course, nothing but the universal acceptance of the values that made the West dominant, which makes it especially useless to give equal weight to the cultures that ended up on the scrap heap.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:16 PM

TANNED, RESTED & READY:

Former Syrian VP: Dangerous things were said to Hariri (JPost staff and AP, Dec. 30, 2005, THE JERUSALEM POST)

Embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad was dealt more bad news Friday night after former Syrian Vice President Abed al-Halim Khadem said that Assad "could have prevented the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri."

Khadem also acknowledged that Hariri was threatened by Syria months before he was assassinated. [...]

Khadem made the claim as he declared a formal break with President Bashar Assad in a television interview from Paris, citing corruption within the regime and its failure to reform.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 3:24 PM

AND NO MIRANDA RIGHTS EITHER

Airbus pilot maroons drunken passenger on desert island (Nigel Bunyan, The Telegraph, December 30th, 2005)

A drunken holidaymaker has been dumped on a desert island after launching a foul-mouthed tirade at the crew of a passenger jet.[...]

The unnamed passenger's difficulties began on Tuesday evening at 35,000 ft when he began abusing the cabin crew of flight ZB558 from Manchester. He refused to calm down and then turned his attention to the other 210 passengers.

Eventually the pilot decided that he posed a risk to safety and had to be removed.

Rather than continue for a further 45 minutes to Tenerife he diverted his Airbus A321 to Porto Santo. Within moments of the plane touching down the passenger was escorted to the terminal. Last night he remained a castaway on the Portuguese-controlled island. His New Year home is a mere 10 miles long by three miles wide with a population of 4,000. There is little entertainment apart from walking on the sand dunes.

How many hours of the average lifetime are spent dreaming of meting out some richly deserved summary justice like this?



Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:05 PM

FOLLOW THE WINNER:

The Peace Epidemic: The world isn't so dangerous after all. (Timothy Noah, Dec. 29, 2005, Slate)

Although it's widely believed that the long standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union brought peace, that wasn't really true. Mutual deterrence successfully prevented war between the two great powers, and we can all be very grateful that humankind avoided nuclear annihilation. But the Cold War turned hot in a variety of proxy wars in which the United States supported one side and the Soviet Union supported the other. The human cost was enormous. By the report's reckoning, the number of "state-based armed conflicts" in the world increased by a factor of three between 1946 and 1991. Dire predictions that the Cold War's end would bequeath a long epoch of tribal anarchy may have seemed plausible in the early 1990s, as the Balkans were beset with ethnic violence. But in the end the jeremiads weren't borne out. The death of Soviet communism didn't just make the West safer; it made the entire world safer. (The report says the end of Western colonialism also played a role; because of anticolonial conflict, the greatest number of wars fought between 1946 and 2003 were waged by the United Kingdom, which fought 21, and France, which fought 19. The United States ranks next with 16, and the Soviet Union brings up the great-power rear with 9. Josef Stalin, who ruled the Soviet Union until 1953, was no slouch in the killing department, but he tended to prefer murdering his own countrymen.)

One region must be excepted from this calculus. Interestingly, it isn't the Middle East (though certainly that region is a violent one). It's Africa. According to the Human Security Report, more people are being killed in wars in sub-Saharan Africa than in the rest of the world combined. [...]

If you go by the numbers, our planet is becoming less violent, not more so. Francis Fukuyama (who himself faltered slightly after 9/11) looks fairly prescient right now for predicting back in 1989 the "end of history," with "history" defined as "the evolution of human societies through different forms of government." In effect, Fukuyama was predicting an end to global armed ideological conflict, since "the evolution of human societies" is almost always achieved through warfare. The Human Security Report 2005 bears Fukuyama out. History may come back, but at the moment it's blessedly on the wane.


There was still a bit of clean-up left to do--disabusing the Islamnicists of the notion their system was a serious alternative--but it was always a dubious proposition that when parliamentarty democracy won the Long War it would lead to a less orderly world.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:31 PM

IF THE GRAND AYATOLLAH WON'T FIX THE PROBLEM THEN WE'LL HAVE TO:

German media: U.S. preparing Iran strike (Martin Walker, December 30, 2005, UPI )

The Bush administration is preparing its NATO allies for a possible military strike against suspected nuclear sites in Iran in the New Year, according to German media reports, reinforcing similar earlier suggestions in the Turkish media.

The Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel this week quoted "NATO intelligence sources" who claimed that the NATO allies had been informed that the United States is currently investigating all possibilities of bringing the mullah-led regime into line, including military options. This "all options are open" line has been President George W Bush's publicly stated policy throughout the past 18 months.

But the respected German weekly Der Spiegel notes "What is new here is that Washington appears to be dispatching high-level officials to prepare its allies for a possible attack rather than merely implying the possibility as it has repeatedly done during the past year."

The German news agency DDP cited "Western security sources" to claim that CIA Director Porter Goss asked Turkey's premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan to provide political and logistic support for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets.


The dirty little secret is that Iran's Sunni neighbors have the most to fear from a nuclear-armed Shi'ite fanatic like Ahmadinejad.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:29 PM

UNSERIOUS, BUT WITH A NICE NAZI TOUCH:

German Proposes Tagging Islamic Militants (Reuters, 12/29/05)

Known Islamic militants should be electronically tagged so their movements could be tracked, a regional German interior minister proposed Wednesday.

"This would allow us to monitor the roughly 3,000 Islamists who are prone to violence, hate-preachers and fighters trained in terrorist camps," the Lower Saxony interior minister, Uwe Schünemann, said in an interview with the newspaper Die Welt.

Mr. Schünemann said electronic tagging was a viable alternative to holding the militants in protective custody, as suggested by the former German interior minister, Otto Schily. Mr. Schünemann was quoted as saying that his proposal would not be against Germany's Constitution.

"It's practical for all Islamists who are prone to violence and who we can't expel to their home countries because they could be tortured," Mr. Schünemann said.


No society need tolerate witches.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:25 PM

THE GOP CAN'T EVEN GET A RACE WAR RIGHT:

Assumptions about Katrina victims may be incorrect, data reveal (JOHN SIMERMAN, DWIGHT OTT AND TED MELLNIK, 12/29/05, Knight Ridder Newspapers)

Four months after Hurricane Katrina, analyses of data suggest that some widely reported assumptions about the storm's victims were incorrect.

For example, a comparison of locations where 874 bodies were recovered with U.S. Census tract data indicates that the victims weren't disproportionately poor. Another database, compiled by Knight Ridder of 486 Katrina victims from Orleans and St. Bernard parishes, suggests they also weren't disproportionately African-American.


Seventy years of plotting to regain power in Washington and trillions of dollars spent to create global warming and Republicans can't even make sure that hurricanes drown only black people?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:21 PM

WERE HIS FINGERS CROSSED?:

I'm a Soldier, Not a Spy (Grant Doty, December 30, 2005, Washington Post)

As Americans take stock of the news that the government has been involved in domestic warrantless eavesdropping as well as surveillance of "potentially threatening people or organizations inside the United States," many people are troubled, including me.

Although the government may be interested in my ACLU membership, my wife's participation in war protests or my affiliation with the liberal United Church of Christ, my real anxiety stems from the fact that I am a soldier and may now be under suspicion from my friends and neighbors.

Specifically, given the information slowly leaking out of Washington, it may not be farfetched for some to think that when I "stumble across people or information" that might be of interest to the government, I might report it to the Pentagon's three-year-old Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA). [...]

Yes, I took an oath to defend the United States against all enemies "foreign and domestic"...


So, he's afraid people will think he took that oath seriously?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:13 PM

RWR SLEW THE GREEN EYESHADE REPUBLICAN:

November Is Ten Months Away: Time for Bush to nationalize the midterm elections. (Larry Kudlow, 12/30/05, National Review)

Citizens Against Government Waste calls 2005 a record year for pork. The group identified 13,997 pork projects in the fiscal 2005 appropriations bills, costing taxpayers $27.3 billion, an increase of 31 percent over fiscal 2004. These are sickening facts. The president must work overtime to erase them in 2006 and truly produce a taxpayer protection budget.

A generally sensible piece except for this retrograde suggestion that the President waste any time or energy going to war over what amounts to something like 1% (?) of the federal budget.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:00 PM

SOME FOLKS NEVER LEARN:

Ex-envoy to Uzbekistan goes public on torture (Anne Penketh, 30 December 2005, Independent)

Britain's former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has defied the Foreign Office by publishing on the internet documents providing evidence that the British Government knowingly received information extracted by torture in the "war on terror".

Letter #1
Confidential
FM Tashkent
TO FCO, Cabinet Office, DFID, MODUK, OSCE Posts, Security Council Posts

16 September 02

SUBJECT: US/Uzbekistan: Promoting Terrorism

I quite understand the interest of the US in strategic airbases and why they back Karimov, but I believe US policy is misconceived. In the short term it may help fight terrorism but in the medium term it will promote it, as the Economist points out. And it can never be right to lower our standards on human rights. There is a complex situation in Central Asia and it is wrong to look at it only through a prism picked up on September 12. Worst of all is what appears to be the philosophy underlying the current US view of Uzbekistan: that September 11 divided the World into two camps in the "War against Terrorism" and that Karimov is on "our" side.

If Karimov is on "our" side, then this war cannot be simply between the forces of good and evil. It must be about more complex things, like securing the long-term US military presence in Uzbekistan. I silently wept at the 11 September commemoration here. The right words on New York have all been said. But last week was also another anniversary – the US-led overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile. The subsequent dictatorship killed, dare I say it, rather more people than died on September 11. Should we not remember then also, and learn from that too?


Chile's not really the best example to use, because it is so obviously a case where American support for "fascism" served both our interests and those of the nation in question spectacularly well. After all, knowing what we know today about how Allende-type regimes tended to devolve and how Pinochet's evolved, who wouldn't whack Allende again? Of course, Taiwan, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, South Africa, South Korea, etc. all worked out rather well too, so it's not clear he has any point at all.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:33 PM

IT WOULD BE AMUSING ANYWAY:

Well, would you hire
this man to be gov?
(JOE MAHONEY, 12/30/05, NY DAILY NEWS)

Could New York's state capitol building become the next Trump Tower?

Republican sources said The Donald - who in 1999 toyed with the idea of running for the White House on the Reform Party line - is mulling a bid to persuade New Yorkers to hire him as their next governor.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:42 PM

LITTLE BOY:

Robot car: streets ahead in cities of the future (Alok Jha, December 29, 2005, The Guardian)

It is not every day that a concept car re-writes the rules of more than 100 years of motoring. In development for four years by a team of architects and engineers led by William Mitchell, former head of the school of architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), as part of his Smart Cities research group, a new MIT car is borne of a complete rethink of people's relationship with their cars in the ever-expanding cities of the future.

Prof Mitchell expects we will share cars that will be easier to drive in congested cities, will be pollution-free and can be customised at will.

The city car concept, with styling input by architect Frank Gehry, will be completed and delivered by MIT to General Motors early next year.

"Primarily we're interested in urban living," says Ryan Chin, an architect and engineer at MIT's media lab and a member of Prof Mitchell's research group. "Everything scales down from what we think the city of the future is."

The Smart Cities group focused on how cars could be better adapted to get round familiar problems of city life, namely congestion, pollution and parking. Motor companies are well aware of the issue. But the group felt the companies had missed the point, even with city cars such as the Smart, the iconic two-passenger cars introduced by Swatch and Mercedes in 1998.

"We have to think of city cars as not just small-footprint vehicles that can squeeze into tight spaces but ones that can work in unison and also be almost like a parasite that leeches on to mass-transit systems," says Mr Chin. While Smart changed the way people think about parking and size, the MIT engineers felt that, as it had not been widely adopted and congestion and pollution problems had got no better, its success had been limited.


A bigger cabin would be better so that the experience is more sociable.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:31 PM

STRAYING FROM THE TALKING POINTS:

Palestinians in Iraq Pay the Cost of Being 'Saddam's People' (Doug Struck, December 30, 2005, Washington Post)

For years, Saddam Hussein harbored a small population of Palestinians in Iraq, trotting them out to cheer whenever he went to war -- which he routinely justified as essential to Arab nationalism and the Palestinian cause.

Don't they know we're all supposed to pretend that Saddam had no ties to terrorism nor interests beyond his borders?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:25 PM

SO HARD TO TELL AN IRISHMAN FROM AN ISLAMICIST:

Irish President Offered Nazis Condolences (SHAWN POGATCHNIK , 12.30.2005, Forbes)

Ireland's president during World War II offered condolences to Nazi Germany's representative in Dublin over the death of Adolf Hitler, newly declassified government records show.

Until now, historians had believed that Ireland's prime minister at the time, Eamon de Valera, was the only government leader to convey official condolences to Eduard Hempel, director of the German diplomatic corps in Ireland. De Valera's gesture - unique among leaders of neutral nations in the final weeks of World War II - was criticized worldwide.


Their own Grand Mufti.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:20 PM

VENGEANCE IS MINE...:

England Burned in Prison Kitchen Accident (AP, 12/30/05)

Lynndie England, the U.S. soldier who posed for some of the most infamous pictures of detainee abuse at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, suffered burns at the prison where she is serving her sentence, her family said Friday.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:17 PM

OF COURSE, THIS ONE LIKELY CAME FROM ROVE TOO:

Justice Dept. Probing Domestic Spying Leak (TONI LOCY, 12/30/05, Associated Press)

The Justice Department has opened an investigation into the leak of classified information about President Bush's secret domestic spying program, Justice officials said Friday.

The officials, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the probe, said the inquiry will focus on disclosures to The New York Times about warrantless surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:11 PM

WHERE THE KIDS ARE MORE MATURE THAN THE LEFT:

AP Exclusive: U.S. teen runs off to Iraq (JASON STRAZIUSO, 12/29/05, Associated Press)

Maybe it was the time the taxi dumped him at the Iraq-Kuwait border, leaving him alone in the middle of the desert. Or when he drew a crowd at a Baghdad food stand after using an Arabic phrase book to order. Or the moment a Kuwaiti cab driver almost punched him in the face when he balked at the $100 fare.

But at some point, Farris Hassan, a 16-year-old from Florida, realized that traveling to Iraq by himself was not the safest thing he could have done with his Christmas vacation.

And he didn't even tell his parents.

Hassan's dangerous adventure winds down with the 101st Airborne delivering the Fort Lauderdale teen to the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, which had been on the lookout for him and promises to see him back to the United States this weekend.

It begins with a high school class on "immersion journalism" and one overly eager - or naively idealistic - student who's lucky to be alive after going way beyond what any teacher would ask.


Essay by U.S. Teen Who Went to Iraq (The Associated Press, Dec 29, 2005)
Excepts from an essay written recently by Farris Hassan, 16, of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., who traveled to Iraq without telling his parents:

There is a struggle in Iraq between good and evil, between those striving for freedom and liberty and those striving for death and destruction. You are aware of the heinous acts of the terrorists: Women and children massacred, innocent aid workers decapitated, indiscriminate murder. You are also aware of the heroic aspirations of the Iraqi people: liberty, democracy, security, normality. Those terrorists are not human but pure evil. For their goals to be thwarted, decent individuals must answer justice's call for help ... So I will.

Life is not about money, fame, or power. Life is about combating the forces of evil in the world, promoting justice, helping the misfortunate, and improving the welfare of our fellow man. Progress requires that we commit ourselves to such goals. We are not here on Earth to hedonistically pleasure ourselves, but to serve each other and the creator. What deed is greater than sacrificing one's luxuries for the benefit of those less blessed? ...

I know I can't do much. I know I can't stop all the carnage and save the innocent. But I also know I can't just sit here ...


Yeah, Mr. Tancredo, those immigrants will never share our values....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:41 AM

UPICK-EM:

The Office Pool, 2006 (WILLIAM SAFIRE, 12/30/05, NY Times)

HERE is your 32nd annual chance to Beat the Pundit. In each multiple choice, pick one, none or all. In a good year, a master prognosticator gets four right.

1. U.S. troops in Iraq at 2006 year's end will number: (a) current "base line" 138,000; (b) closer to 100,000; (c) closer to 90,000; (d) 80,000 or below. [...]

12. Thinking outside the ballot box - the dark-horse line for the 2008 presidential race will pit: (a) Virginia Democrat Mark Warner against Massachusetts Republican Mitt Romney in the battle of centrist capitalists; (b) Dems' iconoclastic Senator Russ Feingold vs. the G.O.P.'s nonpartisan Mayor Mike Bloomberg to compete for evangelical vote; (c) the Dems' favorite Republican, Chuck Hagel, against the G.O.P.'s favorite Democrat, Joe Lieberman; (d) domestic centrists and foreign-policy hardliners Hillary ("You're a Grand Old Flag") Clinton against Condi ("I am not a lawyer") Rice.

13. Conventionally, inside the box: (a) Bill Richardson vs. Rudy Giuliani; (b) Hillary vs. John McCain; (c) Warner vs. Romney; (d) Joe Biden vs. George Allen.

14. As Bush approval rises, historians will begin to equate his era with that of: (a) Truman; (b) Eisenhower; (c) L.B.J.; (d) Reagan; (e) Clinton.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:38 AM

THE WAR ON CARS CONTINUES APACE:

Internet Sales Show Big Gains Over Holidays (MICHAEL BARBARO, 12/30/05, NY Times)

Online retailers, whose growth was expected to level off after a decade of dizzying gains, experienced a stellar holiday season, according to two preliminary reports released yesterday, as traditional stores like Wal-Mart and Target cemented their place on the Web.

Consumer spending online reached $18.1 billion in November and December, a 25 percent increase over 2004, according to the research firm ComScore Networks.

Nielsen/NetRatings, another research firm, said Web purchases totaled $30.1 billion in the period, an increase of 30 percent. Unlike ComScore, Nielsen includes spending at online auction sites like eBay, accounting for its higher figure.

Online commerce still represents less than 6 percent of all retail sales, but the numbers indicate that it has finally become part of mainstream American shopping.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:25 AM

IF YOU HAD ANY SKILLS WHY WOULD YOU STAY?:

China's looming talent shortage: To make the move from manufacturing to services, China must raise the quality of its university graduates. (Diana Farrell and Andrew J. Grant, McKinsey Quarterly)

With a huge supply of low-cost workers, mainland China has fast become the world's manufacturing workshop, supplying everything from textiles to toys to computer chips. Given the country's millions of university graduates, is it set to become a giant in offshore IT and business process services as well?

New research from the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) suggests that this outcome is unlikely. (The full report, The Emerging Global Labor Market, is available free of charge online.) The reason: few of China's vast number of university graduates are capable of working successfully in the services export sector, and the fast-growing domestic economy absorbs most of those who could. Indeed, far from presaging a thriving offshore services sector, our research points to a looming shortage of homegrown talent, with serious implications for the multinationals now in China and for the growing number of Chinese companies with global ambitions.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:12 AM

COME FAIL WITH US:

German finance minister urges fairer tax competition within EU (Lisbeth Kirk, 12/30/05, EU Observer)

German finance minister Peer Steinbruck has urged new EU member states to raise their taxes and ensure "fair tax competition" among the 25 members of the bloc.

There's a reason the End of History features the universal adoption of the Anglo-American model, not the Franco-German.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:10 AM

WELL, AT LEAST THEY AREN'T COLLABORATING:

Gaza protests force EU monitors to flee (Lisbeth Kirk, 12/30/05, EU Observer)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:05 AM

AND THEY WISELY ESCHEWED DEPICTING MOPERY:

Bollywood film in Time's Top 10 (BBC, 12/30/05)

Bollywood film Black has been selected as one of the top films of 2005 in a listing by American Time magazine.

Directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Black is about a relationship between a deaf-blind child and her teacher.

"Black is more than a noble weepie; it is the ultimate Bollywood love story," Time magazine said of the film.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:02 AM

WEREN'T 500,000 DEAD IRAQIS ENOUGH?:

US threat over N Korean food aid (BBC, 12/30/05)

The US says it will stop giving food aid to North Korea unless it lets international relief workers monitor its distribution.

The US said it wanted to check aid - channelled through the UN's World Food Programme (WFP) - reached the needy.

The statement comes as the WFP prepares to halt food aid to North Korea after Pyongyang said it was no longer needed.


Even a tendentious regime change in Iraq has only cost 30,000 lives on its way to democracy, as opposed to the 500,000 kids we killed with sanctions. Why repeat the error?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:50 AM

NO WONDER HIS FICTION LEADS AN ESCAPE:

O'Brian, Sailing Under False Colors: a review of PATRICK O'BRIAN: The Making of the Novelist, 1914-1949 By Nikolai Tolstoy and THE CATALANS: A Novel By Patrick O'Brian (Gregory Feeley, Washington Post)

For most of the last years of Patrick O'Brian's life, when his novels set during the Napoleonic Wars were gaining increasing acclaim, he appeared to be one of those writers whose command of his subject arises from a lifetime of firsthand acquaintance. Biographical information was fiercely guarded, but O'Brian had at times let out that he was Irish, privately educated, that his nautical expertise was grounded in his own sailing experience, and other details that later proved to be untrue. When journalists discovered in 1998, just two years before he died, that O'Brian had been born Richard Patrick Russ, an Englishman who had published his first novel at 15 and had left his wife and two small children (one of them dying) in an act of self-reinvention that he then sought to hide from the world, the response was not charitable. An early biography by Dean King added more facts, although King's lack of access (O'Brian had instructed friends not to cooperate) proved a serious limitation.

Nikolai Tolstoy, O'Brian's stepson, has set out to correct all this with "Patrick O'Brian: The Making of the Novelist, 1914-1949," the first of two planned volumes. His portrayal -- based on extensive research, access to O'Brian's personal papers, and more than 40 years' personal acquaintance -- shifts our image of O'Brian still further, though perhaps not in the direction he intended. The author of the Aubrey/Maturin novels, so worldly and assured in his self-presentation, was not merely a British eccentric but a profoundly damaged individual, whose psychic scarring and resulting haplessness places him in a class with Malcolm Lowry and T.H. White. Though he wrote with assurance and calm authority from his earliest days, O'Brian was a psychological basket case, so incapable in dealing with other people or managing his business and personal affairs that, were it not for his extraordinary literary gift (which manifested itself early) and -- like Lowry -- good fortune in his second wife, he would likely have proven incapable of supporting himself.

The outlines of O'Brian's early life are largely what Dean King found them to be, although Tolstoy provides immeasurably more detail, is often able to provide answers where King was compelled to speculate and -- as he is quick to note -- corrects a large number of errors. That his portrayal of O'Brian is at least as disturbing as King's, despite Tolstoy's recurrent tone of defensiveness and (sometimes) special pleading, is testimony to his honesty. [...]

The story of Dr. Alain Roig, who returns to his Catalan home town after years of medical research in the Far East to intercede in an imminent family scandal, is drolly observed, beautiful in its evocation of place, and -- like O'Brian's later novels -- often mordantly funny.

Admirers of O'Brian's historical novels will be struck at how much of his skill, verve and humor were evident this early in his career, but they will be sobered by the revelations in Tolstoy's work.


The tie to Tolstoy is fitting though, eh?



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:46 AM

THEY"VE PAID A TERRIBLE PRICE FOR OUR FAILURE TO CHANGE THE REGIME:

Raiding the Icebox: Behind Its Warm Front, the United States Made Cold Calculations to Subdue Canada (Peter Carlson, 12/30/05, Washington Post)

Invading Canada won't be like invading Iraq: When we invade Canada, nobody will be able to grumble that we didn't have a plan.

The United States government does have a plan to invade Canada. It's a 94-page document called "Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan -- Red," with the word SECRET stamped on the cover. It's a bold plan, a bodacious plan, a step-by-step plan to invade, seize and annex our neighbor to the north. It goes like this:

First, we send a joint Army-Navy overseas force to capture the port city of Halifax, cutting the Canadians off from their British allies.

Then we seize Canadian power plants near Niagara Falls, so they freeze in the dark.

Then the U.S. Army invades on three fronts -- marching from Vermont to take Montreal and Quebec, charging out of North Dakota to grab the railroad center at Winnipeg, and storming out of the Midwest to capture the strategic nickel mines of Ontario.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy seizes the Great Lakes and blockades Canada's Atlantic and Pacific ports.

At that point, it's only a matter of time before we bring these Molson-swigging, maple-mongering Zamboni drivers to their knees! Or, as the official planners wrote, stating their objective in bold capital letters: "ULTIMATELY TO GAIN COMPLETE CONTROL."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:40 AM

SUKED INTO THE QUAGMIRE:

Stem Cell Advance Is Fully Refuted: Investigator Says Korean's Colonies Do Not Exist (Rick Weiss, December 30, 2005, Washington Post)

The scandal surrounding disgraced South Korean stem cell researcher Hwang Woo Suk deepened yesterday as an investigator told reporters in Seoul that none of the 11 tailor-made cell colonies Hwang claimed to have created earlier this year actually exist.

Korean news outlets also reported that the ongoing probe into one of the biggest scientific frauds in memory had broadened to embrace allegations that government officials -- concerned about the shame such revelations could bring upon their country -- may have attempted to bribe scientists who were considered potential whistle-blowers.

The still-evolving quagmire...


Well, some good has come of it: a last a news story about an actual quagmire and genuine scientific evolution.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:33 AM

BUT...BUT...BUT...GERHARD SCHROEDER AND TED KENNEDY SAID TO STOP...:

Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor: Anti-Terror Effort Continues to Grow (Dana Priest, , December 30, 2005, Washington Post)

The effort President Bush authorized shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, to fight al Qaeda has grown into the largest CIA covert action program since the height of the Cold War, expanding in size and ambition despite a growing outcry at home and abroad over its clandestine tactics, according to former and current intelligence officials and congressional and administration sources.

The broad-based effort, known within the agency by the initials GST, is compartmentalized into dozens of highly classified individual programs, details of which are known mainly to those directly involved.

GST includes programs allowing the CIA to capture al Qaeda suspects with help from foreign intelligence services, to maintain secret prisons abroad, to use interrogation techniques that some lawyers say violate international treaties, and to maintain a fleet of aircraft to move detainees around the globe. Other compartments within GST give the CIA enhanced ability to mine international financial records and eavesdrop on suspects anywhere in the world.

Over the past two years, as aspects of this umbrella effort have burst into public view, the revelations have prompted protests and official investigations in countries that work with the United States, as well as condemnation by international human rights activists and criticism by members of Congress.

Still, virtually all the programs continue to operate largely as they were set up, according to current and former officials. These sources say Bush's personal commitment to maintaining the GST program and his belief in its legality have been key to resisting any pressure to change course.


You mean he hasn't stopped protecting national security just because the Left has its knickers knotted?


Posted by Peter Burnet at 7:23 AM

WHEN YOU GROW UP, SON, YOU CAN FILL IN THIS FORM AND TAKE A NUMBER YOURSELF

It's official: Britain is run by bureaucrats (The Telegraph, December 30th, 2005)

re has been a slight expansion in the numbers of front-line workers, the real bonanza has been in administration. Our public services resemble a South American army, where a handful of miserable conscripts sustain hundreds of self-important generals. The NHS, for example, uniquely in the world, now has more officials than beds.

The TaxPayers' Alliance, which deserves a medal for having trudged through an entire year's worth of Guardian appointments sections, estimates the total cost of these non-jobs in 2005 to be £787,319,556.31. This is bad enough. But think of the opportunity costs. Imagine if these battalions of bureaucrats were making or selling things, instead of plaguing the rest of us. How much more freely Britain would breathe.

The grim truth is that these positions are, in the main, not merely useless, but actively malign. There might be some sort of warped Keynesian argument for spending £800 million to keep a few thousand unemployables off the street, harmlessly sending each other memos and suing each other for sexual harassment.

But many state workers have a tangible and deleterious impact on public policy. A racism awareness counsellor needs to justify her salary by constantly finding instances of racism, so ensuring that her employers are distracted from their main business. A police force that hires diversity directors is not concentrating on catching scoundrels.

By bloating the state in this way, Labour has created a caste of people with a vested interest in pursuing certain policies. It doesn't much matter how we vote, nationally or locally, as long as decisions are in the hands of strategy co-ordinators and policy directors.

Mr Blair himself has run up against the immobilism of the public sector; how much more would a Tory administration. The sad fact is that, whoever is in office, Britain will still be run by overpaid jobsworths.

It is an almost universal modern conceit that our society is both freer and more democratic than, say, a hundred years ago. Perhaps we need this myth to protect us from the depressing horrors of facing open-eyed the combined effects of bureaucratic sovereignty, judicial supremacy and non-discretionary spending entitlements,


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:57 AM

THAT DEVIL'S DEAD:

Novel that Stalin banned grips Russian television audience (Andrew Osborn, 30 December 2005, Independent)

Joseph Stalin banned it, while the Russian Orthodox Church worried that its text might undermine people's faith. Its plot lampoons state authoritarianism and censorship in a country that has atradition of both.

Now the first screen adaptation of Soviet writer Mikhail Bulgakov's novel Master and Margarita, one of the Communist era's finest pieces of literature, has been shown on Russian television. More than half of the adult population has tuned in over the past few weeks and revelled in a plot in which the Devil takes centre stage. [...]

Bulgakov died in 1940, thinking that Master and Margarita would never see the light of day.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:27 AM

THE CURSE OF OIL


Prosperity cheques provide post-Christmas teen dreams
(Judy Monchuk, The Globe and Mail, December 29th, 2005)

And thanks to Alberta's energy bonanza, Shelby will be getting $400 from the province early in 2006 that could make her dream a reality. She and her friends say there's only one option for what the government has termed prosperity cheques.

“A big shopping spree,” the Grade 8 student said with a laugh as she browsed through racks of clothing at Chinook Centre, Calgary's largest mall.

Shelby's mom has thought about letting her daughter have a portion of the windfall to indulge her consumer fantasies, but it's a tough decision.

“It's caused conflict in a lot of families I know,” said Tammy Airth. “For the government to say each individual will get $400 is absurd. Every kid I know is pumped about the $400 that they're getting. That money should go towards offsetting high energy bills, but of course these guys don't see that. They see $400 that the government is giving to them.”

Ms. Airth scoffs at Premier Ralph Klein's suggestion that kids — or their parents — can put the money into education accounts or donate it to the homeless if they feel that's the best use of the cash.

“Kids don't care about their education when they're 12 or 13 years old: they want the money, they want to go shopping and blow the money,” said Ms. Airth.

Historian David Mills says no one should be surprised by the reaction of teens and even pre-teens to what's essentially free cash — a $1.4-billion “rebate” shared by every man, woman and child in Alberta because of soaring oil and gas prices.

“It's almost as if we live in an age of entitlement,” says Mr. Mills, who teaches pop culture at the University of Alberta.

Yes, almost. A few more years of this and Albertans will be importing thousands of Filipino guest workers to do their work for them.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:08 AM

PISS-EU

Outrage as porn posters of the Queen 'promote' EU presidency (Roger Boyes, The London Times, December 30th, 2005)

Pornographic posters showing naked figures wearing masks portraying the Queen, President Chirac and President Bush have created fierce controversy in Austria on the eve of the country taking over the EU presidency from Britain.

The posters, which went on display this week in Vienna, were financed by a €1 million (£680,000) grant from the Austrian Government. It had hoped that a series of pictures by artists from all member states would reflect the social and political diversity of the EU. Instead, the work has provoked an unseemly row.

The posters are mounted on rotating boards and are visible for only seconds at a time — but that is long enough for most passers-by to identify the three figures. The George Bush figure is a woman model using the appropriate mask. She is seen bending over, with the Queen and President Chirac kneeling behind her. The Queen can be seen clutching the hips of the George Bush character.

“Absolutely outrageous!” the tabloid Krone Zeitung declared. “This will overshadow the beginning of our EU presidency.”

The posters are part of an artistic project known as Europ-art that is intended to stir interest in the European Union. Austria now ranks as one of the most sceptical EU partners and its Government has been struggling to find ways of engaging the interest of young people in European issues. The group sex scene was created by Carlos Aires, a 31-year-old Spanish artist.

The second poster by Tanja Ostojic, a Balkan artist, is causing even more anger. It shows a woman’s spread thighs wearing blue knickers embroidered with the stars of Europe. [...]

“The EU knickers are depraved and sexist and can only damage the European idea,” Gabi Burgstaller, governor of the Salzburg region, said.

We yield to no one in our prudish condemnation of pornography, but we do understand why the artists couldn’t think up anything better.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THE REASON GOD MADE CELLULOID:

New DVD's (DAVE KEHR, 12/27/05, NY Times)

Here at the height of white elephant season, with the theaters full of overstuffed Oscar contenders, it's a relief to return to the world of what the critic Manny Farber defined as "termite art" - those buzzy little B-movies, exploitation pictures and oddball imports that were never intended to win awards, but nonetheless offer cinematic pleasures often beyond their bloated, big-budget brethren. What follows is a roundup of some of the last few weeks' smaller, more insidious titles, presented with the assurance that none of them ever received a Golden Globe nomination. [...]

Fox in a Box

From MGM, the current owners of the American International library, comes a boxed set collecting three Pam Grier features from the 1970's heyday of the black exploitation film: Jack Hill's "Coffy" (1973) and "Foxy Brown" (1974), plus William Girdler's "Sheba, Baby" (1975). These look to be the familiar, nonanamorphic MGM transfers of 2001, though repackaged with a fourth disc combining a pair of documentary appreciations of Ms. Grier produced by Vibe magazine. But here she is in her stereotype-shattering glory, playing her perennial part as the strong black woman on a solo campaign to rid her community of pimps, pushers and the corrupt white politicians who protect and profit from them. Some of the 70's fashion statements threaten to short out the color circuitry on your television, but those were exuberant days. $29.95; "Coffy" and "Foxy" are rated R, "Sheba" PG.


Blaxploitation never looked better.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

AN AMERICAN TRAGEDY:

Rail rivals roll past U.S. (John Tagliabue, DECEMBER 30, 2005, The New York Times)

As countries like Italy and Spain - and emerging markets like China and Russia - open their pocketbooks for huge high-speed rail development, the United States remains on the sidelines, risking to lose out on new technologies for propulsion and vehicle control.

For those who thought railroads were basically 19th-century technology, think again. Thanks to miniaturization, these powerful new trains have motors built into the axles of every second rail car, rather than concentrating the pulling power in the locomotive, as was done in traditional pull-push trains.

The new technology makes the trains lighter and enables the trains to go faster, to brake and accelerate more easily, and to cause less wear on rails and wheels. It also frees up locomotives for up to 20 percent additional seating space. The newer generation of very high-speed trains has other breakthrough features, including so-called eddy current brakes, which employ electromagnetic fields rather than brake disks to slow and stop.

Nothing that high enough gas taxes wouldn't solve.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

WE DECIDE WHAT SOVEREIGNTY YOU HAVE:

Italy's Pursuit of CIA Operatives Stalls: Resistance by Berlusconi government and apathy about being able to keep the U.S. from infringing sovereignty fetter case of imam spirited abroad. (Tracy Wilkinson, December 30, 2005, LA Times)

The pro-U.S. government of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is refusing to forward the extradition requests and instead has asked for more documentation, a highly unusual request that prosecutors regard as a delaying tactic.

Berlusconi has repeatedly denied that his government knew about or authorized the abduction, even as former CIA officers in Washington said the operation was conducted with Italian government cooperation.

Berlusconi shrugged off the contradiction. Last week, he justified the operation, saying governments should not be expected to fight terrorism "with a law book in hand."

The ease and openness with which the operatives acted in Milan suggest that they knew they had the green light from Italian authorities. Among other activities, they ran up bills totaling more than $150,000 at some of Milan's best hotels.

"Berlusconi was an accomplice," said Giusto Catania, a leftist Italian member of the European Parliament who sits on its civil liberties committee. Catania is one of a group of EU lawmakers spearheading a continent-wide investigation into alleged CIA activities, as reports of secret prisons and flights mount.

It is not in the prime minister's interest for the Italian inquiry to advance, Catania said, because of his apparent role in permitting the rendition.

Berlusconi believes he will weather any domestic criticism, said a senior advisor to the prime minister, speaking anonymously because he was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. [...]

Italian prosecutors said the CIA operation was an egregious violation of national sovereignty, a call taken up by some members of the political left. [...]

Italian prosecutors have tried to broaden the prosecution of his captors. But, in addition to official roadblocks, they are confronted with a general sense of resignation among Italians, another obstacle to the criminal case. Outrage over the abduction has been tempered by a feeling among many Italians that the Americans will do as they choose on national territory, and nothing can be done about it.

"In a certain sense, Italians expect Italy to be taken for granted," said Giuseppe Cucchi, a retired army general with Italy's civil protection office who is familiar with intelligence operations.


It's a very good thing for the Right to fret about the threat of transnationalism, but the reality is that America, as Crusader State, is the far more significant threat to national sovereignty.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

NAE BOTHER:

English Murder (Ferdinand Mount, The Spectator)

[T]he most remarkable fact about homicide in Britain today is that it has increased at a gallop over the past 40 years.

I don't think this was an inevitable historical trend. After all, from 1946, when Orwell wrote his essay, to 1965, the rate of homicide actually declined slightly, from 340-370 cases per year to 300-325.

Then, in 1965, capital punishment was abolished. Thereafter, there has been a remorseless increase in the number of homicides recorded by the police, to 396 in 1970, 621 in 180, 661 in 1990 and 853 in 2003-04. This increase has been matched by the number of convictions secured. In 1965, a mere 58 people went to prison under the mandatory life sentence that replaced the hangman. By 2003, the figure had risen to 277.

With most crime statistics, there is room for dispute. Their ups and downs may be due to the diligence of a new chief constable or some more or less subtle change in recording practice. But about a pile of dead bodies there cannot be much argument.

These homicide statistics are in fact the most reliable evidence for the claim that England and Wales have become progressively more violent. Nowhere near as violent as South Africa or Russia - or Scotland. But certainly something disquieting is happening. It is not all whipped up by the tabloids.

Yet when the Law Commission this week put out its consultation paper calling for a new Homicide Act, these facts seemed to play no part in its argument. In fact, the homicide statistics were excluded altogether from the 53-page overview and were only to be tracked down in appendix G, on page 323 of the full document.

Nor was there any mention of the startling growth in homicide in the approving leaders in The Times and in the Guardian, which called the commission's proposals "both logical and judicious".

Mr Justice Toulson and his colleagues complain that the present law of homicide is "a mess". They propose instead to create American-style first and second degrees of murder. These, along with a reformed offence of manslaughter and the sentencing tariffs that guide judges these days, would enable them to grade and label different types of murder.

The whole question is seen from the point of view of securing a satisfactory internal consistency of treatment, so that judges can totter off to their lodgings with the warm inner glow of one who has just solved a fiendish sudoku.

Nowhere does the commission appear to ask itself the larger question: will these proposals act as a stronger or weaker deterrent to anyone preparing to inflict grievous bodily harm on his neighbour?


You want it to be rational and effective?


December 29, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:03 PM

NO ONE LIVES LESS COMFORTABLY THAN THEIR PARENTS DID:

Better living ... as measured by PCs, VCRs (Mark Trumbull , 12/30/05, The Christian Science Monitor

In case there was any doubt, a study has confirmed that Americans have a lot of what economists know, technically, as stuff. The computer has surpassed the dishwasher as a standard household appliance. The poorest Americans have posted a sharp rise in access to air conditioning. [...]

It's only one piece of the overall picture of economic progress and doesn't resolve the question about future generations. But it confirms that what the Census Bureau calls "material well-being" abounds for regular folks today in ways that Louis XIV - for all his palaces, silk stockings, and ruffled finery - could barely have imagined.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:35 PM

CAN THEY REALLY NOT FIGURE THIS OUT?:

Former Iraq Hostage Makes Bizzare TV Appearance (Der Spiegel, 12/29/05)

If former hostage Susanne Osthoff had been better advised, she probably would have opted against appearing on German television entirely covered in a black headscarf. The hijab, which left only a pair of slits for her eyes, made the freed hostage look like a disturbing cross between a Chechen Black Widow suicide bomber and a ninja.

On Wednesday night, 10 days after her release from captivity, a televised interview with Osthoff, who had been held in Iraq for three weeks, was broadcast on the German public television channel ZDF. In the interview's introduction, the presenter explained that Osthoff's choice of dress was suposedly intended to preserve her identity --a bizarre thought considering that Osthoff's face has been all over the front-pages since November and most people in Germany must be quite aware of what she looks like. Besides, she didn't wear a headdress in her interview with Arab broacaster Al-Jazeera earlier this week.

The second shock for viewers was the rambling, incoherent nature of Osthoff's answers. Even the heavily edited version (ZDF spokesman: "We wanted to protect Osthoff from herself.") of the original 15-minute interview was barely comprehensible. Questions were left unanswered and at times Osthoff rambled off into non-sequiturs about how badly she had been treated by her landlord back in Germany. When asked how the kidnapping had been carried out, she was evasive, simply responding: "I think these details are not interesting. That doesn't interest anyone. Generally kidnappings are carried out quite violently. People watch a lot of television and realize perhaps that you don't let yourself get abducted voluntarily."


We yield to no one in our contempt for Europeans, but even they have to realize by now that these supposed hostages are just facilitating transfer payments and prisoner releases from European governments to the terrorists.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:20 PM

SHALLOW THROAT:

CIA couple outed by 5-year-old son (Tabassum Zakaria, 12/29/05, Reuters)

The Washington couple at the heart of the CIA leak investigation had their cover blown by their small son as they tried to sneak away on vacation on Thursday.

"My daddy's famous, my mommy's a secret spy," declared the 5-year-old of his parents, former diplomat Joe Wilson and retired CIA operative Valerie Plame.


Can't you just see Joe Wilson telling the poor kid that's what his parents are?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:00 PM

JANET, FULL OF DISGRACE:

College Student Sues Over Mistaken Drug Bust (AP, 12/29/05)

When college freshman Janet Lee packed her bags for a Christmas trip home two years ago, her luggage contained three condoms filled with flour - devices that she and some friends made as a joke.

Philadelphia International Airport screeners found the condoms, and their initial tests showed they contained drugs. The Bryn Mawr College student was arrested on drug trafficking charges and jailed. Three weeks later, she was released after a lab test backed her story, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported Thursday.

Lee filed a federal lawsuit last week against city police, seeking damages for pain and suffering, financial loss, and emotional distress. She was arrested on Dec. 21, 2003, and was held on $500,000 bail and faced up to 20 years in prison had she been convicted of the drug charges.

"I haven't let myself be angry about what happened, because it would tear me apart," Lee said. "I'm not sure I can bear to face it. I'm amazed at how naive I was."


Forget her suing them, why aren't they prosecuting her for the hoax?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:43 PM

JUST ONE MISERABLE KID PER FAMILY:

Nick's Cultural Revolution (DAVID BARBOZA, 12/29/05, NY Times)

When Nickelodeon's popular "Kids' Choice Awards" program came to China last month, the producers were forced to make some serious modifications. There would be no voting on favorite burp. Nor would children judge which movie character was the best at breaking wind.

There was, however, sliming, a highlight of the American version of the show, which involves dumping, squirting and otherwise propelling green gooey stuff at people. And adults repeatedly were whacked by children - with balloon bats, of course - just to give the Chinese a taste of the freedoms afforded to children in the United States.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the show's national television broadcast was that children in China seemed to think that even this much kinder, gentler version of the program was wonderfully, outrageously transgressive. [...]

In the cutthroat competition of contemporary Chinese society, parents invest heavily in what is often their only child. Urban children especially may attend school from 7 a.m. till 4 p.m., followed by hours of homework, music lessons and other enrichment courses. Deviating from this rigorous program is not encouraged.

"We don't allow him to watch too much TV," Qiu Yi, a 41-year-old advertising salesman in Shanghai, said of his 11-year-old son. "I'm not against cartoons. But I try to encourage him to watch documentaries on dinosaurs and the Second World War. These programs are useful to his study."

What's on television in China seems to be not all too dissimilar from what's happening in the classroom. Youth programming in China tends to be dry, conservative and pedantic. It consists mostly of quiz shows, team competitions and endless lineups of youngsters, dressed uniformly, standing at attention and answering questions like Boy and Girl Scouts. [...]

"A lot of children's programming is really bad in China," said Li Yifei, managing director of MTV Networks China and considered one of the most powerful women in Chinese television. "It's condescending and more about lecturing to children. Fun - that's what's desperately needed."


Who'd blame the kids if they Menendez their parents?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:25 PM

HEAR WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TERRORIST WHO TRIED KEEPING QUIET?:

Al-Qaida operative became fountain of information for U.S. (JOHN CREWDSON, 12/28/05, Chicago Tribune)

Consider Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the 39-year-old former al-Qaida operative who was the Sept. 11 mastermind and bearer of many al-Qaida secrets.

If anyone had a motive for remaining silent it was the man known to terrorism investigators as "KSM." But not long after his capture in Pakistan, in March 2003, KSM began to talk.

He ultimately had so much to say that more than 100 footnoted references to the CIA's interrogations of KSM are contained in the final report of the commission that investigated Sept. 11.

Not that everything KSM said was believable. But much of his information checked out in separate questioning of other captures al-Qaida figures.

What made KSM decide to talk? The answer may be waterboarding, to which KSM was subjected on at least one occasion, according to various accounts.


Note the key element that opponents of torture always seek to avoid discussing--when you torture for intelligence purposes, rather than to extract a useless confession, you can just check the information being given to you and thereby determine its reliability.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:30 PM

TRICKS HE WILL DO:

Brit Jew marries dolphin (Joe Kot, 12/29/05, ynet)

Till death do us part? An unusual wedding ceremony was held in the southern resort town of Eilat on Wednesday, as Sharon Tendler, a 41-years-old Jewish millionaire from London married her beloved Cindy, a 35-years-old dolphin, Israel's leading newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reported Thursday.

The groom, a resident of the Eilat dolphin reef, met Tendler 15 years ago, when she first visited the resort. The British rock concert producer took a liking to the dolphin and has made a habit of traveling to Eilat two or three times a year and spending time with her underwater sweetheart.

"The peace and tranquility underwater, and his love, would calm me down," the excited bride said after the wedding.

Perhaps Rabbi Eric Yoffie put it best: "We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban human-dolphin weddings."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:20 PM

THE MANHATTAN PROJECT OF THE WAR ON CARS:

Navigating future for road charges (Paul Rincon, 12/29/05, BBC News)

[I]n a few years, sat-nav will be doing far more than simply telling drivers how to get to their destination. [...]

Powerful applications are expected on the roads; the Galileo network would allow a vehicle's exact movements to be tracked, presenting new possibilities for road-user charging and tolling.

The precision and availability of the Galileo signal would facilitate the application of charges according to the distance travelled by a vehicle, along with other parameters.

"For example, you might want to vary the charge according to speed, or whether someone is travelling through a city centre," Hans-Peter Marchlewski, general counsellor for the Galileo Joint Undertaking, told the BBC News website.

The time signal produced by Galileo would also allow different charges for driving at different times of the day.

"This we are able to do without any support from bridges or ground stations. You can do everything with the [Galileo] signal," explained Mr Marchlewski.

Each motorist would, of course, need to carry a satellite-linked "smart box" in their car, but Galileo-based systems would also dispense with much of the roadside infrastructure to collect tolls and charges.

Galileo sat-nav could potentially form the basis for general "pay-as-you-go" road pricing proposed for the UK as a replacement for road tax and petrol duty.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:05 PM

NEATNESS DOESN'T COUNT:

Democracy Test: As 2005 began, President Bush set the spread of democracy as his primary goal. How did he do? (Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey, Dec. 28, 2005, Newsweek)

It only seems fair to judge someone’s year on their own terms. So in the holiday spirit, it’s worth looking back at President George W. Bush’s 2005 by using the standard he set for himself: the success of liberty.

As he explained in his Inaugural Address in January, his second term--and his legacy--depends on spreading democracy and the rule of law around the world. “We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion,” Bush declared on the steps of the Capitol. “The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.” That wasn’t just something for future generations to worry about. Just before flying off to Camp David last week, and then his Texas ranch for a holiday, the president summarized his own year in front of the cameras on the South Lawn of the White House. “This has been a year of strong progress toward a freer, more peaceful world, and a prosperous America,” he said before citing the elections in Iraq. “This is an amazing moment in the history of liberty.”

Set aside, for a moment, the question of civil liberties at home--even though the debate has barely begun into why the administration bypassed the courts to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens. Just how amazing was the year in terms of liberty around the world?


Fortunately, Freedom House has already answered the question, so we don't have to go by just the opinions of two folks who think eavesdropping on terrorists means we have less liberty. Not only is freedom rising but the accompanying peace and prosperity are extraordinary. What stands out in the essay is that they just don't like the messiness that freedom brings in its wake.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:39 PM

CHEAPENING TRAGEDY:

THE DISPUTATION: Our Role in Promoting Holocaust Denial (David Klinghoffer, December 30, 2005, Forward)

Lately we Jews have displayed a weakness for a style of rhetorical overreach in which the Holocaust is deployed as a stick to threaten those whom some of us find objectionable. It should not startle anyone if Jew haters, seeing what a favorite weapon the Holocaust has become, seek to wrestle it out of our hands by denying it ever happened.

Some illustrations:

Last month in Houston, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, leader of the 1.5-million-member Reform movement, compared religious conservatives to Nazis for retaining the idea that marriage is a partnership of a man and woman. Yoffie said, "We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations."

Placing conservative Christians in the same tradition that brought us the Holocaust was a theme already familiar in the statements of prominent Jews. When Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" came out last year, even some usually perspicacious analysts couldn't resist linking the traditionally Catholic Gibson with Hitler and the Holocaust.

Columnist Charles Krauthammer linked Gibson's movie to the "blood libel that... led to countless Christian massacres of Jews and prepared Europe for the ultimate massacre — 6 million Jews systematically murdered in six years."

In The Washington Post, Richard Cohen summarized his own view: "I thought the movie was tawdry, cartoonish, badly acted and antisemitic, maybe not purposely so but in the way portions of the New Testament are — an assignment of blame that culminated in the Holocaust."

Walter Reich, former director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, found in Gibson's "Passion" signs of "that kind of anger that became the seedbed in which the antisemitism that flourished in the last century, and the Holocaust it produced, took root."

The Anti-Defamation League's national director, Abraham Foxman, said that he is "always hesitant to make comparisons of today's evils... to that of Adolf Hitler." But that didn't stop him from locating "The Passion" in the same vein of hate that led to the Holocaust. "The very reason that Jews have gone through so much is the thinking and viewpoint reflected in the Gibson film," he explained to the New York Post. "For 1,950 plus years the accusation that the Jews killed Jesus has been the source of antisemitism — inquisitions, expulsions, pogroms and eventually the Holocaust."

The fact that Gibson's film led to no manifestation of increased antisemitism anywhere in the world has not, to my knowledge, resulted in any of these commentators retracting their statements.

It's not only Christians, however, against whom we wield the ax of Hitler's incomparable genocide. When Israel's incomparably humane plan to evacuate Gaza of its Jewish residents was carried out, one found Jewish settlers comparing themselves to Holocaust victims — wearing orange Stars of David to recall the yellow star that Jews in the Nazi era were compelled to wear. An Israeli housing minister noted, "Unfortunately, I am no longer surprised when a Jew compares me and other Israeli officials to Nazis."


The danger would seem less that it contributes to denial of the Holocaust itself, than that the continual accusation that George Bush, in particular, and Christians, generally, are Nazis will tend to diminish the evil of the Third Reich. After all, if heterosexuality is Nazism, then the God of Abraham is....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:33 PM

MAKING CARS OBSOLETE:

Working at Home Gets Easier: Advances in Technology Make Telecommuting More Feasible (CHRISTOPHER RHOADS and SARA SILVER, December 29, 2005, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL)

The three-day transit strike was just the latest opportunity for some workers to put telecommuting technology to the test. Post-Sept. 11 concerns about terror attacks, growing fears of pandemics from severe acute respiratory syndrome and the avian flu, the increase in hurricanes, higher gas prices and greater traffic congestion, among other factors, have encouraged more people to find ways to work outside the office.

This year, 82.5 million workers world-wide have done their jobs at home one day a month, more than double the figure from 2000, according to Gartner Inc., a technology research firm. It predicts the figure will grow to more than 100 million workers by 2008.

The U.S., where some states as well as the federal government have passed legislation recently to enable more telecommuting, leads the development, according to Gartner. More than 23% of the country's work force worked at least one day a month at home this year, up from 12% in 2000, it said. It predicted that figure will grow to 27% by 2008. (The Gartner figures don't include corporate professionals who travel and work regularly from planes and hotels.)

Advancements in technology -- most notably the proliferation the past few years of high-speed Internet access in homes, cafes, airports and other locations -- has made the increase of telecommuting, or teleworking, possible and much easier than in the past.

"Broadband technology has made all of this a lot more feasible than five or six years ago," says Brett Caine, group vice president of Citrix Online, which makes software for teleworkers. Citrix Online is a unit of Citrix Systems Inc., Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

What is new, teleworking consultants agree, is a growing comfort with working from a remote location.


It's not as if white collar workers do anything once they get to the office anyway....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:26 PM

TOO EASY A CHOICE:

You choose: Civil liberties or safety? (James P. Pinkerton, December 29, 2005, Newsday)

Revelations about the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping rocked the civil liberties establishment, but the country as a whole didn't seem upset. Instead, the American people, mindful of the possible danger that we face, seem happy enough that Uncle Sam is taking steps to keep up with the challenges created by new technology.

Ask yourself: Do you think it's a bad idea for the feds, as U.S. News & World Report mentioned, to monitor Islamic sites inside the United States for any possible suspicious radiation leaks? The Council on American-Islamic Relations is up in arms - but are you? If you were to read in the paper that some FBI agent has gotten in trouble over pointing a Geiger counter at a mosque, would you be inclined to give the FBI agent the benefit of the doubt? I thought so.

Or take another example: Wednesday's USA Today details government plans to deploy security agents at major airports to engage in "behavioral screening." That is, agents chat up passengers, looking for anything suspicious. It's a tactic that's worked in Israel for years, and it's being introduced here, starting with Boston's Logan Airport. That airport, some might recall, was the departure point for two of the doomed flights on 9/11.

But of course, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts has already sued to oppose any such program. Who do you think the overwhelming majority of Americans want to see prevail on this question?


The thing is the overwhelming majority would support even some impingement on our own lives, but none of these steps touch us at all.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 PM

IT'S THE SAME ALL OVER....:

Sex bombs at the box office in 2005 (Indo-Asian News Service, December 29, 2005)

Bollywood seemed obsessed with sex and sleaze in 2005 but the flirtation rebounded, with the dozen-odd movies of this genre fading out without a whimper. [...]

The list of box office casualties is long.

Neha Dhupia, who seemed to believe that exposure was a sure means to success, had to face twin disappointments this year. Two of her films, Sheesha and Siskiyan which had elements of titillation failed to lure audience and bombed miserably. [...]

Perhaps the year's most sensational release - Vinod Pande's Sins - a film about forbidden love between a Catholic priest and a disciple - blew the lid off sexual inhibitions in Indian cinema but failed to pull the crowds.

Producer-director Mahesh Bhatt, arguably one of the most prolific filmmakers in Bollywood, has become a front-bench loyalist and tries to provide the audience instant gratification through his films.

He uses sex and sleaze as publicity gimmicks to promote his films. And to market his thriller Nazar he deliberately blew lip-locking scenes between Pakistani actress Meera and Ashmit Patel out of proportion. As anticipated, it annoyed Pakistani fundamentalists.

Bhatt ignored the box office verdict - poor - and churned out another cheesy film called Kasak with Meera and Lucky Ali. That too fell flat.

Even Rituparno Ghosh's Antarmahal was full of intimate scenes that made a few conventionalist eyebrows rise. In fact, some critics lashed out at Ghosh and even labelled him a porn-filmmaker.

But actor-turned-director Deepak Tijori, who startled filmdom with his sexually explicit films Oops! and Khamosh, seems to have learnt from his past mistakes and has moved on to comedy.

He says: "The success of a genre depends upon the audience's liking. At this point of time comedy is working and double meaning dialogues are titillating people. Also, films with two-three heroes are doing well at the box office."

Films sans sex or nudity did well at box office this year. But there are a few stubborn filmmakers who still refused to accept that verdict.


...the elites vs the peoples of the Axis of Good.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:45 AM

NO ONE WORKS HARDER THAN THEIR PARENTS DID:

Twenty Years Later, Buying a House Is Less of a Bite (DAVID LEONHARDT and MOTOKO RICH, 12/29/05, NY Times)

Despite a widespread sense that real estate has never been more expensive, families in the vast majority of the country can still buy a house for a smaller share of their income than they could have a generation ago.

A sharp fall in mortgage rates since the early 1980's, a decline in mortgage fees and a rise in incomes have more than made up for rising house prices in almost every place outside of New York, Washington, Miami and along the coast in California. These often-overlooked changes are a major reason that most economists do not expect a broad drop in prices in 2006, even though many once-booming markets on the coasts have started weakening.

The long-term decline in housing costs also helps explain why the homeownership rate remains near a record of almost 69 percent, up from 65 percent a decade ago.

Nationwide, a family earning the median income - the exact middle of all incomes - would have to spend 22 percent of its pretax pay this year on mortgage payments to buy the median-priced house, according to an analysis by Moody's Economy.com, a research company.

The share has increased since 1998, when it hit a low of 17 percent before house prices began rising sharply in many places. Although the overall level has reached its highest point since 1989, it remains well below the levels of the early 1980's, when it topped 30 percent.


'Inverted curve' on bonds raises some concerns: Economists say event could signal recession, or not (JEANNINE AVERSA, Associated Press)
Whether a harbinger of troubled economic times or a quirk due to light trading around the holidays, this week's flip in the bond market — where long-term investments for a while fetched lower interest rates than short-term ones — bears close watching.

Yields, or the return, on 10-year Treasury notes on Tuesday dropped slightly below the yields on two-year notes, marking the first time this has happened in five years. This phenomenon, also evident for part of the trading session Wednesday, is called an "inverted yield curve" and in the past it has often preceded a recession.

Typically, longer-term instruments carry higher interest rates than shorter-term ones to compensate investors for tying up their money over a longer time frame, a decision that can be fraught with uncertainty.

When the situation reverses, it signals that bond investors are betting that interest rates down the road will move lower, something that can happen in the event the economy were to slow down or slip into a recession, thus blunting any concern about inflation.


The Fed has hiked interest rates 13 consecutive times into the teeth of a global deflation, raising real rates to an absurd level, thuis inverting the curve and making low housing costs higher than they should be.

MORE:
The Most Important Economic News of the Year (Arnold Kling, 29 Dec 2005, Tech Central Station)

The table below presents annualized productivity growth for various five-year periods, starting with the period 1955-1960 (from the fourth quarter of 1955 to the fourth quarter of 1960). [...]

What the table says is that the economy today is in great shape. The average productivity growth rate in the last five years is the highest over the past half century.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:10 AM

NO ISLAND IS ISOLATED THAT HAS AMERICA AS A FRIEND:

Growing Japanese Isolation: Koizumi's Obsession with the Past Makes for an Uncertain Future (Wieland Wagner, 12/28/05, Der Spiegel)

Go to the movie theater in Japan these days and one of the more popular choices is a film about the country's past -- about a past Japan just can't seem to shake. The plot centers around a group of exhausted soldiers battling a vastly superior squadron of American aircraft. A scene of spurting blood, massive and deafening explosions and clouds of smoke marks the sinking of the "Yamato," then the world's largest battleship, in the Pacific Ocean, together with its crew of about 2,500 sailors. The message of the film -- that Nippon's heroes in World War II did not die in vain -- is hard to miss. And it's one that finds resonance with the Japanese public.

The battle portrayed in the film happened 60 years ago. In an attempt to delay an American invasion of the Japanese homeland, the Japanese military command sent the "Yamato" to an almost certain demise off the coast of Okinawa. The suicide mission created a long-lasting myth of heroic sacrifice for the fatherland, a myth that has never failed to get the Japanese reaching for their handkerchiefs.

This wartime tearjerker is symptomatic of a year in which Japan has marked the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II, of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and of the ensuing American occupation. It was also a year made conspicuous by the lack of remorse the Japanese have shown for the atrocities they committed against their Asian neighbors -- and for the country's enthusiastic commemoration of the fallen soldiers of the former Japanese empire. Indeed, mindless sacrifice seems to have become a virtue -- one which many in Japan credit for its dramatic rise out of the ashes of World War II.

And the past is increasing in relevance in Japan recently. Once again, Japan feels it is surrounded by enemies. This time, though, the adversary isn't the United States -- on the contrary, America as an ally has become more indispensable than ever. Rather, the rising global power China is making Japan nervous, as is the former Japanese colony Korea.


The strongest relationship they've ever had with America and the recognition that China and the Koreas are enemies (the South because it increasingly appeases the North)--where's the downside here?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:00 AM

MAKING MOVIES FOR THEMSELVES (via Gene Brown):

Hollywood's misunderstood terrorists (Victor Davis Hanson, 12/29/05, Honolulu Advertiser)

Take this fall's "Flightplan," [which] warns us that the real threat after Sept. 11 is certainly not young Middle Eastern males on planes who might hijack or crash them into iconic American buildings. No, more dangerous in Hollywood's alternate universe are the flight officials themselves — who in reality on Sept. 11 battled terrorists only to have their throats cut before being blown up with all the passengers.

A slickly filmed "Syriana" is the worst of the recent releases. The film's problem is not just that it predictably presents the bad, ugly sheik as a puppet of American oil interests while the handsome and good independent crown price is assassinated for championing his oppressed people against Western hegemony. Or that the conniving corporate potentates have big bellies and Southern accents while the goodhearted, sloppily dressed George Clooney is double-crossed by his stylish, pampered CIA bosses safe in the Washington, D.C., suburbs.

"Syriana" also perverts historical reality. [...]

Plus, in the real world outside Hollywood, does the United States really assassinate Gulf royalty who wish to liberalize their economies and give women the right to vote?

Contrary to the premise of "Syriana," the gripe against contemporary American foreign policy is just the opposite. Realists, isolationists and leftists alike damn the United States as naive or foolish for obsessing over democratic reform in Afghanistan and Iraq, pressuring Saudi Arabia and Egypt to hold valid elections and insisting that the terrorist patron Syria leave the voters of Lebanon alone.

The price of gas skyrocketed after the American invasion of Iraq. And oil companies, especially French and Russian, were furious when Saddam Hussein's kleptocracy fell — and their sweetheart deals were nullified by a new democratic Iraqi government.

Moral equivalence is perhaps the most troubling of Hollywood's postmodern pathologies — or the notion that each side that resorts to violence is of the same ethical nature.


Of course, Hollywood is paying the price of its anti-Americanism at the box office.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:55 AM

THANK GOODNESS HENTOFF'S ONLY IN THE VOICE:

McCain's Retreat: Praise for the president's yielding to John McCain ignored the awful details in fine print (Nat Hentoff, December 23rd, 2005, Village Voice)

To begin, McCain, before his White House rapprochement with the president, had accepted administration language in his human rights amendment to give paid legal counsel and a certain amount of legal protection to interrogators—including the CIA's—accused of abusing prisoners. Their defense would be that a "person of ordinary sense and understanding would not know the practices were unlawful." Also, as at the Nuremberg trials after World War II, the defendants would say they were only following orders.

But as Josh White pointed out in the December 16 Washington Post, if these orders were plainly illegal, they would have to be disobeyed. In that case, what penalties would the commanders themselves, who gave the unlawful orders, face— including the top of the command at the Defense Department, the Justice Department, and the White House?

The Bush administration pressured McCain to accept this additional language in fear that, eventually, courts would decide that U.S. "coercive interrogations" have indeed violated U.S. law and international treaties we have signed. The ACLU and human rights organizations have already filed lawsuits making these claims against high levels of the administration.

Much more serious— and ignored by most of the media—is an amendment— voted for by McCain—to the Defense Authorization bill by Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), Carl Levin (D-Michigan), and Jon Kyl (R-Arizona).

Tom Wilner, a constitutional lawyer who represents a number of Kuwaiti detainees (a/k/a prisoners) at Guantánamo, gets to the chilling core of the amendment:

"This amendment [which McCain has approved] tears the heart out of anything good that the McCain prohibition [against cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment] does. It strips the right of habeas corpus from detainees at Guantánamo, prohibits them from suing U.S. officials for their treatment, and in new language slipped into the bill [during the House-Senate conference committee sessions] actually authorizes the tribunals at Guantánamo [for enemy combatants] to use statements obtained through coercion [including torture] as 'probative' [testimony]. That provision works a significant change of existing U.S. and international law and actually provides an incentive for U.S. officials or officials from other governments through [CIA] rendition [sending terrorism suspects to other countries to be tortured], to obtain such coerced statements." (Emphasis added.)

Accordingly, Tom Wilner tells me, this "McCain/Graham/Levin/Kyl package is a disaster—a giant step backward for human rights. . . . By eliminating the Great Writ [habeas corpus] and authorizing the use of coercion, this amendment un- dermines the very foundation of our system.

"These changes far out- weigh the language for which Senator McCain has been so complimented, prohibiting the government from torturing or engaging in cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment."

Furthermore, how does this administration actually define torture anywhere? From a December 16 Washington Post editorial after Bush's "surrender" to McCain: "Mr. Bush's political appointees at the Justice Department [Alberto Gonzales at the top] and the Pentagon [Rumsfeld et al.] have redefined both 'torture' and 'cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment' as not covering in all circumstances such CIA techniques as 'waterboarding,' or simulated drowning; 'cold cell,' the deliberate inducing of hypothermia; mock execution; and prolonged and painful 'short-shackling.' It has taken these positions, even though 'cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment' as defined by the Senate [passage of the McCain amendment] covers everything that also would be prohibited by the Constitution [against prisoners held in the U.S.]. . . .

"[Accordingly,] the administration has adopted logic that accepts, in principle, the idea that the FBI could constitutionally use them on U.S. citizens in certain circumstances."


Luckily, ony a very few folks like Nat Hentoff are serious enough, even if mistaken, about civil liberties and human rights, to pay attention to the reality instead of the anti-Bush atmospherics.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:37 AM

NOT NEAR AS GLOOMY AS THEY SHOULD BE:

Population gloom: A new study says Russia's demographic 'devastation' has left it facing increasing crisis (Tom Parfitt, December 29, 2005, Guardian Unlimited)

Boris Vasiliev stomped down the snow-covered track that is the main street of his village and paused outside a dilapidated single-storey building.

"That used to be the doctor's surgery," he said, and then pointed back the way he had come. "Down there was the shop. A bit further, the social club."

Either side of the track were two long lines of empty wooden cottages. Buyavino, in the Tver region 130 miles north of Moscow, is one of tens of thousands of Russian villages slowly dying out as the country faces an alarming decline in its population.

When Guardian Unlimited visited earlier this year, Mr Vasiliev, a 58-year-old forestry worker, was the youngest person in the village and the only one with a job. [...]

Russia's population has plummeted by almost 7% to 143 million in the last 15 years, and is predicted to drop by another 20 million by 2025. And as Moscow gears up to take over the presidency of the G8 on January 1, the Kremlin is being urged to meet the crisis head on.

In a report published last week, Delovaya Rossiya, a business lobby group, predicted that the country would lose an astonishing $400bn (£232bn) in the next two decades if it failed to tackle the population dive.

Inadequate government efforts to encourage immigration, support young families and promote healthy eating are having a disastrous effect on President Vladimir Putin's oft-repeated desire to double GDP, it said.


There's no reason to expect nations in demographic decline to grow their economies.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:05 AM

SOUNDS LIKE IT'D GO QUITE WELL WITH FOOTBALL ON TV:

Recipe of the week (Chicago Tribune, 12/29/05)

Mexican baked eggs with sausage and cheese

Preparation time: 30 minutes
Chilling time: 4 hours or overnight
Cooking time: 55-60 minutes
Servings: 6

The sausage can be omitted if desired; just increase the salt to 1 teaspoon.

Ingredients:
1 1/4 cups fresh bread crumbs, crusts trimmed
3/4 cup milk
1/2 cup water
6 large eggs plus whites from 2 large eggs
4 ounces sausage, hot (or regular)
1 Tbsp. canola oil
1 large white onion, split lengthwise, thinly sliced
1 green pepper, roasted and peeled, see note below, cut into short, thin strips
1 jalapeno, seeded, minced
1 Tbsp. minced garlic
3/4 tsp. salt
8 ounces shredded chihuahua cheese
Freshly ground black pepper
Salsa, corn tortillas for serving

1. Mix crumbs, milk and water in medium bowl. Whisk eggs and egg whites in another bowl until frothy. Set both aside.

2. Cook sausage in large skillet over high heat until crumbled and browned, about 4 minutes. Set aside on paper towels. Drain fat from pan.

3. Add oil to pan. Add onion, green pepper, jalapeno, garlic and salt. Cook over medium-high heat, stirring often, until onions are soft, about 6 minutes. Remove pan from heat. Add reserved sausage, bread crumb mixture, frothed eggs, 1 1/3 cups of the cheese and black pepper. Mix well. Sprinkle 1/3 cup cheese on bottom of greased 6-cup shallow baking dish. Ladle in egg mixture. Sprinkle remaining cheese on top. Cover with plastic; refrigerate at least 4 hours or overnight. Remove plastic before baking.

4. Heat oven to 325 degrees. Cook in oven until well browned and puffy, about 55-60 minutes or until a toothpick inserted in center comes out clean. Serve hot, pass salsa and warm corn tortillas separately.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:57 AM

IN SCIENCE TRUTH IS REVEALED ONLY ACCIDENTALLY (via Brian Boys):

Did Early Humans First Arise in Asia, Not Africa? (Nicholas Bakalar, December 27, 2005, National Geographic News)

The authors maintain that, although there is no absolute proof, putting all the evidence together requires an open mind about other geographical origins of the first humans.

The authors point out that there is very little solid information about the first early humans in Asia, and paleontologists are left with assumptions that are too often treated as historical facts.

There is no archaeological or fossil evidence to prove that early humans moved from southern Africa to the Nile Valley in the early Pleistocene (1.8 million years ago to 11,500 years ago), they say.


It's just one faith vs. another.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:46 AM

WHO NEEDS 'EM?:

Patriotism is back in intellectual fashion (David Green, 27/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Can an intelligent person be patriotic? Or is national loyalty a base emotion, fit only for the tabloid-reading masses? In the 1940s, George Orwell remarked that Colonel Blimps and highbrow intellectuals both accepted as a law of nature that patriotism and intelligence were divorced.

England was, he thought, the only great country whose intellectuals were ashamed of their own nationality and felt it their "duty to snigger at every English institution". [...]

Patriotism as Orwell defined it - "devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people" - is making a comeback among members of the intelligentsia.


What does intellectualism have to do with intelligence?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:46 AM

EVEN RANDY LIKES IT (via Mike Daley):

OLD-FASHIONED MEAT LOAF

2 cups finely chopped onion
1 tablespoon minced garlic
1 celery rib, chopped fine
1 carrot, chopped fine
1/2 cup finely chopped scallion
2 tablespoons unsalted butter
2 teaspoons salt
1 1/2 teaspoons freshly ground black pepper
2 teaspoons Worcestershire sauce
2/3 cup ketchup plus additional as an accompaniment if desired
1 1/2 pounds ground chuck
3/4 pound ground pork
1 cup fresh bread crumbs
2 large eggs, beaten lightly
1/3 cup minced fresh parsley leaves

Preheat oven to 350°F.

In a large heavy skillet cook onion, garlic, celery, carrot, and scallion in butter over moderate heat, stirring, 5 minutes. Cook vegetables, covered, stirring occasionally, until carrot is tender, about 5 minutes more. Stir in salt and pepper, Worcestershire sauce, and 1/3 cup of ketchup and cook, stirring, 1 minute.

In a large bowl combine well vegetables, meats, bread crumbs, eggs, and parsley. In a shallow baking pan form mixture into 1 10-by 5-inch oval loaf and spread remaining 1/3 cup ketchup over loaf. . DO NOT COOK IN LOAF PAN!

Bake meat loaf in oven 1 hour, or until a meat thermometer inserted in center registers 155°F.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:31 AM

THE FEDERALIST FUTURE:

Aceh marks final troop withdrawal (BBC, 12/29/05)

A ceremony has taken place in Aceh marking the withdrawal of Indonesian troops sent there to combat an uprising which has cost more than 15,000 lives.

The pull-out is the final military step in a peace deal agreed with rebels from the Free Aceh Movement (Gam) aimed at ending 26 years of bitter conflict.

The rebels have already handed in their weapons and dissolved their armed wing.

The peace deal finally came together following the tsunami a year ago which devastated large parts of the province.

More than 120,000 Acehnese were killed in the disaster - and in the face of such widespread loss of life, the two sides appeared no longer to have the stomach for the fight, reports the BBC's Jakarta correspondent, Rachel Harvey. [...]

Under the peace deal agreed in August, the rebels dropped their demand for full independence in return for more autonomy for the province, which lies at the northern tip of the island of Sumatra.


After a number of years of autonomy, independence will come naturally.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:26 AM

A GREAT AMERICAN TREE AND A PRETTY GOOD WEAPON:

Trying to Light A Fire Under Chestnut Revival (Washington Post, December 29, 2005, )

They aren't just for Christmas anymore.

Agricultural researchers at the University of Missouri at Columbia's Center for Agroforestry are experimenting with more than 50 varieties of chestnuts. The goal: to bring back the American chestnut.

A century ago -- before an Asian blight devastated most of the country's millions of chestnut trees -- chestnuts were a staple of American diets, particularly for recent immigrants. The trees' rot-resistant timber was used to build barns and beams, its bark provided tannin for leather.

While the chestnut remains an oddity for most Americans, commercial production is increasing, and so is demand.

"The American Chestnut Foundation has worked very closely with the Agriculture Department to come up with a disease-resistant strain of the American chestnut," President Bush said when he planted a 16-foot chestnut tree on the White House grounds to mark the 133rd annual celebration of Arbor Day on April 29. "One day the American chestnut . . . will be coming back. And this is our little part to help it come back."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:17 AM

TIME FOR PEACE ABROAD AND WAR AT HOME:

Bush Team Rethinks Its Plan for Recovery: New Approach Could Save Second Term (Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei, December 29, 2005, Washington Post)

President Bush shifted his rhetoric on Iraq in recent weeks after an intense debate among advisers about how to pull out of his political free fall, with senior adviser Karl Rove urging a campaign-style attack on critics while younger aides pushed for more candor about setbacks in the war, according to Republican strategists.

The result was a hybrid of the two approaches as Bush lashed out at war opponents in Congress, then turned to a humbler assessment of events on the ground in Iraq that included admissions about how some of his expectations had been frustrated. [...]

The lessons drawn by a variety of Bush advisers inside and outside the White House as they map a road to recovery in 2006 include these: Overarching initiatives such as restructuring Social Security are unworkable in a time of war. The public wants a balanced appraisal of what is happening on the battlefield as well as pledges of victory. And Iraq trumps all.

"I don't think they realized that Iraq is the totality of their legacy until fairly recently," said former congressman Vin Weber (R-Minn.), an outside adviser to the White House. "There is not much of a market for other issues."


As H. W. Brands has written, that's how we got stuck with fifty years of the New Deal/Great Society in the first place: the cost of keeping the Left on board in time of war against a Leftist evil abroad was funding their welfare state at home. It's also why, contrary to David Frum, 9-11 was a political as well as national security disaster for George W. Bush and why the WoT will be brought to a rapid conclusion.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:13 AM

IT'S A START:

39% live in areas limiting smoking: Six more states pass restrictions in 2005 (Wendy Koch, 12/29/05, USA TODAY)

Six states enacted indoor smoking bans in 2005, more than in any previous year, as public sentiment appears increasingly anti-tobacco.

Thirty-nine percent of Americans are covered by statewide or local laws limiting smoking, according to Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. In 1985, there were fewer than 200 such state and local laws in the USA. Today, there are more than 2,000. Of those, 118 state or local governments ban all smoking in restaurants, bars and other workplaces.

It's all part of a growing sentiment for a smoke-free environment at work, in public places, even outdoors.


Better uniform than piecemeal, but every bit helps.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:11 AM

MUSTN'T LET THEM GET SUCH NOTIONS IN THEIR LITTLE HEADS:

'Saint Bob' accused of betraying poor (GERRI PEEV , 12/29/05, The Scotsman)

ANTI-POVERTY activists have attacked Sir Bob Geldof for signing up to David Cameron's new Conservative think tank, accusing the aid campaigner of becoming a propaganda tool for politicians and betraying the poor in Africa.

Geldof's recruitment to the Global Poverty Challenge has alarmed activists who fear his involvement will reinforce the idea of free-market policies being the only way to tackle hardship.


The poor are meant to be dependent on the State.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

WHAT'S THE HURRY:

Teaching jobs in doubt as pensioners set to outnumber pupils by 2009 (PETER MACMAHON, 12/29/05, The Scotsman)

SCOTLAND'S demographic time-bomb will explode in three years, when the number of pensioners north of the Border overtakes the number of children in school, the Executive has been warned.

While the secularists continue to shovel up their assurances that peoples don't just kill themselves off....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:40 AM

SOLID:

Last-Minute Gift Buying Boosts Retailers: Sales at big chains rise 3.9% last week from a year earlier. Volume this week also may be good. (Leslie Earnest, December 29, 2005, LA Times)

Procrastinators again gave retailers a last-minute present this holiday season, as sales in the week before Christmas rose 3.9% from a year earlier.

The International Council of Shopping Centers, reporting its tally of 69 chains nationwide, said Wednesday that sales volume and customer traffic accelerated in the seven days before the holiday.

With shoppers gravitating back to stores to return unwanted presents, snap up bargains and redeem gift cards, retailers could log another solid week, said Michael Niemira, the group's chief economist.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:33 AM

NOT EVEN AQUAWOMAN COULD GET OUT OF THIS FIX:

After Storm, She Tries to Mend State, and Career (JAMES DAO, 12/29/05, NY Times)

She is struggling to rebuild a shattered state. But along the way, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco of Louisiana is also working to repair a wounded reputation - her own.

She has been mocked as weepy and indecisive by radio talk show hosts who deride her as "momma governor." She has feuded with the White House, which did not invite her to a recent announcement on levee protection. She has been criticized on Capitol Hill by Republicans as having made a "dysfunctional" response to Hurricane Katrina. [...]

The question now is whether Ms. Blanco can regain enough political traction to lead her state out of its trauma. A post-hurricane poll showed that only 19 percent of voters would definitely support her for re-election in 2007. The depopulation of New Orleans, her party's base, has emboldened Republicans. And some Democrats question whether she has a vision for reconstruction, beyond the laundry list of needs she ticks off in news releases.

"She's got problems facing her," said Bernie Pinsonat, a pollster. "I don't know if any governor could survive this."


Even racism may not be enough to help her beat Bobby Jindal this time.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:31 AM

A SQUANDER:

New York Transit Deal Shows Union's Success on Many Fronts (STEVEN GREENHOUSE, 12/29/05, NY Times)

He was excoriated on tabloid front pages and by the mayor and governor. As thousands streamed across the Brooklyn Bridge on a frigid night during last week's transit strike, someone in a car yelled out his name, prefacing it with a curse.

But now, a day after details of an agreement between the transit workers and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority were spelled out, Roger Toussaint, the union's president, seems to have emerged in a far better position than seemed likely just a few days ago.


The strike was a gift, but NY wasted it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:16 AM

A VERY SATISFACTORY LATE CHRISTMMAS GIFT:

Sox in hunt for Tejada (Chris Snow, December 29, 2005, Boston Globe)

Dealing Miguel Tejada within the division remains a road the Orioles would rather not go down, but the Red Sox, according to a source with direct knowledge of the team's pursuit of the shortstop, have made a ''pretty good offer" that has positioned them as a legitimate contender for the 2002 American League Most Valuable Player.

The Sox, who initially offered Manny Ramírez for Tejada straight up, recently offered Ramírez and righthander Matt Clement, according to the source.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:52 AM

TURKEY IS, AFTER ALL, JUST A GRAVY DELIVERY SYSTEM:

The essential gravy Mastering the art of flavorful gravy (Russ Parsons, 12/29/05, Los Angeles Times)

There are few foods on the holiday table that carry the mystique of gravy. At its most basic level, it's nothing more than a paste of flour and fat thinned with turkey stock, yet it somehow has the capacity to strike fear in otherwise brave-hearted cooks.

Granted, there are enough bad gravies out there to give a cook pause. But making a good gravy — one that tastes of turkey essence and not flour and that lightly naps the food rather than smothering it — is only a little more complicated than stirring together a white sauce. [...]

The most critical phase of making gravy is right at the start, when you make the paste and add the first bit of liquid to it. This is what makes the difference between a gravy that is silky and one that is lumpy. After that, everything is easy. [...]

Giblet gravy

Total time: 45 minutes plus stock-simmering time
Servings: Makes about 3 cups

Ingredients:
1 onion, quartered
1 cup chopped carrot
1 cup chopped celery
Assorted turkey pieces — neck, wingtips, tail, gizzard and heart (but not the liver)
1 bay leaf
1 bunch (about 14 sprigs) parsley
1 sprig fresh thyme
1/4 cup fat skimmed from roasting pan, with butter added if necessary to make 1/4 cup
1/4 cup flour
Salt to taste
1/4 tsp. powdered sage (if serving sage dressing)
Freshly ground black pepper

1. In a large saucepan, combine the onion, carrot, celery, turkey pieces, 6 cups water, the bay leaf, parsley and thyme. Bring to a simmer, partially cover and cook for at least 2 hours.

2. After cooking, strain the stock into a measuring cup. You'll need about 3 1/2 to 4 cups of stock. Peel the tough skin from the gizzard; chop the gizzard and heart finely. Set aside.

3. When the turkey comes out of the oven, remove it to a platter to rest. Place the roasting pan over a burner set to high. Remove any garlic, onions, herbs or aromatics with a slotted spoon and discard. Let the pan sizzle for a minute; add the stock, scraping the pan with a wooden spoon to free any browned bits.

4. Pour this mixture into a fat separator or back into the measuring cup and set aside for a couple of minutes to let the fat separate.

5. In a saucepan over medium heat, add one-fourth cup skimmed fat or whatever amount of fat you have plus enough melted butter to make about one-fourth cup. Whisk in the flour and let it cook for 1 to 2 minutes, whisking constantly.

6. Slowly add 1 cup of stock, whisking constantly, being careful to add as little of the top layer of fat as you can. The sauce will thicken almost immediately. Gradually add more stock, about 1 cup at a time, whisking until the gravy is just thick enough to coat the back of a spoon.

7. When all of the stock has been added, season to taste with salt, sage and a couple of grinds of black pepper. Simmer over low heat for 15 minutes to cook out the taste of the raw flour. Occasionally, use a large soup spoon to skim off the skin of protein that forms on the top.

8. About 5 minutes before serving, stir in the chopped giblets. Ladle into a warmed gravy boat.


December 28, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:57 PM

WHAT'S A LITTLE SLAVERY BETWEEN FORMER FRIENDS:


N. Koreans Toil Abroad Under Grim Conditions
: Women provide badly needed labor in Czech towns and elsewhere. Pyongyang keeps a tight rein on them and takes most of their wages. (Barbara Demick, December 27, 2005, LA Times)

The elementary school closed long ago for lack of students. The entire village 20 miles west of Prague has only about 200 people.

The schoolhouse is now a factory producing uniforms. Almost all the workers are North Korean, and the women initially looked delighted to see visitors. It gets lonely working out here, thousands of miles from home. They crowded around to chat.

"I'm not so happy here. There is nobody who speaks my language. I'm so far from home," volunteered a tentative young woman in a T-shirt and sweatpants who said she was from Pyongyang, the North Korean capital.

But as she spoke, an older woman with stern posture and an expressionless face — a North Korean security official — passed by in the corridor. The young women scattered wordlessly and disappeared into another room, closing and bolting the door behind them.

Hundreds of young North Korean women are working in garment and leather factories like this one, easing a labor shortage in small Czech towns. Their presence in this recent member of the European Union is something of a throwback to before the Velvet Revolution of 1989, when Prague, like Pyongyang, was a partner in the Communist bloc.

The North Korean government keeps most of the earnings, apparently one of the few legal sources of hard currency for an isolated and impoverished government believed to be living off counterfeiting, drug trafficking and weapons sales. Experts estimate that there are 10,000 to 15,000 North Koreans working abroad in behalf of their government in jobs ranging from nursing to construction work. In addition to the Czech Republic, North Korea has sent workers to Russia, Libya, Bulgaria, Saudi Arabia and Angola, defectors say.

Almost the entire monthly salary of each of the women here, about $260, the Czech minimum wage, is deposited directly into an account controlled by the North Korean government, which gives the workers only a fraction of the money.

To the extent that they are allowed outside, they go only in groups. Often they are accompanied by a guard from the North Korean Embassy who is referred to as their "interpreter." They live under strict surveillance in dormitories with photographs of North Korea's late founder Kim Il Sung and current leader Kim Jong Il gracing the walls. Their only entertainment is propaganda films and newspapers sent from North Korea, and occasional exercise in the yard outside.

"This is 21st century slave labor," said Kim Tae San, a former official of the North Korean Embassy in Prague. He helped set up the factories in 1998 and served as president of one of the shoe factories until he defected to South Korea in 2002.

It also was Kim's job to collect the salaries and distribute the money to workers. He said 55% was taken off the top as a "voluntary" contribution to the cause of the socialist revolution. The women had to buy and cook their own food. Additional sums were deducted for accommodation, transportation and such extras as flowers for the birthdays of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il.

The women even had to pay for the propaganda films they were forced to watch. By the time all the deductions were made, each received between $20 and $30 a month. They spent less than $10 of it on food, buying only the cheapest local macaroni.

"They try to save money by not eating," said Kim, the former embassy official. He says that his wife, who accompanied him on visits to the factory, was concerned that women's menstruation stopped, their breasts shriveled and many experienced acute constipation. "We were always trying to get them to spend more on food, but they were desperate to bring money home to their families."

Kim said that Czechs often mistook the North Korean women for convict laborers because of the harsh conditions. "They would ask the girls, 'What terrible thing did you do to be sent here to work like this?' "

In fact, the women usually come from families deemed sufficiently loyal to the government that their daughters will not defect. With salaries at state-owned firms in North Korea as low as $1 per month, the chance to work abroad for a three-year stint is considered a privilege.

Having shed its own communist dictatorship, the Czech Republic is sensitive to human rights issues. On the other hand, the country has to employ about 200,000 guest workers, largely to replace Czechs who have left to seek higher wages in Western Europe.


Just the beginning of how horribly the demographic disaster will warp societies.


Posted by Matt Murphy at 8:27 PM

PICK THE ALAMO BOWL SCORE, WIN A BOOK:

Everyone is invited to participate -- even those not signed up for our little contest. Please post your guesses below. I'll give a prize to whoever comes closest to guessing the true point spread without going over.

General game info: The game is the Nebraska Cornhuskers versus the Michigan Wolverines. Both teams are 7-4. Michigan is generally listed as a 10.5 to 11-point favorite. Michigan is probably the better team but their fans are outnumbered and Michigan doesn't appear excited about playing in this particular bowl game.

If the winner picks Nebraska, he will receive a free copy of Pauline Maier's book American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. If the winner picks Michigan, he will receive a Howard Zinn book (in fairness, this last point is subject to negotiation).

Have fun!


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:48 PM

...AND LOWER...:

Why energy prices are cooling off: Home-heating oil prices have declined by some 60 cents a gallon since September. (Ron Scherer, 12/29/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

Already there are reports that OPEC will cut production, perhaps by as much as one million barrels of oil per day, to try to keep prices from falling. "In the second quarter of the year, demand is at its lowest," says Mr. Routt. "If they continued pumping when demand eases they could be accused of crushing the market."

Oil prices have remained below $60 a barrel for six months. Combined with lower demand for gasoline, this has helped bring down the price for motorists. Wednesday, GasPriceWatch.com reported the national average at $2.15 a gallon.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:44 PM

SAY GOOD-BYE TO THE FILIBUSTER:

2006 economy looks solid: Most forecasters see growth of at least 3 percent, which means more jobs and higher pay. (Mark Trumbull , 12/29/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

A fifth straight year of economic expansion in 2006 promises to mean new jobs, higher pay, and maybe even fatter investment portfolios for millions of Americans. [...]

The consensus forecast calls for:

• Rising pay. Disposable incomes will rise by 3.2 percent, after inflation, more than double this year's gain.


Posted by David Cohen at 6:38 PM

TCHATKES FOR PEACE

Number of tour groups leaps in 2005 (Hilary Leila Krieger, Jerusalem Post, 12/28/05)

The number of tour groups visiting Israel jumped substantially in 2005, including from Arab and Muslim countries, according to figures provided by the Interior Ministry Wednesday.

Jordan sent its first tour groups ever - totaling 64 individuals - according to the ministry, and Egypt's numbers rose from 47 tour participants in 2004 to 432 in 2005.

Indonesia and Malaysia - two countries that don't have official diplomatic relations with Israel - sent 7,234 and 1,431 tourists respectively on organized tours. The numbers were 4,755 and 654 apiece the year earlier.

I would guess that there were some pretty odd moments on those tours.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:18 PM

THERE'S MORE WHERE THAT CAME FROM:

Huge new oil discovery in Brazil (BBC, 12/28/05)

Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, says it has discovered a huge new offshore oil field off the coast of Rio de Janeiro state.

The Papa-Terra field was found in the Campos Basin, which is already Brazil's most important oil-producing region.

Petrobras estimates it contains at least 700 million barrels of crude - about 10% of Brazil's current reserves. [...]

The new field is expected to help Petrobras achieve its goal of making Brazil self-sufficient in oil. Since 2003, the company has been meeting 91% of the country's needs.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:10 PM

SHOULD THEY BE EXPECTED TO IMITATE THE FAILURES INSTEAD?:

The Steady, Strategic Ascent Of JetBlue Airways (Knowledge@Wharton, 12.28.05)

The brainchild of industry veteran David Neeleman, who is the company's chairman and chief executive, JetBlue has tried to combine the best features of low-fare carriers, like Southwest, and traditional ones, like UAL's United and AMR's American. Like Southwest, it eschews hub airports in favor of point-to-point flights and looks for innovative ways to cut costs. Its 1,100 call-center operators, for example, don't work in a center at all, but at their homes in and around Salt Lake City. "I have had some investors ask, 'Do they have uniforms?'" Barger quips. "And I'm like, 'I have no idea whether they are wearing anything at all.'" Nor, he said, does he care--as long as they provide excellent customer service.

Like traditional carriers, JetBlue offers assigned seats and in-flight entertainment. Recently, for example, it announced that it was adding 100 channels of satellite radio. The company had to do business differently if it was to succeed in a "broken industry," Barger said. "Today, three out of every ten seats flown are on a bankrupt carrier. We are growing our company and trying to fend off competition that is insensitive to price. In bankruptcy, companies have protection, and underneath that umbrella they can offer very low fares. Independence Air is offering $59 from Washington to the West Coast. How do you compete with that?"

One way is to find markets with fewer competitors. That strategy motivated JetBlue's recent purchase of 100 of Embraer's 190 aircraft. The smaller planes will enable it to economically serve less-crowded markets, such as Richmond, Va., and Austin, Texas. "A smaller airplane has some inefficiencies, but it allows us to mine markets that Southwest, Frontier and America West aren't in," Barger noted.

One criticism of JetBlue has been is that it's little more than a Southwest copycat. Barger admitted that his company has borrowed from the only major airline that has continued to thrive amid the industry's recent slump. "We have taken some aspects of Southwest. Why? Because they work. There's no pride of authorship there."


If prices aren't low and/or falling you won't succeed in the deflationary economy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:03 PM

OBLIGATORY CASTRO COMPARISON:

The Castro show just keeps getting weirder (ANA MENENDEZ, 12/27/05, Miami Herald)

Poor Fidel. It's not easy being a dictator these days, not when your sworn enemy has stolen your playbook and recast it as democracy. How sad it must be to come up with all these creative governing principles -- listening in on private phone calls, reading personal mail, secretly video-taping protestors -- only to live long enough to see a third-rate intelligence like George W. Bush adopt them all as his own. It's enough to drive anyone nuts.

At least she's honest about suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:39 PM

WHAT STORM?:

Consumer Confidence Up As Gas Prices Fall (EILEEN ALT POWELL , 12.28.2005, Forbes)

Consumer confidence surged in December as declining gasoline prices and improving job opportunities buoyed spirits, boding well for spending in the new year.

The Conference Board said Wednesday that its Consumer Confidence Index advanced to 103.6 this month after recovering to 98.3 in November. That was better than the 103.0 reading analysts had expected for December.

December's rise put the index at its highest level since Hurricane Katrina struck on Aug. 29, devastating Gulf Coast states and disrupting fuel and trade for much of the nation. Last August, before the storm, the index registered 105.5.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:37 PM

THE GOOD OLD DAYS:

JAILED FOR THEIR WORDS: A law passed during World War I pitched Montanans into prison for critical remarks; law students are seeking clemency for them (Maurice Possley, December 28, 2005, Chicago Tribune)

On April 23, 1918, with the U.S. in the depths of World War I, Fred Rodewald, a German immigrant homesteader who had settled with his family on 320 acres in eastern Montana, uttered a sentence that forever changed his life.

He suggested that Americans "would have hard times" if Germany's kaiser "didn't get over here and rule this country."

That remark earned him 2 years in prison for violating Montana's Sedition Act. When he went off to the penitentiary in Deer Lodge, the 42-year-old Rodewald left behind a pregnant wife and eight children. An armistice ended the war less than a month later.

Now, nearly 90 years later, law students at the University of Montana have begun a quest and are prowling dusty archives and musty courthouse storage rooms across the state to clear Rodewald and 73 other Montanans convicted of sedition.

The project provides a contrast between the waning days of World War I, when a farmer could be jailed for suggesting that it was "a rich man's war," and today, when citizens can criticize the war in Iraq without fear of prosecution, if not without fear of government surveillance.


If only a Democrat were in office for the WoT, John Murtha and Cindy Sheehan would be behind barbed wire....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:06 AM

SPYING ON TERRORISTS IS ALMOST AS POPULAR AS ABU GHRAIB:

National Security Agency (RasmussenReports.com, December 28, 2005)

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.

Is even Karl Rove an evil enough genius to initiate the impeachment proceedings just so they can thoroughly discredit the Democrats?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:33 AM

THE LEAST OF THEIR PROBLEMS:

Centrist Democrats hit anti-Bush tactics (Donald Lambro, 12/28/05, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

"The Republicans still hold the advantage on every national-security issue we tested," said Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster and former adviser to President Clinton, who co-authored a Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) memo on the party's national-security weaknesses.

Nervousness among Democrats intensified earlier this month after Democrats led a filibuster against the Patriot Act that threatened to block the measure, followed by a victory cry from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, who declared at a party rally, "We killed the Patriot Act."

After Mr. Bush sharply attacked Mr. Reid, saying lack of the Patriot Act "will leave us in a weaker position in the fight against brutal killers," Senate Democrats dropped their filibuster and accepted a six-month extension. A Republican-backed five-week extension was adopted last week by the House and Senate.

Recent polls say 56 percent of Americans approve of the job Mr. Bush is doing to protect the country from another terrorist attack.

"In shaping alternative policies -- particularly on national security, terrorism and Iraq -- Democrats have to be extremely careful to avoid reinforcing the negative stereotype that has cost us so much in the last two national elections," the recent DLC memorandum said.

The WoT just isn't likely to be much of an issue going forward--Democrats should be far more worried about the healthy economy, their estrangement from the nation on moral issues and their lack of any coherent alternatives to George Bush's Third Way.


MORE:
Life Keeps Getting Better, Americans Say (Nathan Burchfiel, December 27, 2005, CNSNews.com)

Most Americans say 2005 was a better year than 2004 and they're optimistic that 2006 will be even better, according to a poll released Monday by Quinnipiac University.

The school surveyed 1,230 Americans and found that 53 percent feel that 2005 was "a better year for [them] personally" than 2004. Nearly 80 percent expect 2006 to be better than 2005.

Republicans feel better about the direction of their lives than Democrats, according to the poll. Sixty-five percent of Republicans felt this year was better than last, compared to 41 percent of Democrats.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:24 AM

FIFTY WASTED YEARS:

Peace on Earth? Increasingly, Yes. (Andrew Mack, December 28, 2005, Washington Post)

The Human Security Report, an independent study funded by five countries and published by Oxford University Press, draws on a wide range of little publicized scholarly data, plus specially commissioned research to present a portrait of global security that is sharply at odds with conventional wisdom. The report reveals that after five decades of inexorable increase, the number of armed conflicts started to fall worldwide in the early 1990s. The decline has continued.

By 2003, there were 40 percent fewer conflicts than in 1992. The deadliest conflicts -- those with 1,000 or more battle-deaths -- fell by some 80 percent. The number of genocides and other mass slaughters of civilians also dropped by 80 percent, while core human rights abuses have declined in five out of six regions of the developing world since the mid-1990s. International terrorism is the only type of political violence that has increased. Although the death toll has jumped sharply over the past three years, terrorists kill only a fraction of the number who die in wars.

What accounts for the extraordinary and counterintuitive improvement in global security over the past dozen years? The end of the Cold War, which had driven at least a third of all conflicts since World War II, appears to have been the single most critical factor.


One of the other reasons is because the numbers demonstrate just how evil was the supposed peace of the Cold War and the catastrophic cost of not dealing with the USSR fifty years earlier.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:23 AM

NOTE THAT THIS IS THE DAILY NEWS, NOT THE POST (via Gene Brown):

Chuck and Hil play risky Patriot game (NY Daily News, December 27, 2005)

Absent full ringing Senate support for the renewal of those expiring sections of the Patriot Act - apparently it is beyond some of our good senators to comprehend that there really is a war on terror - we will, along with President Bush, settle for the temporary five-week extension that got okayed Thursday night as the pols beat it out the door for the holidays.

Fine. Let them continue to wrangle over this and that technical detail for a few weeks when they return in January. Let some have a good crow over the "defeat" they've just handed the administration. The important thing is that come the new year, the Patriot Act will still be in place and the FBI and CIA will continue to be able to share terrorism information. So, sorry, terrorists. Guess you can't start using your cell phones again after all.

As for our own Sens. Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, who joined their colleagues in that filibuster against the renewal of an utterly essential terror-fighting instrument - well, that was pretty outrageous of them, given that New York City and the security thereof is one of the primary reasons for the very existence of the Patriot Act in the first place.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:59 AM

WHEN FEDERALISM IS YOUR WORST CASE SCENARIO YOU'RE IN AWFULLY GOOD SHAPE:

Devout Democracies: Self-Rule in the Middle East Will Have a Religious Component, but that Doesn't Mean It Won't Work (Reuel Marc Gerecht, December 27, 2005, The Weekly Standard)

In fragile societies trying to establish democracy, where communal and individual trust are integral, suicide bombings, if they come in unending waves, could, conceivably, destroy everything. In all probability, this scenario is too pessimistic. The backlash in the Iraqi Sunni community, as elsewhere in the Sunni Arab world, against the horrific slaughter of women and children has already started. It may be a spur to political compromise among the Sunni Arabs in Iraq (for fear of the holy warriors and the Shia, who may eventually let loose a pitiless, all-consuming revenge). And in Afghanistan, the cult of the suicide bomber is still in its infancy. Pashtun society, which is where such holy-warriorism will have to grow, would probably offer sufficient resistance to keep this kind of terrorism from becoming a plague.

Suicide bombing possibly aside, a comparison of Afghanistan and Iraq ought to calm American nerves about the political evolution in Mesopotamia. What doesn't really bother us in Afghanistan-the participation of devoutly religious Muslims in the political process-shouldn't bother us elsewhere. We may view Afghanistan with the bigotry of low expectations: Since Afghans have been calling themselves mujahedeen, holy warriors, for nearly three decades, and political Islam has been swirling through the Afghan bloodstream for even longer, we don't expect their political system to be all that secular. That Afghans, who have developed a certain penchant for making personal and political differences a casus belli, can sit together under one roof and scream but not shoot is an achievement for the new parliament. However imperfect, this is the birth of tolerance. For Americans and their European allies in Afghanistan, and for the Afghans themselves, watching ultraconservative turbaned men, veiled women, and opium-enriched warlords rub shoulders with expatriate suits and ties and women showing hair and a bit of a female form is a very good beginning.

We should have, mutatis mutandis, similar expectations in Iraq. Iraqis, we were told by a long list of Iraqi exiles, journalists, and scholars, are much less fervent believers. On the Shiite, Sunni, and even Kurdish side, this assumption of rather advanced secularization was misplaced and, more important, harmful to our understanding of how democracy would take root in Iraq. We should realize that in Mesopotamia, as in Afghanistan, democracy will be either made or broken by men and women of serious, not particularly reformed faith-not by secular liberals, Muslim progressives, or "moderates" (probably best defined as Muslims who act more or less like ordinary faithful Christians). All of the explicitly secular and moderate candidates did rather poorly in Iraq's national elections on December 15, even though the United States, with the Central Intelligence Agency in the lead, probably poured a small fortune into helping their cause. One can feel considerable sympathy for the liberal Iraqi dissident Kanan Makiya, who recently gave an analytical cri de coeur in the New York Times, dissecting all the reasons we should fear Iraq's new constitution, with its fissiparous potential. It is, without doubt, a flawed document. One can easily wish for a little less federalist enthusiasm on the Shiite and Kurdish sides.

And one can wish for more vigorous checks and balances. As the late, great historian Elie Kedourie once speculated, Middle Eastern countries, in their earlier democratic moments, might have done much better if they'd used America's presidential system rather than Europe's parliaments as a model. A strong executive constantly checked by strong legislative and judicial authorities might have kept the Middle East's homegrown and imported authoritarian impulses from dominating. Such a constitutional setup today in Iraq would probably improve the odds of surviving sectarian strife.

Furthermore, when one scans the Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish communities, one isn't particularly inspired by the Iraqi founding fathers. For a secular, liberal Iraqi like Makiya, things are not good. But they are far from hopeless. The Islamic-Iraqi identity on the Shiite side still seems quite solid: From the most secular to the most religious, the nationalist component has not been subsumed. It is possible that it could be: The savage battering of the Shia by Sunni holy warriors and insurgents could make the Shia think of themselves first and always as Shiite, and therefore less willing to compromise with Sunnis, who fear being impoverished in a federalist system that would effectively deny them future oil revenue. Something like this almost happened in Lebanon, when the ideas and foot-soldiers of Iran's very Shiite Islamic revolution struck Lebanon after decades of Christian and Sunni Lebanese neglect and abuse of the Lebanese Shia, even worse Palestinian oppression of the Lebanese Shia, and the Israeli invasion in 1982. In Iran, the revolution and the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war engorged the Shiite side of the Persian brain, altering temporarily the complex balance that makes the Shiite-Iranian identity.

But we're not quite there yet in Iraq. We will unquestionably see a federalist Iraq-at a minimum the Kurds will guarantee this. And the Shia have now understood that federalism checks centralized power, which has historically brutalized them. (Until the Shia become more self-confident as a community--and they still appear fearful of the Arab Sunnis' greater martial prowess--federalism will retain strong appeal for them.) But the language of the Shia still seems overwhelmingly Iraqi in content and tone. For anyone raised in the 1980s on militant Shiite Islamist thought, Iraq just doesn't do it. Compared with Lebanon's Hezbollah and Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps at their most fervid, the young radical Iraqi cleric Moktada al-Sadr seems like a pretty prosaic nationalist. The Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the Dawa party, the two oldest Shiite religious parties, don't seem at all ready to give up on the idea of a nation that incorporates and compromises with Arab Sunnis. Abdul al-Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of SCIRI, may have many sins, but he is not a fanatic. SCIRI's likely parliamentary chief, Adel Abdel Mahdi, is a thoughtful man who absolutely doesn't want to push Iraq into civil war.

And there remains the huge fact of the Shiite population in Baghdad, which would be excluded from any Shiite semi--autonomous zone in the south. Baghdad is a majority Shiite city. And it simply cannot be compared to any other city in Iraq-certainly not impoverished and broken Basra, the other possible pole of Shiite urban influence. (The impoverished Shiite south of Iraq actually reminds one of Afghanistan.) For the foreseeable future, the centripetal power of Baghdad will remain. The exclusionary, defensive, federalist impulses of the Iraqi Shiite community, which Makiya rightly fears, can go only so far before they provoke real, paralyzing Shiite resistance from Baghdad. If for no other reason, the Baghdad Shiite factor will likely guarantee sufficient tolerance toward the Sunnis for democratic progress to continue.

An Afghan parallel again has value. Despite the strife and civil war that fragmented loyalties, the Afghan national identity is still alive.


It's not hard to see how History Ends when the great hope of those who oppose liberal democracy is suicide.


Posted by David Cohen at 8:51 AM

THE MEDICAL MERRY-GO-ROUND

Revealed: the pill that prevents cancer (Jeremy Laurance, The Independent, 12/28/05)

A daily dose of vitamin D could cut the risk of cancers of the breast, colon and ovary by up to a half, a 40-year review of research has found. The evidence for the protective effect of the "sunshine vitamin" is so overwhelming that urgent action must be taken by public health authorities to boost blood levels, say cancer specialists.

A growing body of evidence in recent years has shown that lack of vitamin D may have lethal effects. Heart disease, lung disease, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis are among the conditions in which it is believed to play a vital role. The vitamin is also essential for bone health and protects against rickets in children and osteoporosis in the elderly. . . .

Countries around the world have begun to modify their warnings about the dangers of sunbathing, as a result of the growing research on vitamin D. The Association of Cancer Councils of Australia acknowledged this year for the first time that some exposure to the sun was healthy.

Australia is one of the world's sunniest countries and has among the highest rates of skin cancer. For three decades it has preached sun avoidance with its "slip, slap, slop" campaign to cover up and use sunscreen. But in a statement in March, the association said: "A balance is required between avoiding an increase in the risk of skin cancer and achieving enough ultraviolet radiation exposure to achieve adequate vitamin D levels." Bruce Armstrong, the professor of public health at Sydney University, said: " It is a revolution."

In the latest study, cancer specialists from the University of San Diego, California, led by Professor Cedric Garland, reviewed 63 scientific papers on the link between vitamin D and cancer published between 1966 and 2004. People living in the north-eastern US, where it is less sunny, and African Americans with darker skins were more likely to be deficient, researchers found. They also had higher cancer rates.

The researchers say their finding could explain why black Americans die sooner from cancer than whites, even after allowing for differences in income and access to care.

Do you ever suspect that modern Public Health is, at best, a wash?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:39 AM

STUPID BEAT LOAF:

Meatloaf Popularity Grows Among Foodies (JEFF BARNARD, December 27, 2005, The Associated Press)

Mom made meatloaf to stretch the food budget. Dad ate it because it tasted good, especially with lots of ketchup. Now Baby Boomers are ordering it in restaurants. Meatloaf may not be tops on the healthy food list, though it can certainly be made that way with lean meats and lots of veggies. But this comfort food that became an American staple during the Depression is hanging on, growing up and branching out. [...]

Meatloaf comes out of the late 19th century, when meat grinders became popular, said Lynne Olver, editor of the Web site Foodtimeline.org. The 1884 "Boston Cooking School Cookbook" has recipes for ground veal mixed with breadcrumbs and eggs, baked in small individual molds. [...]

The word meatloaf appears regularly in the New York Times in the 1930s and 1940s, when the Depression and World War II made stretching food dollars imperative. But it was the 1950s when America "embraced" meatloaf.

"I have cookbooks from the '50s with all sorts of filled meatloaf, gourmet meatloafs, meatloaf for the grill," Olver said.

James E. McWilliams, assistant professor of history at Texas State University at San Marcos and author of "A Revolution in Eating, How the Quest for Food Shaped America," sees meatloaf's roots in scrapple, a mixture of ground pork and cornmeal made by German-Americans in Pennsylvania since Colonial times.

"It's a food that's quite consistent with an American attitude," McWilliams said. "It is so open to interpretation and flexible. Its origins are humble."

President Ronald Reagan was a famous fan, and writer Jean Shepherd included family battles over meatloaf in the movie "A Christmas Story." Little brother Randy declares he hates meatloaf, and The Old Man threatens to use a screwdriver and plumber's helper to get some down him.


In his very fine crime novel, '46, Chicago, Steve Monroe points out that one of the reasons meatloaf became so popular is that during wartime rationing it cost you so many more coupons to get steak than ground beef.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:09 AM

UNREQUITED:

Munich mastermind spurns Spielberg's peace appeal (Nidal al-Mughrabi, Dec 27, 2005, Reuters)

The Palestinian mastermind of the Munich Olympics attack in which 11 Israeli athletes died said on Tuesday he had no regrets and that Steven Spielberg's new film about the incident would not deliver reconciliation.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:00 AM

RHETORIC CREATES REALITY:

When Chinese Sue the State, Cases Are Often Smothered (JOSEPH KAHN, 12/28/05, NY Times)

China's legal system often hands down verdicts that the powerless consider unfair. But a bigger problem is that courts often refuse to issue any verdict at all - or even acknowledge that some bothersome legal complaints exist.

The English translation is simply "put on the record" or "register a case," but in China "li'an" is so fraught with official meddling that for many with complaints against the government, the judicial system is closed for business.

Since Communist China first created the semblance of a modern legal system a quarter-century ago, criminal cases - the state suing individuals - mostly go through the courts. Private citizens and businesses now often resolve civil disputes in court. But the third and most sensitive use of the judicial system, a 1989 statute that entitles people to sue the state, remains a beguiling fiction, scholars say.

"The number of people wanting to sue the government is large and growing," says Xiao Jianguo, a legal scholar at People's University in Beijing who has studied the issue. "But the number of people who succeed in filing cases against the government is miniscule. So you could say there is a gap between theory and practice."

Though fast-rising China wants to persuade the outside world that it is governed by law, pressure to improve the system comes mainly from within. Protests are erupting around the country over land seizures, pollution, corruption and abuse of power, with 74,000 officially recorded incidents of mass unrest in 2004.

China's leaders know they need to manage such unrest. Indeed, President Hu Jintao says "democratic rule of law" is a crucial ingredient of his plan to build a "harmonious society."

Such pledges spread awareness of legal rights, but have yet to change legal procedures. It is not clear how many protests follow failed attempts to settle disputes in court. But lawyers say the judicial system bars its doors to so many contentious cases that it effectively forces people to take to the streets.


These regimes somehow never learn that when they try to speak like liberals they create expectations of liberalization and are eventually forced to grant it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:56 AM

IT'S WARTIME, NOT CRIMEBUSTERS:

Defense Lawyers in Terror Cases Plan Challenges Over Spy Efforts (ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN, 12/28/05, NY Times)

Defense lawyers in some of the country's biggest terrorism cases say they plan to bring legal challenges to determine whether the National Security Agency used illegal wiretaps against several dozen Muslim men tied to Al Qaeda.

Just don't bring them to trial.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:47 AM

DREAMING UP THE JUST SO STORY OF HOW MAN BECAME HOMOPHOBIC (via Pepys):

Brokeback Mountain: The guilt trip continues (Robert Wright vs. Mickey Kaus, Blogging Heads)

Not only is this hilarious conversation --which is essentially just two guys trying to escape the moral nature of the fact they find anal sex repulsive-- devastating to Darwinism and homophilia but it's all made superfluous by just one line from Mark Helprin: "It should not be necessary to explain a praiseworthy revulsion."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:46 AM

THEY'RE SO MODERN:

Thatcher-basher Geldof advises Cameron's team (David Charter, 12/28/05, Times of London)

BETTER known for turning the air blue, Bob Geldof has agreed to act as an unpaid adviser on global poverty relief for the new light blue Conservative Party.

The former rock star turned millionaire poverty campaigner famously clashed with Baroness Thatcher in the 1980s but was successful in changing Conservative policy when she eventually agreed to waive the VAT on the Band Aid single.

Like his fellow Irish rock ambassador Bono, who endured the wrath of campaigners by sitting down with President Bush, “Saint Bob” has risen above partisan political concerns to promote his anti-poverty message.


Exorcise these Tory ghosts: David Cameron knows that expunging Thatcherite rhetoric is vital for his party's future success (Bruce Anderson, 12/28/05, Times of London)
IT ALL COMES back to the classics. Anyone who wants to understand the changes that are now taking place in the Tory party should begin by considering a Latin tag — suaviter in modo, fortiter in re. Like most of the best Latin phrases, it is so pithy as to be almost impossible to translate, but applied to politics it means “be firm on the essentials of policy, while using conciliatory language to explain yourself to the public”. That is Cameronism, Even if David Cameron has not said anything about detailed policies, his willingness to think boldly has alarmed a number of Tories who prefer to cling to Thatcherite certainties and Thatcherite rhetoric. [...]

Lady Thatcher has endowed British political vocabulary with two words, “Thatcherism” and “cuts”, which are widely believed to be synonymous. She never used the term “cuts”, but her body language gave it credence. Yet there were no cuts. During her years, tax revenue hardly fell as a proportion of GDP, while public expenditure went on growing, especially on health. Mrs Thatcher once insisted that “the NHS is safe in our hands ”. So it was.


The reality is that Mr. Cameron, like Mr. Bush, is just an advocate of Thatcherism, but smart enough to adopt his opponent's rhetoric to dress that Third Way up in.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:43 AM

DOING BETTER BY IRAQ THAN WE EVER DID BY POLAND:

Poland postpones Iraq withdrawal (BBC, 12/28/05)

Poland's government says it has taken the "very difficult decision" to extend its military deployment in Iraq until the end of 2006.

The new conservative government's decision reverses the previous leftist administration's plan to pull troops out in early 2006.

Poland, a staunch ally of the US, has about 1,500 troops stationed in Iraq.


Poland is so much hated because it so often humbles the rest of us.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:00 AM

BUBBLICIOUS:

Print Reports Snow Readers On Housing: Reports hype November sales drop while ignoring that 2005 will break 2004 new house-sale record. (Ken Shepherd, Dec. 27, 2005, Free Market Project)

The front page of the December 27 Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) joined other print outlets in blowing hot air on the so-called “housing bubble” with “Home Sales Plunge as Prices Pull Back and Supply Swells,” as reporter Kirk Shinkle painted a chilly winter landscape for the housing market. [...]

Yet a month prior, The Washington Post’s Sandra Fleishman reported on government figures showing sales for October 2005 had leapt 13 percent over September, “a monthly increase not seen in a dozen years, according to a government report.” In her November 30 report on the October numbers, Fleishman voiced caution from unnamed experts, noting that the “unexpected burst of activity in sales of new homes, particularly a 47 percent rise in sales in the West, could be an error in reporting,” adding that experts say, “monthly new-home statistics are volatile and often subject to revisions.”

Shinkle hyped one month’s aberrant statistics to hint at a housing bubble burst and warned new home building “might only add to a growing glut on the market.” That is only the latest example of the media eagerly misreporting the news to forecast a housing bubble burst which has not yet happened, despite four years of doom-saying. The Free Market Project placed the housing bubble myth as number five in its year-ending list of the Top Ten Economic Myths of 2005. The November 30 Free Market Project study on housing bubble coverage is also available at FreeMarketProject.org.


Gee, you'd think the stories about the oil bubble bursting would crowd out the housing ones.


December 27, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:23 PM

BUT I'M THE SMART ROCK! (via Mike Daley):

Love in the Age of Neuroscience (Mickey Craig and Jon Fennell, The New Atlantis)

Late last year, over a period of several months, America and Britain were awash in reviews of I Am Charlotte Simmons, the latest novel by Tom Wolfe. Most reviews criticized the novel’s cheap and tiresome devices (excessive repetition, capitalized words, overly dramatic punctuation), stock characters (the ingénue, country bumpkins, frat boys, salacious sorority sisters, dumb jocks, politically correct professors), and, most egregiously, its preoccupation with student sex. Several reviewers were disturbed by the reference to “loamy, loamy loins” by an author in his mid-seventies—a man thoroughly out of touch with his young subjects, perhaps even jealous of their vivacious sex lives. But these critics, with rare exception, entirely overlooked the central themes of the novel. As John Derbyshire wrote in National Review, I Am Charlotte Simmons is a reminder of the “darker side” of recent discoveries in the human sciences, especially in neuroscience and genetics. At stake is the “metaphysic” which provides sense and direction to our lives, including the complicated encounter between men and women. The novel invites us to ask: Is love possible in the age of neuroscience? Or have we unmasked human beings only to discover that love is an illusion?

The university, like American and Western society as a whole, was transformed by the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Grounded in an uncompromising individualism of personal choice, the sexual revolution established the legitimacy of casual, pleasure-seeking sex, independent of procreation, family, and even affection. The story of Charlotte Simmons explores the consequences of this momentous change in human behavior and association. Wolfe helps us see that there is no free lunch: In giving full rein to our biological impulses, there is a toll to pay in human longing and human happiness. As Peter Berkowitz reflects in a superb review essay in Policy Review:

[W]hat if men and women are different in ways that go beyond the structure of their sex organs, and so experience sexual relationships differently? And what if the exercise of the new freedom imparts lessons to both men and women about life, and develops habits of heart and mind, that interfere with the capacity to give oneself to and care for another...? What if relationships teach how to withhold one’s heart, to embrace another with one eye always fixed on the exit...? And what if such lessons, habits, and teachings are more easily acquired than discarded?

Charlotte’s experiences at the fictional Dupont University shed light on these questions, as the ambitious girl from backwater North Carolina is transformed by her sophisticated and salacious surroundings. Far from being the path to higher civilization and refinement of character, Dupont is a toxic impediment to the yearning for higher things, built on a dogmatic denial that higher civilization and refinement of character are even possible. Where, in a former age, the impressionable young student might have aspired to religious salvation or genuine wisdom, today’s typical college student lives more for entertainment, sensation, and release, all the while demanding and largely getting immediate gratification. The individual still seeks status and recognition. But the marks of distinction are all too often inebriation, “hooking up,” expertise at sarcasm (“sarc one,” “sarc two,” and “sarc three”), and insouciance toward matters intellectual and moral. As students learn about and fall into this new ethic, the university not only fails to stand in opposition, it accelerates the process. Dupont, that composite of Duke, Stanford, Yale, and the University of Michigan, corrupts the promising young Charlotte. For revealing this disturbing truth, the author has been reviled by those who are thereby revealed.

More importantly, the teaching of Dupont University is precisely that the soul and the moral dimension of being are illusions. In the past, the university (at its best and in principle) sought to cultivate the human soul toward completion or excellence. The modern university, as Wolfe portrays it, denies that there are truthful distinctions between higher and lower; it teaches that the soul is not real, and that perfection of the soul is thus a thing of the past.

The setting of I Am Charlotte Simmons is truly “postmodern”—a world dominated by Nietzsche and neuroscience, a world which has jettisoned the moral imagination of the past. Not only is God dead, but so is reason, once understood as the characteristic that distinguishes man from the rest of nature. We now understand ourselves by studying the behavior of other animals, rather than understanding the behavior of other animals in light of human reason and human difference. We learn that it is embarrassing for any educated person to be considered religious or even moral. Darwin’s key insight that man is just another animal, now updated with the tools and discoveries of modern biology, has liberated us from two Kingdoms of Darkness. Post-faith and post-reason, we can now turn to neuroscience to understand the human condition, a path that leads to or simply ratifies the governing nihilism of the students, both the ambitious and apathetic alike. [...]

The task of neuroscience is to understand human behavior as it really is, without illusions. This new way of seeing the mechanisms of man confirms that the soul does not really exist and that our behavior is simply a physical reaction to stimuli over which we have no control. Human beings think they have free will and that their choices have meaning. But this is one of the comforting myths of the past that neuroscience is proud to overcome. As Dr. Starling explains, this time with a thought experiment borrowed from a fellow neuroscientist:

Let’s say you pick up a rock and you throw it. And in mid-flight you give that rock consciousness and a rational mind. That little rock will think it has free will and will give you a highly rational account of why it has decided to take the route it’s taking.

In other words: Human beings are simply rocks. Neuroscientists are rocks who know they are rocks. Human beings are bodies in motion, bodies that falsely believe they have free will. But neuroscience, armed with tools like fMRIs and PET scans, promises a true description of human behavior, a final lifting of man’s religious and moral illusions. And that life without illusions may amount to nothing more than the joyless quest for joy or the soulless interactions of the soulless. The consequences of this shift in human self-understanding are enormous.


The one redeeming feature of such terrible nonsense is the hilarity of the materialists insisting that their own gnostic knowledge is uniquely not just an affect of the forces they proclaim to believe in.

MORE:
He Is Charlotte Simmons: a review of I Am Charlotte Simmons by Tiom Wolfe (Peter Berkowitz, Policy Review)

The governing theme of I am Charlotte Simmons is introduced by Wolfe in an entry from (the fictitious) Dictionary of Nobel Laureates, 3rd ed. that he places at the front of the novel. In 1983, 28-year-old Dupont University assistant professor of psychology Victor Ransome Starling removes the amygdala, which controls the emotions in higher mammals, from 30 cats. This causes the cats to enter a state of hypermanic sexual arousal. When Starling opens one of the cage doors to show an assistant the results of the experiment, the cat leaps out, immediately wraps its legs around the assistant’s leg, and begins thrusting with its pelvis. But Starling is startled when the assistant points out that the desperate animal is actually one of the control cats whose amygdala has not been touched. Pondering the implications of the replication by the control cats of the amygdalized cats’ hypermanic sexual arousal, Starling is led to the discovery for which he is awarded the Nobel Prize, namely, “that a strong social or ‘cultural’ atmosphere, even as abnormal as this one, could in time overwhelm the genetically determined responses of the perfectly normal, healthy animals.”

This sets up the experiment that Wolfe’s novel is meant to conduct: What happens if a talented, attractive and ambitious young person instilled with a conservative sensibility who wishes to pursue the cultivation of the mind is parachuted into a contemporary university? Indeed, Dupont University — a composite institution located like Swarthmore on the outskirts of suburban Philadelphia next to Chester; carrying the cache of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton; and like Duke or many major state universities boasting a national-caliber athletic program — initially overwhelms Charlotte Simmons of Sparta, North Carolina. The product of a poor family in a small town on the other side of the Blue Ridge Mountains in the heart of Red America, Charlotte excelled in her studies, was taken under wing by a devoted, spinster high-school teacher who taught her to take pride in her intelligence and to love literature and learning, and won a scholarship to one of America’s finest bastions of higher education. Encouraged by her hardworking and devout parents, Charlotte leaves them behind to pursue an education in the best that has been thought and said. Little does she understand, nor do those who love her back home in Sparta, that Dupont sustains a cultural atmosphere at war with the beliefs and practices developed over millennia to guide normal, healthy young people in their transition to responsible adulthood.

Indeed, consistent with the discovery for which Professor Starling wins his Nobel prize, Charlotte’s moral conservatism and hunger for knowledge prove no match for the larger lessons about sex and the soul that social and academic life at Dupont incessantly drum into students’ heads. Right from the start, Beverly Amory, her wealthy, haughty, emaciated, sexually sophisticated Groton-educated roommate, causes Charlotte to feel clueless about how to speak and what to say, and embarrassed about what she wears and how little she has to spend. Striving to remember that she is, after all, Charlotte Simmons, committed to high ideals and expected by family and friends in Sparta to achieve great things, Charlotte finds herself yearning for a place of honor in the strict campus pecking order. To achieve that very human goal, she is resolved to excel in her studies. But the rigorous rules for social advancement require that she also have sex and find a boyfriend, in no particular order. And as a healthy and attractive young woman, Charlotte understandably feels some thrill at that message.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:03 PM

WHERE THERE'S SMOKE THERE'S WITCHES (via JD Watson):


Sinclair Letter Turns Out to Be Another Exposé
: Note found by an O.C. man says 'The Jungle' author got the lowdown on Sacco and Vanzetti. (Jean O. Pasco, December 24, 2005, LA Writer)

Inside the box, an envelope postmarked Sept. 12, 1929, caught [Paul Hegness's] eye. It was addressed to John Beardsley, Esq., of Los Angeles. The return address read, "Upton Sinclair, Long Beach."

"I stood there for 15 minutes reading it over and over again," Hegness said of the letter by the author of "The Jungle," the groundbreaking 1906 book that exposed unsanitary conditions at slaughterhouses.

The last paragraph got the Newport Beach attorney's attention. "This letter is for yourself alone," it read. "Stick it away in your safe, and some time in the far distant future the world may know the real truth about the matter. I am here trying to make plain my own part in the story."

The story was "Boston," Sinclair's 1920s novelized condemnation of the trial and execution of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, Italian immigrants accused of killing two men in the robbery of a Massachusetts shoe factory.

Prosecutors characterized the anarchists as ruthless killers who had used the money to bankroll antigovernment bombings and deserved to die. Sinclair thought the pair were innocent and being railroaded because of their political views.

Soon Sinclair would learn something that filled him with doubt. During his research for "Boston," Sinclair met with Fred Moore, the men's attorney, in a Denver motel room. Moore "sent me into a panic," Sinclair wrote in the typed letter that Hegness found at the auction a decade ago.

"Alone in a hotel room with Fred, I begged him to tell me the full truth," Sinclair wrote. " … He then told me that the men were guilty, and he told me in every detail how he had framed a set of alibis for them."


Even the Left, you'd think, might have been right in just one of their cause celebres. You'd be wrong.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:59 PM

THE ONLY SCIENTIFIC STANDARD:

Leave evolution out of standards, Bush says (Associated Press, December 28, 2005)

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has portrayed himself as a friend of science, going so far as to spearhead a deal to bring an arm of the prestigious Scripps Research Institute to South Florida.

But don't count on him to defend one of the pillars of modern science.

Bush said last week he did not think Darwin's theory of evolution needed to be part of the state's public school science standards, according to an account in the Miami Herald.

"I think people have different points of view and they can be discussed in school," Bush said. "They don't need to be in the curriculum."


Contra Judge Jones, that's the only rigorously scientific standard.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:56 PM

OBLIGATORY AFRIKAANER COMPARISON:

The 'I' Word: Expect 2006 to offer up Nixon-era nastiness and a chorus of calls to impeach Bush. (Howard Fineman, Dec. 27, 2005, Newsweek)
Where’s the Outrage? (Arlene Getz, Dec. 21, 2005, Newsweek)

Back in the 1980s, when I was living in Johannesburg and reporting on apartheid South Africa, a white neighbor proffered a tasteless confession. She was "quite relieved," she told me, that new media restrictions prohibited our reporting on government repression. No matter that Pretoria was detaining tens of thousands of people without real evidence of wrongdoing. No matter that many of them, including children, were being tortured—sometimes to death. No matter that government hit squads were killing political opponents. No matter that police were shooting into crowds of black civilians protesting against their disenfranchisement. "It's so nice," confided my neighbor, "not to open the papers and read all that bad news."

I thought about that neighbor this week, as reports dribbled out about President George W. Bush's sanctioning of warrantless eavesdropping on American conversations. For anyone who has lived under an authoritarian regime, phone tapping—or at least the threat of it—is always a given. But U.S. citizens have always been lucky enough to believe themselves protected from such government intrusion. So why have they reacted so insipidly to yet another post-9/11 erosion of U.S. civil liberties?

Perhaps only the MSM could simultaneously expect impeachment over spying and bewail the fact that Americans are quite happy the spying was going on.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:53 PM

TIME FOR A BIG OLE FRENCH FRY:

French ban petrol in cans amid fear of New Year riots (Colin Randall, 28/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Fears of a new outbreak of street violence in France have prompted many areas to ban the sale of petrol in cans.

Setting fire to cars on New Year's Eve has become a tradition among lawless youths on estates with large immigrant populations in the Parisian suburbs and Strasbourg.

The wave of rioting that swept the country for three weeks from the end of October has led to widespread concern that troublemakers may try to stage a show of strength this weekend.

The bans affect most areas around Paris and several provincial cities that suffered during the earlier riots. Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister, insisted that November's state of emergency would not be lifted at New Year.


I've never actually gone out wilding, but give me a torch and a car and I bet I can find a ready supply of gasoline.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:48 PM

NO ONE DEMANDS PRIVACY WHO ISN'T ENGAGED IN EVIL:

Unwarranted Complaints (DAVID B. RIVKIN and LEE A. CASEY, 12/27/05, NY Times)

[I]t is highly doubtful whether individuals involved in a conflict have any "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their communications, which is the touchstone of protection under both the Fourth Amendment and the surveillance act itself - anymore than a tank commander has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his communications with his commanders on the battlefield. The same goes for noncombatants swept up in the hostilities.

Even if Congress had intended to restrict the president's ability to obtain intelligence in such circumstances, it could not have constitutionally done so. The Constitution designates the president as commander in chief, and Congress can no more direct his exercise of that authority than he can direct Congress in the execution of its constitutional duties. As the FISA court itself noted in 2002, the president has "inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance."

In this instance, in addition to relying on his own inherent constitutional authority, the president can also draw upon the specific Congressional authorization "to use all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks "in order to prevent any future attacks of international terrorism against the United States." These words are sufficiently broad to encompass the gathering of intelligence about the enemy, its movements, its abilities and its plans, a core part of the use of force against Al Qaeda and its allies. The authorization does not say that the president can order the use of artillery, or air strikes, yet no one is arguing that therefore Mr. Bush is barred from doing so.

The fact that the statutory language does not specifically mention intelligence collection, or that this matter was not raised by the White House in negotiations with Congress, or even that the administration had sought even broader language, all points recently raised by former Senator Tom Daschle, is irrelevant.

Overall, this surveillance program is fully within the president's legal authority, is limited in scope (involving communications to or from overseas related to the war against Al Qaeda), and is subject to stringent presidential review. The contretemps its revelation has caused reveals much more about the chattering classes' fundamental antipathy to strong government in general, and strong executive power in particular, than it does about presidential overreaching.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:44 PM

2%, HERE WE COME:

Contractors Are Warned: Cuts Coming for Weapons (LESLIE WAYNE, 12/27/05, NY Times)

It was a message that the industry has been bracing for. The Pentagon budget, James F. Albaugh, chief executive of Boeing's $30 billion military division, said at the conference, has "been a great ride for the last five years." But, he added: "We will see a flattening of the defense budget. We all know it is coming."

The issue, however, goes beyond tightening budgets. Mr. Henry told the contractors that the Pentagon was redefining the strategic threats facing the United States. No longer are rival nations the primary threat - a type of warfare that calls for naval destroyers and fighter jets. Today the country is facing international networks of terrorists, and the weapons needed are often more technologically advanced, flexible and innovative. [...]

In the years ahead, Mr. Henry said, the Pentagon would like to move "away from massive force." This would mean, for instance, that fewer fighter jets would be needed because the upcoming Joint Strike Fighter F-35 has more capabilities than the existing F-16's.

He noted that special operations forces played a big role in the early days of the Iraq war - once controlling up to two-thirds of the country - and are expected to be used in greater numbers in the future. This would mean the Pentagon would want to buy more of the highly agile and high-technology weapons that they need. Specialized skills like language, intelligence and communication are also becoming top priorities.

As for aerospace, he said the Pentagon would be looking for aircraft with longer ranges, and, therefore, did not need ships or nearby bases for them to land. Increasingly, the Pentagon will be depending on unmanned aerial vehicles, which can work longer hours than piloted craft and do not put Air Force lives at risk. In the future, he said, unmanned craft will be used not only for surveillance, as they are in Iraq, but for combat as well.


Even the 3% of GDP we spent through the '90s isn't sustainable in peacetime, which is returning rather quicker than most thought it would. As the Middle East liberalizes the defense budget will get pummeled.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:39 PM

HARD TO IMAGINE BETTER NEWS:

Iraq Vote Shows Sunnis Are Few in New Military (RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr., 12/27/05, NY Times)

An analysis of preliminary voting results released Monday from the Dec. 15 parliamentary election suggests that in contrast to the remarkable surge in Sunni Arab participation in the political process, the Sunnis still have comparatively little representation in the Iraqi security forces. [...]

It has been suspected that Sunni Arabs are underrepresented in the new military and police. Election officials believe that a special tally from the Dec. 15 vote helps to detail the disparity, mostly because voting in Iraq has almost completely been along ethnic and sectarian divisions.

In the special tally - which the officials said overwhelmingly consisted of most of the ballots cast by security forces, but also included votes from hospital patients and prisoners - about 7 percent of the votes were cast for the three main Sunni Arab parties. Across the whole population, though, officials have estimated, Sunni Arab candidates won about 20 percent of the seats in the new Parliament.


There's always a threat to nascent democracy from the armed forces which typically had too strong a ties to the prior dictatorial regime to give up power willingly. If the Sunni already have so little influence in the military then there's no way a Ba'athist counter-revolution could conceivablly succeed.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 9:09 PM

WE HAVEN’T BEEN THIS EXCITED SINCE THE PEPPERED MOTHS

Evolution 'breakthrough of the year,' Science journal declares (CBC News, December 22nd, 2005)

The journal Science has declared genetic studies of evolution the breakthrough of 2005. [...]

"In 2005, scientists piled up new insights about evolution at the genetic level and the birth of species, including information that could help us lead healthier lives in the future," the journal's editors wrote.

"Ironically, these often-startling discoveries occurred in a year when backers of "intelligent design" and other opponents of evolution sought to renew challenges to this fundamental concept."

Uncanny.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:48 PM

THE ASCENT OF SPECIOUS (via Robert Schwartz):

SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH EVOLUTION PHILOSOPHER DANIEL DENNETT: "Darwinism Completely Refutes Intelligent Design" (Der Spiegel, 12/27/05)

SPIEGEL: Your colleague Michael Ruse has accused you of stepping out of the field of science and into social science and religion with your theories. He's even said you are inadvertently aiding the Intelligent Design movement as a result.

Dennett: Michael is just trying to put the implications of Darwin's insights into soft focus and to reassure people that there is not as much conflict between the perspective of evolutionary biology and their traditional ways of thinking.

SPIEGEL: And what about the accusation that you are aiding Intelligent Design?

Dennett: There is probably an element of truth to it. I've just finished writing a book in which I look at religion from the perspective of evolutionary biology. I think you can, should, and even must take this route. Others say 'no, hands off! Just don't let evolution get anywhere near the social sciences.' I think that's terrible advice. The idea that we should protect the social sciences and humanity from evolutionary thinking is a recipe for disaster.

SPIEGEL: Why?

Dennett: I would give Darwin the gold medal for the best idea anybody ever had. It unifies the world of meaning and purpose and goals and freedom with the world of science, with the world of the physical sciences. I mean, we talk about the great gap between social science and natural science. What closes that gap? Darwin


Inadvertently? He's acknowledged believing in design. The funny thing here though is his admission that Darwinism is quite intentionally intended to close the philosophical gap with the social sciences--where evolutionary theory is a given and, thanks to Adam Smith and David Riccardo & company, was prevailing in the intellectual milieu in which Darwn operated. Indeed, what Darwinism claims is that just as the evolution model works where intelligent actors are involved it must work where they aren't.


MORE:
Cardinal Schönborn on God and Creation: "It Is the Very Dignity of the Creature to Have Received Everything From Him": Here is a provisional translation of a catechetical lecture given by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna, last month on creation and evolution. (ZENIT, 19 DEC. 2005)

A scientist wrote me in response to my article in the New York Times that he would like to believe in a creator but just cannot believe in an "old man with a long white beard." I answered him saying that no one expects him to believe this. On the contrary, such a childish conception of a creator has nothing to do with what the Bible says about the creator and with the article of the creed that says, "I believe in God, the father almighty, the creator of heaven and earth."

In my response I wrote him that it would be a good thing if his religious knowledge would not lag so far behind his scientific knowledge and if his vast knowledge as a scientist did not go hand in hand with what is after all childish religious conceptions. For an old man with a long white beard is certainly not what is meant by the creator. I recommended that he simply read what, for example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says on this subject.

Now there is another misunderstanding that is constantly found in the ongoing discussion, and I have to deal with it right here at the beginning. I refer to what is called "creationism." Nowadays the belief in a creator is automatically run together with "creationism." But in fact to believe in a creator is not the same as trying to understand the six days of creation literally, as six chronological days, and as trying to prove scientifically, with whatever means available, that the earth is 6,000 years old.

These attempts of certain Christians at taking the Bible absolutely literally, as if it made chronological and scientific statements — I have met defenders of this position who honestly strive to find scientific arguments for it — is called "fundamentalism." Or more exactly, within American Protestantism this view of the Christian faith originally called itself fundamentalism. Starting from the belief that the Bible is inspired by God, so that every word in it is immediately inspired by him, the six days of creation are taken in a strict literal way.

It is understandable that in the United States many people, using not only kinds of polemics but lawsuits as well, vehemently resist the teaching of creationism in the schools. But it is an entirely different matter when certain people would like to see the schools deal with the critical questions that have been raised with regard to Darwinism; they have a reasonable and legitimate concern.

The Catholic position on this is clear. St. Thomas says that "one should not try to defend the Christian faith with arguments that are so patently opposed to reason that the faith is made to look ridiculous." It is simply nonsense to say that the world is only 6,000 years old. To try to prove this scientifically is what St. Thomas calls provoking the "irrisio infidelium," the scorn of the unbelievers. It is not right to use such false arguments and to expose the faith to the scorn of unbelievers. This should suffice on the subject of "creationism" and "fundamentalism" for the entire remainder of this catechesis; what we want to say about it should be so clear that we do not have to return to the subject.

And now to our main subject: What does the Christian faith say about "God the creator" and about creation? The classical Catholic teaching, as we find it explained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or more compactly presented in the Compendium of the Catechism, contains four basic elements.

1. The doctrine of creation says that there is an absolute beginning — "in the beginning God created heaven and earth" — and that this absolute beginning is the free and sovereign act of establishing being out of nothing. This is the main theme of today's catechesis: the absolute beginning.

2. The doctrine of creation also says that there are various creatures. This is the distinction of creatures, "each according to its kind," of which we read in the first chapter of Genesis. This is the work of the first six days as related on the first page of the Bible. I will speak on this subject in the next catechesis, in which I will ask what it means to say that according to our faith in creation God has willed a multiplicity of creatures.

3. We come now to a point of fundamental importance for the Christian belief about creation. It is also a point about which we will be speaking later today. We believe not only in an absolute beginning of creation but in the preservation of creation; God holds in being all that he has created. We refer here to his continuing work of creation, which in theology is called the "creatio continua," the ongoing act of creation.

4. And finally, the doctrine of creation most definitely includes the belief that God directs his creation. He did not just set it in motion once at the beginning and then let it run its course. No, the divine guidance of creation, which we call divine providence, is a part of the doctrine of creation. God leads his work to its final end.


Thus, design and Darwinism can not be reconciled.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:26 PM

ESCAPE FROM TOKYO (via Robert Schwartz):

Japan's humanoid robots: Better than people (The Economist, 12/20/05)

HER name is MARIE, and her impressive set of skills comes in handy in a nursing home. MARIE can walk around under her own power. She can distinguish among similar-looking objects, such as different bottles of medicine, and has a delicate enough touch to work with frail patients. MARIE can interpret a range of facial expressions and gestures, and respond in ways that suggest compassion. Although her language skills are not ideal, she can recognise speech and respond clearly. Above all, she is inexpensive . Unfortunately for MARIE, however, she has one glaring trait that makes it hard for Japanese patients to accept her: she is a flesh-and-blood human being from the Philippines. If only she were a robot instead.

Robots, you see, are wonderful creatures, as many a Japanese will tell you. They are getting more adept all the time, and before too long will be able to do cheaply and easily many tasks that human workers do now. They will care for the sick, collect the rubbish, guard homes and offices, and give directions on the street.

This is great news in Japan, where the population has peaked, and may have begun shrinking in 2005. With too few young workers supporting an ageing population, somebody—or something—needs to fill the gap, especially since many of Japan's young people will be needed in science, business and other creative or knowledge-intensive jobs.


Prisoners at SuperMax facilities who are similarly denied human contact become psychotic over time, a preview of Japan's anti-human future.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 8:22 PM

ROBERT FISK, LOGICAL POSITIVIST

Telling it like it isn't (Robert Fisk, Los Angeles Times, December 27th, 2005)

This is only the tip of the semantic iceberg that has crashed into American journalism in the Middle East. Illegal Jewish settlements for Jews and Jews only on Arab land are clearly "colonies," and we used to call them that. I cannot trace the moment when we started using the word "settlements." But I can remember the moment around two years ago when the word "settlements" was replaced by "Jewish neighborhoods" — or even, in some cases, "outposts."

Similarly, "occupied" Palestinian land was softened in many American media reports into "disputed" Palestinian land — just after then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, in 2001, instructed U.S. embassies in the Middle East to refer to the West Bank as "disputed" rather than "occupied" territory.

Then there is the "wall," the massive concrete obstruction whose purpose, according to the Israeli authorities, is to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from killing innocent Israelis. In this, it seems to have had some success. But it does not follow the line of Israel's 1967 border and cuts deeply into Arab land. And all too often these days, journalists call it a "fence" rather than a "wall." Or a "security barrier," which is what Israel prefers them to say. For some of its length, we are told, it is not a wall at all — so we cannot call it a "wall," even though the vast snake of concrete and steel that runs east of Jerusalem is higher than the old Berlin Wall.

The semantic effect of this journalistic obfuscation is clear. If Palestinian land is not occupied but merely part of a legal dispute that might be resolved in law courts or discussions over tea, then a Palestinian child who throws a stone at an Israeli soldier in this territory is clearly acting insanely.

If a Jewish colony built illegally on Arab land is simply a nice friendly "neighborhood," then any Palestinian who attacks it must be carrying out a mindless terrorist act.

And surely there is no reason to protest a "fence" or a "security barrier" — words that conjure up the fence around a garden or the gate arm at the entrance to a private housing complex.

For Palestinians to object violently to any of these phenomena thus marks them as a generically vicious people. By our use of language, we condemn them.

So, in the name of preserving the integrity of the English language, let's blow up some Israelis.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:16 PM

FIRST THE FAITH, THEN THE SCIENCE:

Is Creationism Destructible?: Where to go from Dover. (William Saletan, Dec. 21, 2005, Slate)

In his 139-page ruling on the Dover, Pa., "intelligent design" case, federal district Judge John E. Jones sets out to kill ID's scientific pretensions once and for all. [...]

Scientifically, Jones settles the issue. Culturally, he fails. And until we learn the difference, the fight over creationism in schools and courts will go on.

The decisive assumption in Jones' opinion is the definitions of science proposed by the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. First, scientific explanations must be natural, not supernatural. Second, they must be testable. These criteria instantly kill ID as science. Its explicit aspiration was to defeat "methodological naturalism." Once you accept naturalism, as Jones does, you guarantee his conclusion that supernatural theories are a "science stopper."


The most helpful thing the judge did in this case was to demonstrate the tautologous nature of Darwinism.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:55 PM

A MAN WHO KNOWS HIS PRIORITIES

Dying patients 'can aid stem cell research' (The Guardian, December 27th, 2005)

Professor Ian Wilmut, creator of Dolly the sheep, today said experimental stem cell therapy should be carried out on terminally ill patients to speed up the pace of research.
Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:44 PM

SO MUCH FOR THE BIG SPENDER LABEL:

THE BIG THREE BUDGET EATERS (NY Post, December 27, 2005)

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid consumed nearly half of all federal spending in 2004, and budget analysts expect them to account for an even bigger share in the future.
They accounted for more than $1 trillion in the 2004 budget year, says the Consolidated Federal Funds Report released today by the Census Bureau.

Overall federal spending was $2.2 trillion, an increase of 5 percent from 2003,

This was a slightly smaller increase than in recent years, said Gerard Keffer, chief of the bureau's federal programs branch.


Conservatives sit around telling themselves that the size of government is a function of George Bush's irresposible discretionary spending.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:41 PM

WHEN IT STOPPED BEING A RUBBER STAMP IT STOPPED BEING TOLERABLE:

Bush was denied wiretaps, bypassed them (UPI, 12/27/05)

The 11-judge court that authorizes FISA wiretaps modified only two search warrant orders out of the 13,102 applications approved over the first 22 years of the court's operation.

But since 2001, the judges have modified 179 of the 5,645 requests for surveillance by the Bush administration, the report said. A total of 173 of those court-ordered "substantive modifications" took place in 2003 and 2004. And, the judges also rejected or deferred at least six requests for warrants during those two years -- the first outright rejection of a wiretap request in the court's history.


Maybe he can go back to the court now that the Clinton appointee quit?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:37 PM

GROWN-UPS IN CHARGE:

Iraqi poll winners woo rivals (Shamal Aqrawi, 12/27, Reuters)

Leaders of the Shi'ite and Kurdish blocs that emerged triumphant in this month's Iraqi election agreed on Tuesday to push ahead with efforts to bring Sunni and other parties into a grand coalition government.


The visit of Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim of the Shi'ite Islamist Alliance to the Kurdish capital Arbil opened a series of planned meetings among rival factions intended to ease friction over election results which Sunni and secular parties say have been rigged and to begin building a consensus administration.

"We agreed on the principle of forming a government involving all the parties with a wide popular base," Kurdish regional leader Masoud Barzani told a joint news conference after talks with Hakim, the dominant force in the Alliance.


The Kurds and Shi'a have demonstrated incredible self-restraint the past couple years.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:34 PM

THE COARSENING OF CANADA:

Blog bombshell hits GritsParty exec quits over slurs on Web (TARA BRAUTIGAM, 12/27/05, CP)

A high-ranking official within the Liberal Party of Canada resigned yesterday after he called NDP Leader Jack Layton an "a--hole" and compared Layton's wife Olivia Chow to a dog on his Internet blog.

Mike Klander, executive vice-president of the federal Liberal party's Ontario wing, stepped down after photographs of Chow, the NDP candidate for the Toronto riding of Trinity-Spadina, and a chow chow dog were posted on his blog dated Dec. 9 under the heading "Separated at Birth."

The blog also slagged Layton.

"I'm going away for a couple of days so I thought I would find something smart and witty to put up on my blog before I left," the blog said, dated Nov. 23. "Unfortunatley (sic) I couldn't think of anything so I just want to say that I think Jack Layton is an a--hole ... for no reason other than it makes me feel good to say it ... and because he is."


There are better ways to not be so boring.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:30 PM

I JUST KNOW THIS IS THE WEEK KRUGMAN ADRESSES THE GAS BUBBLE...:

Natural Gas Prices Decline 10 Percent (AP, 12/27/05)

Natural gas futures plunged 10 percent Tuesday, settling at their lowest level in three and a half months amid forecasts calling for mild U.S. weather over the next week. It was the third straight decline for natural gas prices, which have fallen 23 percent since Wednesday, and the selloff triggered a decline in other energy futures.

Help us, Ben Bernanke, you're our greatest hope....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:45 AM

BADLY DESIGNING WOMEN (via Mike Daley):

Too Few Good Men: a review of Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas and American Dream: Three Women, Ten Kids, and a Nation’s Drive to End Welfare by Jason DeParle (Amy L. Wax, Policy Review)

Edin and Kefalas are talented and sedulous ethnographers. [....]

Nonetheless, their book ultimately fails. Despite promising beginnings, the authors fall victim to tired social science dogmas. Their fealty to bad ideas hinders a full excavation of the rich lode of material they have so painstakingly assembled. They miss the message of their own fieldwork and the clear implications of broader social trends. The result is a lost opportunity to discover the true causes of family upheaval and to think constructively about the cures for its decline.

Why do the women in this study so rarely marry and so often end up as single mothers? Most express a strong desire to marry and view extra-marital childbearing as “second best.” Yet almost all remain single. The authors offer this explanation: Expectations for marriage have risen across the board. People now regard marriage as a luxury good rather than as a necessity. They refuse to tie the knot unless they have first achieved economic success. A house, a well-paying job, and enough money for a nice wedding are now needed before considering a trip to the altar. But few of the unskilled can make good on their aspirations because wages at the bottom have stagnated or declined. To their credit, the authors do not exaggerate the extent of these trends. Although they note (correctly) that unskilled men’s earnings have lost ground relative to college graduates’ and that some well-paying jobs have disappeared, they acknowledge that the overall economic prospects of men with a high school education or less are not significantly worse than in past decades when marriage rates were much higher. It’s not that most unskilled men are less able to support a family than they were decades ago; earnings for this group were always modest. Rather, the problem is that women — and men — expect far more.

In contrast, conclude Edin and Kefalas, having children carries no such inflated requirements. Babies need not await the achievement of an elevated position in life, because childbearing is a fundamental hallmark of female adulthood that is central to poor women’s dignity and identity. In the authors’ words, “women rely on their children to bring validation, purpose, companionship, and order to their often chaotic lives — things they find hard to come by in other ways.” In a perverse inversion of old values, these woman have come to regard lone motherhood as the ultimate heroic act, the proving ground of their responsible devotion to others.

At first blush, the authors’ theory about why marriage is unpopular among the less educated appears to explain demographic reality. Rising expectations generate a class divergence in marriage rates for the simple reason that the well-off are better able to fulfill those expectations than the poor and uneducated. Yet despite superficial appeal, the authors’ explanation just doesn’t fly. First and foremost, their conclusions are at odds with what their women subjects actually say. More broadly, the authors’ thesis cannot be reconciled with the full range of facts regarding racial and class differences in family structure. A growing body of social science evidence suggests that group mores and personal behavior, not insufficient resources, are the most important cause of marital decline.


Women's liberation, predictably, liberated men.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:01 AM

SELF ABOVE ALL:

GOP Lawmaker Relishes Role as a Flamethrower: Illegal immigration, and not party loyalty, is Rep. Tom Tancredo's burning issue (Mark Z. Barabak, December 27, 2005, LA Times)

And once he damages the GOP does he expect Democrats to do his bidding?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:58 AM

THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO GIVE SADDAM A NOBEL:

Finally, All the World Can Be His Stage: The work of Adil Kadhim, once shaped by Hussein's censors, speaks of a more open society and a cultural bridge to the West. (Alissa J. Rubin, December 27, 2005, LA Times)

When Saddam Hussein was in power, Adil Kadhim would rise at 6 each morning in his cramped apartment, set a pot of water on the stove for tea, and begin writing.

His work, like that of all authors, had to pass regime censors. One of his television series was an allegory about power, and made it to the screen by being set in 1950s Baghdad rather than in the later Baathist era. A television movie sang the praises of the Iraqi army, and another script used Julius Caesar rather than Hussein to describe the life of a dictator. These innocuous and popular shows made Kadhim one of the best-known theatrical writers in Iraq.

But the work dearest to his heart he stuffed into drawers. Much of it drew together figures from East and West, a motif viewed with suspicion by the regime. In one play he put on trial several notorious figures, including Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden, who in the name of purifying humanity commit heinous acts. In another, an Iraqi woman who murdered her husband shares a prison cell with two heroines of Greek tragedy, Electra and Antigone, and the three discuss the men who led to their ruin.

Occasionally a foreign director visiting Iraq would see a draft and take it out of the country to produce. But Kadhim was careful not to seek attention from outsiders. In Hussein's Iraq, too much notice was dangerous. He had spent time in prison as a young man, and his brother was kidnapped by Hussein's secret police and never seen again. For Kadhim, who has a wife and two daughters, survival trumped art.

Now, with Hussein himself in prison, Kadhim, 64, no longer needs to smuggle his writing out of the country. In the last two years, he has written full-length plays that take on previously forbidden subjects, including the Iraq-Iran war and the repression of women in rural Arab society, as well as current events, such as the U.S.-led invasion and continued military presence.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:54 AM

MAKING THE SINNERS PAY:

State's Tobacco Revenue Surges: California counters a national trend, using aggressive enforcement to bring in millions of cigarette tax dollars even as smoking declines (Evan Halper, December 27, 2005, LA Times)

State officials are reporting an increase of tens of millions of dollars in tobacco taxes for the first time in years, even as smoking in California declines.

California has taken in more than $124 million in new tobacco-tax receipts over the last 20 months. Officials credit a unique new program that includes stamping every cigarette pack sold in the state with a counterfeit-proof sticker.

Investigators, armed with hand-held devices, visit stores and scan the stickers to see whether a package of cigarettes is licensed for sale, where it came from and whether the distributor paid the required taxes. They seize illegal products as they find them and then begin tracking their sources.

The stickers, along with more inspectors and strict new licensing requirements, have helped the state bust scores of smugglers and retailers, seizing millions of illegal cigarettes. At the same time, the federal government has ramped up its sting operations in California, making high-profile arrests that have saved the state millions.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:33 AM

STOF DEFENDING ME, SON:

Twisting Vonnegut's views on terrorism (Mark Vonnegut, December 27, 2005, Boston Globe)

FOR THE past month or so it's been said and repeated that my father supports terrorism. The desire to have it be true is almost palpable. If novelist Kurt Vonnegut supports terrorism, then maybe all critics of the war are on some level proterrorist. [...]

My father cares not a fig about the Middle East.


Which is how he's actually a paradigm for the Left--it's not that they're pro-terror but that they're indifferent to everyone but themselves.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:22 AM

COSTS LESS TIME AS WELL AS LESS MONEY:

Retailers take steps to keep lines moving: New tactics ease a holiday peeve (Jenn Abelson, December 27, 2005, Boston Globe)

Fixing the problem of long lines has never been at the top of the agenda for retailers. For one thing, they know Americans are used to standing in line: By some industry estimates, we spend an average of two to three years of our lives waiting in line at airports, grocery stores, and traffic jams.

Ever notice how department stores and supermarkets place gum, candy, and other items at the register? That's because the longer the customer waits in line, the more likely he or she is to purchase something else. Or so the theory has gone.

But a growing number of consumer complaints -- along with competition from line-free Internet shopping -- has prompted retailers to buckle down when it comes to curbing unruly waits.

''When our customer is ready to check out, they're ready to check out," said Rick Webb, Wal-Mart's vice president of customer experience. ''They're not very tolerant of waiting in lines."

As Gillis, who bailed out of the Wal-Mart line, put it: ''After struggling through the crowds, I am fairly well frazzled by the time I go to pay. So, to then see that a store may have 15 checkout lanes but only four cashiers working, yes, I am bothered by the lines."

Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, recently began expanding ''line rushing" technology, a mobile scanner that allows employees to check out merchandise while customers wait in line. Customers receive a print-out with a bar code, so cashiers only need to scan the paper and take payment.

Apple stores take mobile technology one step farther. Last month, Apple introduced hand-held checkout devices that allow people to pay anywhere in the store, and customers are e-mailed their receipt. IKEA, a Swedish furniture chain with a new store in Stoughton, allows people to pay with a credit or debit card while waiting in line.

This year, Wal-Mart also started using forecasting technology that helps predict in 15-minute intervals how many registers are needed, based on past sales. To better train new workers hired for the holiday season, Wal-Mart began putting cash registers in the employees' back room so that they can practice.

In recent months, T.J. Maxx and Marshalls started introducing the line queue concept, which puts customers in one big line that snakes back and forth rather than at individual registers.

''You don't have to play those games trying to figure out which line to pick or whether to switch lines if the person in front of you has a problem," said TJX spokeswoman Sherry Lang. ''We've all been there. This is a fair system, so you're not waiting in line longer than anyone else."


Government measures certainly won't capture the deflationary effect of the time we save.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:15 AM

14TH OF NEVER:

Foes cite Alito's stance on liberty: Say he targeted issue key to Roe (Charlie Savage, December 27, 2005, Boston Globe)

During his years on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. repeatedly tried to limit the court's interpretation of the 14th Amendment's protection of ''life, liberty, and property" -- one of the key legal underpinnings of the Roe v. Wade abortion case.

The appeals court had ruled in a series of cases that the 14th Amendment protects people against arbitrary decisions by their local government, such as zoning board officials who deny permits for no good reason.

Alito, now a nominee to the Supreme Court, rejected such rights, writing that ''only in extreme circumstances is it proper to invoke" 14th Amendment protections. [...]

''There are many very important and serious legal scholars who take issue with [liberty rights] because it very quickly becomes what the judge thinks the law should cover," said Sean Rushton, of the conservative Committee for Justice.

In recent decades, the Supreme Court has invoked liberty rights to strike down laws forbidding contraception, abortion, interracial marriage, and gay sex between consenting adults; a zoning law that prevented extended families from living together; and a law that forced parents to let grandparents visit their children.

But because the Constitution does not explicitly list the rights protected by those decisions, some legal conservatives reject the rulings as mistakes.


The Left stands to pay a high price for basing things it wishes were rights on a fiction. All the 14th did was make it clear that the Constitution covered former slaves.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:11 AM

HAVING TWO WOULD HELP:

The true reason for UK's woeful tennis record? We've been using wrong balls (EBEN HARRELL, 12/27/05, The Scotsman)

BRITISH tennis players are failing on the world stage in part because they have been using the wrong ball, according to Davis Cup captain Jeremy Bates.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:06 AM

DOESN'T SHAME REQUIRE A CONSCIENCE?:

Most of Europe set to miss Kyoto goals: study (AFP, Dec 27, 2005)

Most of Europe, which has criticized the United States over its stance on global warming, looks set to miss a set of goals to cut greenhouse gases under the Kyoto Protocol, a study revealed on Tuesday.

The findings by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) will make embarrassing reading for European governments that have berated Washington for its refusal to ratify the United Nations pact.

Of 15 countries in Europe signed up to Kyoto, only Britain and Sweden were on target to meet their commitments on reducing harmful gas emissions by 2012, said the IPPR, Britain's leading progressive think tank.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:03 AM

WHEN THE LIGHTERS GO ON AGAIN....:

In French suburbs, rage 'is only asleep' (Katrin Bennhold, 12/26/05, International Herald Tribune)

"Burn!" A knot of young men join their voices in a battle cry as they edge closer to the silhouette of a parked Mercedes, some of them aiming what look like handguns, others reaching for lighters.

In the harsh light of an underground parking lot in this grim suburb northwest of Paris, the guns and lighters are imaginary - but the sense of aggression is real. As one of the young men films with a digital camera, the others move to the angry beat of music blasting out of an open car door, echoing into the dark December night.

They sing about the riots that erupted two months ago, about being Muslim and about not feeling French in France. For them the unrest is not over, it is waiting to break loose again.


MORE:
Skinhead racist murders spark protests from foreign students (Jeremy Page in Moscow, 12/27/05, Times of London)

LIKE thousands of Africans every year, Kanhem Leon came to Russia in search of the education that would give him a better life back home in Cameroon. Instead, the devout Christian was stabbed by a gang of skinheads in St Petersburg on Christmas Eve and left to die in the snow.

Elsewhere, such a brutal attack might be regarded as a random act of violence. But not in Russia’s picturesque second city. Mr Leon, 28, was the second African student in as many months to have been murdered by skinheads in St Petersburg, and dozens more have been beaten or injured in knife attacks.

Foreign students have accused the Government of turning a blind eye to neo-Nazi “death squads” who openly patrol the city in combat fatigues and carry out regular attacks on non-Slavs with knives and clubs.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:58 AM

AND LE BAND PLAYED ON (via Ali Choudhury):

Canada's group sex club patrons swinging free (Robert Melnbardis Mon Dec 26, 2005, Reuters)

On a recent night out on the town, Michel and Chantal Delbecchi left their suburban Montreal home and drove to the L'Orage Club in the city's east end, where they had sex with a couple they had never met before.

The Delbecchis, husband and wife since 1978, are "echangistes," French for "swingers," who for the past 21 years have been visiting clubs like L'Orage (Thunderstorm) to have consensual sex in a group with one or more other people. [...]

The ruling sparked outrage, largely in English-speaking parts of Canada, where critics said it would erode limits on indecency or obscenity, encourage prostitution and even contribute to the corruption of minors.

In the mainly French-speaking and predominantly Catholic province of Quebec, however, the decision caused barely a ripple of adverse reaction. Newspaper editorialists fumed in Toronto, but largely yawned in Montreal.

Swingers across Canada cheered the ruling, especially those in Quebec, where adherents go to clubs not only to meet others like them, but also to have sex on the premises.


As suggested yesterday, David Warren doesn't belong in a nation that's fundamentally French.


December 26, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:11 PM

NAKED NATION (via Gene Brown):

I AM Canadian (David Warren, 12/26/05, Ottawa Citizen)

[T]he slanders against the U.S., and the Conservative opposition, are things that don’t touch me. They can defend themselves. Were people better informed, they might not feel the need. Take for instance the anti-American blather over the Kyoto protocol. Since 1990, “greenhouse gas” emissions have risen by 14 percent in the U.S., and by 25 percent in Canada. There are no legs on the horse Mr Martin has mounted. Or, the attempt to cast Mr Harper as a narrow religious bigot when he is, firstly, not especially religious, and secondly, timidly defending moral principles held by all the major religions in common.

If the Liberals were not provided with a karaoke chamber by the Canadian media, they would be naked on stage. There would be nothing for people to look at except their record of criminal corruption, moral perversion, and catastrophic waste. Which is not to suggest any elaborate conspiracy, for the journalists here are like those in most other Western countries -- a class, sharing backgrounds and material interests, who hang out mostly with each other. They are united by a worldview, enforced by peer pressure. It just happens that this worldview is toxic.

For contrast, consider the Alberta oil patch, which is staffed with another class, sharing a different worldview. You will find about as many liberal and socialist dissenters in the oil patch, as you will conservative dissenters in the media. It is how the world works: by peer pressure.

Let them be them. What annoys me most about the Liberal campaign, may be summarized in the words, “Choose your Canada.” The insinuation of this slogan is that people not sleepwalking to the Liberal themes, are not really Canadian. Now, that I take personally.


I wonder if he's not quite wrong here--maybe just as you can't be a secular statist and truly be American you can't be a conservative liberal and be a Canadian.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:55 PM

WHAT IF THE OUTSIDE OF HIS BUBBLE WALL IS ACTUALLY THE INSIDE OF YOURS? (via Gene Brown):

The New York Times' Christmas Gift (Michael Barone, 12/26/05, Real Clear Politics)

n the Dec. 15 Chicago Tribune, John Schmidt, associate attorney general in the Clinton administration, laid it out cold: "President Bush's post-Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents."

"News stories" in the Times and other newspapers and many national newscasts have largely ignored this legal record. Instead, they are tinged with a note of hysteria and the suggestion that fundamental freedoms have been violated by the NSA intercepts.

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.|


You can tell how insulated they are from reality by their belief that there's a political price to be paid for being too mean to terrorists.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 12:05 PM

THE CONUNDRUM

The one thing Jesus is not (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, reprinted in The Spectator, December 17th, 2005)

God sent the human race what I call good dreams: I mean those queer stories scattered all through the heathen religions about a god who dies and comes to life again and, by his death, has somehow given new life to men. He also selected one particular people and spent several centuries hammering into their heads the sort of God He was — that there was only one of Him and that He cared about right conduct. Those people were the Jews, and the Old Testament gives an account of the hammering process.

Then comes the real shock. Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time. Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God: there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world Who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.

One part of the claim tends to slip past us unnoticed because we have heard it so often that we no longer see what it amounts to. I mean the claim to forgive sins: any sins. Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself. You tread on my toe and I forgive you, you steal my money and I forgive you. But what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed and untrodden on, who announced that he forgave you for treading on other men’s toes and stealing other men’s money? Asinine fatuity is the kindest description we should give of his conduct. Yet this is what Jesus did. He told people that their sins were forgiven, and never waited to consult all the other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured. He unhesitatingly behaved as if He was the party chiefly concerned; the person chiefly offended in all offences. This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin. In the mouth of any speaker who is not God, these words would imply what I can only regard as a silliness and conceit unrivalled by any other character in history.

Yet (and this is the strange, significant thing) even His enemies, when they read the Gospels, do not usually get the impression of silliness and conceit. Still less do unprejudiced readers. Christ says that He is ‘humble and meek’ and we believe Him; not noticing that, if He were merely a man, humility and meekness are the very last characteristics we could attribute to some of His sayings.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 11:40 AM

THE SPIRIT OF GALLIPOLI

Aussies rise to challenge of Canadian sperm (Anne-Marie Owens, National Post, December 26th, 2005)

Lured by ads in the University of Calgary student newspaper that declared, in bold letters, SPERM DONORS NEEDED, WE WILL PAY, RETURN AIR FARES TO AUSTRALIA, TWO WEEKS ACCOMMODATION, DAILY ALLOWANCE, the unusual call-to-arms was a bit of a no-brainer for healthy, young university students with the desire to travel.

But a strange thing happened once the campaign went public.

This is the story of a small fertility clinic that announced it was going to Canada to look for sperm and unwittingly provoked so much Australian male pride that it suddenly found more than enough donors domestically.

After several years of failing to raise enough donors in Australia, despite advertising widely, Reproductive Medicine Albury found the intense publicity about its other-side-of-the-world sperm search last year delivered a new batch of homegrown donors.

Not to be outdone by Canadian donors, it seems, Australian men reacted to the campaign as a point of pride. "It was a bit of, 'What? Isn't Australian sperm good enough, then?' " says Dr. Scott Giltrap, director of the fertility centre.

Good to see those Aussie men are still stepping up to the plate to protect home and family.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:01 AM

SHARED INTERESTS:

Hizbullah is Lebanon's bulwark against Al-Qaeda: 'We do not have any relations with that group' (Clancy Chassay, 12/24/05, The Daily Star)

Since the events of September 11, 2001, there have been numerous attempts to link Hizbullah to Al-Qaeda - some more plausible than others. Investigation, however, reveals considerable animosity between the two groups, and two leading academics on the subject suggest Hizbullah may be Lebanon's best protection against an Al-Qaeda presence in the country. [...]

Amal Ghorayeb of the Lebanese American University believes any operational cooperation between the two groups is out of the question. "Hizbullah would in no way share Al-Qaeda's goals. The Americans have to understand Al-Qaeda is a threat to American security, Hizbullah is simply a threat to American interests," says Ghorayeb.

An expert and writer on Hizbullah, Ghorayeb says: "Al-Qaeda would never work with Hizbullah; their greatest enemies are the Shiites. There is a very strong cultural and religious animosity on the side of Al-Qaeda."

Last week a Shiite cleric in Lebanon received a death threat from an Al-Qaeda-type Salafi jihadist group confirming this hostility.


There's a reason al Qaeda is so dead set on preventing a Shi'a state in Iraq.


Posted by Stephen Judd at 9:59 AM

CUT IT OUT

Spy chief planning to curb spending (Siobhan Gorman, The Baltimore Sun, 12/26/05)

Some intelligence veterans say $44 billion a year is not enough to meet the growing demands placed on U.S. intelligence agencies since Sept. 11. Cutting growth in spending for the intelligence agencies would stunt the growth of a nascent intelligence reform effort, they contend.
When companies merge they look at cutting costs by reducing duplication, etc.  Why is it that when the governement merges departments we need more money and more people?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:54 AM

RACE TRAITOR:

Powell Speaks Out on Domestic Spy Program (STEVEN R. WEISMAN, 12/26/05, NY Times)

Former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said on Sunday that it would not have been "that hard" for President Bush to obtain warrants for eavesdropping on domestic telephone and Internet activity, but that he saw "nothing wrong" with the decision not to do so.

"My own judgment is that it didn't seem to me, anyway, that it would have been that hard to go get the warrants," Mr. Powell said. "And even in the case of an emergency, you go and do it. The law provides for that."

But Mr. Powell added that "for reasons that the president has discussed and the attorney general has spoken to, they chose not to do it that way."

"I see absolutely nothing wrong with the president authorizing these kinds of actions," he said.

Asked if such eavesdropping should continue, Mr. Powell said, "Yes, of course it should continue."



Posted by Peter Burnet at 9:48 AM

WORTH FRAMING

Wake up, racism is global (Mark Steyn, The Spectator, December 17th, 2005)

What's the deal with these riots in Sydney? You switch on the television and there's scenes of urban conflagration and you think, "Hang on, I saw this story last month." But no. They were French riots. These are Australian riots. Entirely different. The French riots were perpetrated by - what's the word? - "youths". The Australian riots were perpetrated by "white youths". Same age cohort, but adjectivally enhanced.

And, being "white youths", they thus offered "a chilling glimpse into the darker corners of Australian society", as Nick Squires put it last week, "with thousands of white youths rampaging through a well-known beach suburb, attacking people of Middle Eastern background. They were egged on by white supremacists and neo-Nazis."

Gotcha. White youths egged on by white supremacists. You can't make a racist omelette without egged whites...

Some days this guy is so good you can’t finish the article for the tears.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:47 AM

THAT'S NOT WHAT THE TEACHABLE MOMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO DEMONSTRATE:

On Gulf Coast, Cleanup Differs Town to Town (ERIC LIPTON, 12/25/05, NY Times)

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Harrison County, the home of Biloxi, and Jackson County, where Pascagoula is located, each had about 10 million cubic yards of debris to clean up. Both counties took up the federal government on its offer to foot the bill.

But while Harrison County and all but one of its cities hired contractors on their own, Jackson County and its cities, at the urging of the federal government, asked the Army Corps to take on the task. Officials in Jackson County said it was a choice they had regretted ever since.

The cleanup in Jackson County and its municipalities has not only cost millions of dollars more than in neighboring counties, but it is also taking longer. The latest available figures show that 39 percent of the work was complete in Jackson County, while 57 percent was done in Harrison County and its cities that are managing the job on their own, according to federal records.

"Something is very wrong here," said Frank Leach, a Jackson County supervisor. "Our federal government is paying an extraordinary amount of money for services that are not being performed adequately."


Remember how confident the Demo0crats were that the Hurricane would make everyone yearn for big government again?


Posted by Peter Burnet at 8:45 AM

HUMAN EXCEPTIONALISM

O come, all ye faithless (Mark Steyn, The Spectator, December 17th, 2005)

It’s hard to persuade an atheist to believe in God. But unless he’s the proverbial ‘militant atheist’ — or, more accurately, fundamentalist atheist — the so-called rationalist ought to be capable of a rational assessment of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of different societies. If he is, he’ll find it hard to conclude other than that the most secular societies have the worst prospects. Rationalism is killing poor childless Europe. But instead of rethinking the irrationalism of rationalism, the rationalists are the ones clinging to blind faith, ever more hysterically. At that ridiculous climate conference in Montreal, Peyton Knight of the National Center for Public Policy Research encountered Richard Ingham, a correspondent for Agence France-Presse: ‘He demanded to know the National Center’s stance on global warming. I began to explain to him that it is our view that mankind is not causing the planet to get appreciably warmer. Before I could delve into any specifics, he cut me off, shouting: “Why? Because it isn’t in the Bible? It isn’t in Genesis?”’

The bit I like isn’t in Genesis, but Psalms: ‘What is man, that thou art mindful of him...? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea....’

Let’s suppose that there is no God and that the Psalmist just conjured that up out of thin air. Nevertheless, it accurately conveys the central feature of our world — our dominion over pretty much everything else out there. A couple of months back, I was asked about creationism and ‘intelligent design’. Not my bag, so I kept it short. But I did say that the Psalmist had captured the essence of our reality rather better than your average geneticist. I’d just been told that not only does man share 98.5 per cent of his genetic code with the chimp but he shares 75 per cent of it with the pumpkin. If that’s so, it doesn’t seem a terribly useful scale for measuring the differences in our respective achievements. As I put it, ‘The fact is that this is a planet overwhelmingly dominated and shaped by one species, and our kith and kin — whether gibbons or pumpkins — basically fit in the spaces between.’

This modest thought provoked Paul Z. Myers, professor of biology at the University of Minnesota, into paroxysms of scorn: Steyn, he scoffed, ‘must not possess a gut populated by intestinal bacteria. We are at their mercy; without them, we suffer horribly for a while and die.... He must not have any wooden furniture in his home, or plastic ...made from the carbon left by ancient forests.... It’s a good thing he doesn’t eat, or he’d have to excrete — without any bacteria or fungi or nematodes or flatworms, the shit would just pile up (this would explain his written output, though).’

Oh dear. All I was doing was making a simple point about the scale of man’s domination, and all Professor Myers’s demolition does is confirm it. My intestinal bacteria may indeed be doing a swell job, but living in my gut isn’t exactly a beach house at Malibu. Yes, I’ve got wooden furniture. I live in the Great North Woods and the house and practically everything in it is made from those woods. But I sit on the chair, the chair doesn’t sit on me. And as for my excreta and the hard-working nematode, who gets the better end of that deal?

In a way, Professor Myers is only taking transnationalism to its logical conclusion. After all, if one is obliged to pretend that the Americans, Belgians, Greeks and Canadians are all equal members of a military alliance, it’s not such a stretch to insist that the Americans, the flatworms, the intestinal bacteria and your Welsh dresser are all equal partners in some grand planetary alliance. Nonetheless, if we are virtually the same as a chimp, the 1.5 per cent of difference counts for more than the 98.5 per cent of similarity. The Psalmist seems to find that easier to understand than the biologist does.

Natural evolution stumbles horribly and often hilariously when trying to explain human history and human nature, which perhaps explains the zealotry with which its proponents drop all pretense to objective inquiry, deny the overwhelming evidence before their eyes and insist there is nothing intrinsically special about man.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:40 AM

DESIGNING PROBOSCIDEA:

A mammoth task: New technology sequences part of the genome of an extinct behemoth, and promises to help unravel other ancient DNA (Byron Spice, December 26, 2005, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

A week ago, an international team including Dr. Schuster and Penn State colleague Webb Miller, announced they had recovered DNA from a woolly mammoth that had been preserved in the permafrost of northern Siberia for 27,000 years and used a new gene sequencing technology to unravel a portion of its genetic code.

"I'm convinced we'll be able to sequence the entire genome," said Hendrik N. Poinar, a molecular evolutionary geneticist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada, and lead author of last week's report in the journal Science.

That will enable researchers to compare and contrast the extinct behemoth's genome, which is almost as large as a human's, with that of the African elephant. And that will allow scientists to get a better idea of what evolutionary changes occurred that caused woolly mammoths and African elephants to diverge 5 million to 6 million years ago, Dr. Poinar said, as well as to better understand why the elephant survived while the mammoth went extinct.


Of course, we know how they became extinct: we hunted them to extinction. And elephants are an excellent example of how little divergence matters, as we can crossbreed Asian and African elephants and will undoubtedly be able to crossbreed them with mammoths as well.


MORE:
Global Polio Largely Fading: Stronger Vaccine Is Playing Key Role (David Brown, December 26, 2005, Washington Post)

The 17-year effort to eradicate polio from the world appears to be back on track after nearly unraveling in the past three years.

A new strategy of using a vaccine targeting the dominant strain of the virus appears to have eliminated polio from Egypt, one of six countries where it was freely circulating. That approach is on the verge of doing the same in India. Twenty-five years ago, India had 200,000 cases of paralytic polio a year. A decade ago, it was still seeing 75,000 cases annually. Through November this year, it recorded 52.

Such dramatic successes, many the result of a more potent formulation of polio vaccine, have once again made eradication of the paralyzing viral disease a realistic goal. Only one human disease -- smallpox -- has ever been wiped out, and that was almost three decades ago.

Intensive immunization campaigns targeting tens of millions of children in Africa have suppressed polio transmission in countries where it reappeared after the continent's most populous nation, Nigeria, halted universal polio vaccination in 2003. [...]

Since the vaccine went into use in Egypt this spring, polio has disappeared there. UNICEF has ordered 600 million doses and plans to use it throughout much of Africa.

Next year, India may be free of polio. One former hotbed -- Bombay -- already is.

Since April, no polio virus has been detected in that city's sewage. That is indirect evidence the virus is no longer carried by any of its 12.7 million residents -- undoubtedly for the first time in history.


Once again, intelligent design.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:20 AM

SOME SHOOT BACK:

U.S. Seeks To Escape Brutal Cycle In Iraqi City: 3rd Try at Pullout Depends on Police (Ann Scott Tyson, December 26, 2005, Washington Post

Using bulldozers and armored earthmovers, Army engineers encircled Samarra with a wall of dirt, sealing off the many small roads that insurgents used to move weapons into the city. Signs warned that anyone trying to cross the berm would be met with deadly force -- and some were, according to battalion officers.

The wall sent a panic through Samarra that a major offensive was imminent. "We helped spread that rumor," Walsh explained, "to get people to leave, so citizens of Samarra would be more inclined to give up the insurgents. Cooperate, or we'll clear the city." Tens of thousands fled, reducing Samarra's population to about 70,000. Half the working police force quit.

Meanwhile, in a change of tactics, soldiers began taking up unpredictable, covert positions in houses and abandoned buildings. "We got more sneaky," said 1st Lt. Adam Hurley, 24, of Raleigh, N.C., whose soldiers shot insurgents as they were placing artillery rounds in freshly dug holes.

"We had to do some deep-seated military operations," Walsh said. "We had to take a step back versus going forward. We took one step back, instead of destroying the city."

After Samarra was walled in, attacks in the city dropped sharply, from seven or eight a day last summer to one or two now, according to the military. Since October, only one roadside bomb has exploded on the main portion of highway running past Samarra, and there has been only one car bomb, in contrast with two or three a month previously.

The security has come with a cost. Long lines of vehicles sit idle at the city's three checkpoints, where crossing can take as long as an hour. "It completely disrupted the city market," said Hurley, adding that farmers especially suffered. While thousands of residents have returned to the city, the population is still down by about a fourth from a year ago.

Now, the U.S. military is embarking on a gradual plan to cut its forces and pull out of the city -- a plan that ultimately depends on a local police force that trainers say is undermanned and years away from being up to the task.

In a new police headquarters in Samarra's barricaded government Green Zone, a block from the old one that was gutted by insurgent bombs, a few police officers sat around on the roof. Only one sits in a guard tower, his hands folded on his lap. Beds with blankets were situated under an awning, and Islamic prayers wafted from a cassette player.

Two battalions of special police commandos returned to Samarra from Baghdad in December to bolster the local police but plan only a short stay. "Right now the police are capable of defending themselves," the commandos' chief, Col. Bashar Abdullah Hussein, asserted between cell phone calls in his office. The commandos will be in Samarra "not more than three months," he said.

But Capt. Barry Humphrey, who trains local police, says the vast majority of policemen don't come to work, and those who do often put in only a few hours. Several hundred idle police are on the payroll under a patronage system tolerated by the current police chief.

"The biggest problem we have so far is accountability of people," said Humphrey, 30, of Montgomery, Ala. With competent leaders, he estimated it will take two years to generate the planned local police force of 1,200 men.

On a foot patrol Dec. 2 in a violent part of Samarra called Abu Bas, Humphrey was with a police patrol when two men in black robes and head scarves flew around the corner and opened fire. They shot one policeman in the forehead and shoulder. But instead of taking cover, five police officers went forward in pursuit. Ultimately, the attackers were caught trying to escape through a checkpoint. To Humphrey, it was a small step forward.

"This time," he said, "some of them did shoot back."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 AM

THE QADDAFIS AND THE MUBARAKS FEEL THEIR WAY:

Egyptian dissident gets 5-year prison sentence (The New York Times, Reuters, 12/25/05)

An Egyptian court sentenced Ayman Nour, a leading political opposition figure, to five years of hard labor on forgery charges, prompting protests among many Egyptians and a statement from the United States questioning the validity of the nation's judicial process.

Nour was convicted in a case widely seen as a political prosecution intended to silence a challenge to President Hosni Mubarak. Nour, a 41-year-old lawyer, was sentenced Saturday to five years in prison on the charge that he forged documents to found El Ghad, or the Tomorrow Party. Nour was Mubarak's main challenger in the September elections and has denied the charges.

In a courtroom packed with uniformed police and state security officers, it took just minutes for a judge to read out the verdict and sentence in a nearly inaudible whisper, provoking Nour, locked inside a foul-smelling, filthy cage inside the courtroom, to break into a chant of "Down with Mubarak!"

Diplomats from the United States, France, Norway and the European Union were seated in the courtroom. Political analysts, diplomats, scholars and writers have said that the charges appeared little more than political persecution, especially after one of the prosecution's main witnesses said he testified against Nour only after state security forces threatened his nieces.

Libya court overturns death term for nurses (Craig S. Smith and Matthew Brunwasser, DECEMBER 25, 2005, The New York Times, International Herald Tribune)
The Libyan Supreme Court on Sunday overturned the convictions of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who had been sentenced to death on charges of infecting hundreds of Libyan children with the HIV virus. The politically charged case was sent back to a lower court for a retrial.

The action, which came on the heels of an international agreement to set up a fund that will pay for the children's medical care, raised hopes that the medical workers might eventually be freed.

"The court has accepted the appeal of the Bulgarian nurses and ordered that a new trial take place at the criminal court of Benghazi," the Supreme Court's president, Ali al-Alus, told Agence France-Presse, referring to the coastal Libyan city where the infections took place. [...]

Although Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, did not intervene in the case, one of his sons, Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi, has been involved in negotiations. He said a year ago the defendants would not be executed.


The Egyptians had elections first, but the younger Qaddafi seems to have a surer grasp of what liberalizing Libya requires than does the younger Mubarak, or perhaps just more influence. At any rate, the pace of such reforms will inevitably be uneven, but they end up in the same place eventually.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

FORESIGHT IN HIS TEMPERAMENT:

Hornblower, Still Under Full Sail (JONATHAN YARDLEY, December 26, 2005, Washington Post)

Earlier this month, for its annual holiday issue, Book World asked several literary eminentos "what book they would recommend to a friend craving a little escape from the world's cares." My answer would have been ridiculously easy: any of the 11 "Hornblower" novels by C.S. Forester, most particularly the first in the series, "Beat to Quarters."

For more than five decades I have escaped into the "Hornblower" novels as often as time and occasion have permitted. I was introduced to them as a middle-schooler in the early 1950s by my father, who adored them. The first that I read, "Mr. Midshipman Hornblower" (1950), doubtless was given to me because my father knew I would identify with the mere boy who was its protagonist, but over the years the three novels about Horatio Hornblower when he was in his thirties and held the rank of captain -- "Beat to Quarters," "Ship of the Line" and "Flying Colours," all of them, incredibly, published in 1938 -- have been my favorites, and they remain so to this day.

It seems most unlikely that many readers now need to be introduced to Horatio Hornblower. All the novels chronicling his long career are very much in print and, if sales rankings at Amazon.com are any guide, continue to sell remarkably well. The 1951 film "Captain Horatio Hornblower," directed by Raoul Walsh and starring Gregory Peck in the title role -- my father and I drove across the state of Virginia to see it -- was well received and remained popular for years. More recently, the BBC made a "Hornblower" series with Ioan Gruffudd perfectly cast as Hornblower; eight episodes are available on DVD, and all are terrific, completely faithful to the original and considerably grittier than the 1951 movie.

Forester is now known almost entirely for "Hornblower," but when he began to write "Beat to Quarters" in the mid-1930s at age 38, he was a well-established, successful author of highly literate, carefully researched novels of adventure and suspense, most notably "Payment Deferred" and "The African Queen." He had published two dozen books and had been lured to Hollywood, which he found not to his taste. He fled back to England aboard a Swedish freighter, a leisurely voyage during which he thought through the personality and character of his flawed but heroic protagonist, a British naval officer serving during the Napoleonic Wars. Forester decided to name him Horatio, "not because of Nelson but because of Hamlet," from which "it seemed a natural and easy step to Hornblower."

That is how Forester put it in "The Hornblower Companion," published two years before his death in 1966. This book, with its detailed maps of all of Hornblower's naval engagements and its candid, instructive account of how Forester wrote fiction, is a useful supplement to the novels, but reading it really isn't necessary because Forester's descriptive powers are so keen that every location and battle comes vividly alive in the reader's imagination. Although he wasn't in love with the movie industry, he obviously had a highly cinematic mind and animated scenes with clarity and immediacy.


Couldn't agree more and be sure to check out the recent A&E series



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THE LEFT WAS ON THE WRONG SIDE IN THE LAST WAR TOO:

Review of Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin, The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World New York (Richard B. Speed, December 17, 2005, HNN)

As Andrew explains, Soviet interest in the “third world” went back to Lenin who had called for “world revolution,” and to the Congress of the Peoples of the East held at Baku in 1920. But Soviet hopes for revolution in the “east” had been disappointed until after the Second World War, when European empires in Asia and Africa began to crumble. With Joseph Stalin’s death and the emergence of Mao’s China as a competitor for worldwide revolutionary leadership, Nikita Khrushchev began to turn Soviet attentions to the former colonies. During the famous 1956 speech in which he denounced the crimes of Stalin, Khrushchev also asserted that “The new period in world history which Lenin predicted has arrived, and the peoples of the East are playing an active role in deciding the destinies of the world . . . .”

The successful revolution in Cuba a few years later seemed to demonstrate that even the nations of Latin America which Stalin had written off as a series of American puppet states, might follow Fidel Castro’s lead into the Soviet camp. This achievement, combined with the necessity to fend off the growing Chinese challenge for revolutionary leadership fired Khrushchev’s endorsement of KGB Chairman Alexander Shelepin’s 1961 proposal to “promote armed uprisings against pro-Western reactionary governments” in the “third world.” Khrushchev’s departure in 1964 did not diminish Soviet support for the strategy of third world revolution. Indeed it was enthusiastically supported by Leonid Brezhnev and his successor, the former KGB chief, Yuri Andropov. It wasn’t seriously questioned until the Afghan quagmire absorbed the attention of Mikhail Gorbachev in the mid-1980s.

According to Andrew, the KGB conducted an aggressive campaign against the “Main Enemy” in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, which began in 1960-61 and lasted until the mid-1980s. As one young intelligence officer put it, “we were guided by the idea that the destiny of world confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union, between Capitalism and Socialism, would be resolved in the Third World.” The Soviet Foreign Ministry however was never enthusiastic about this new turn. Under Andrei Gromyko, the Foreign Ministry continued to focus on the competition in Europe. Thus it fell to the KGB to lead Soviet policy in the “third world.” As Andrew writes, “The initiative for ‘global struggle’ came from the KGB rather than the Foreign Ministry.”

The book is organized into four major sections corresponding to Latin America, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. Each section has several chapters dealing with KGB activities in the major nations and some of the lesser countries in each region. China and Japan are each treated in separate chapters. India, the “the Third World country on which the KGB eventually concentrated most operational effort during the Cold War,” is covered in two chapters as is Afghanistan, the nation where Soviet policy suffered its final defeat. KGB involvement in Middle Eastern terrorism is likewise covered in a separate chapter.

The general reader will find innumerable stories about such events as Indian diplomats seduced by Soviet “swallows” into turning over the embassy’s codebooks. Among other things, the book reveals that “Fear of a pre-emptive Soviet strike seems to have been a major reason for the Chinese decision to enter the secret talks . . . which led to . . . Sino-American rapprochement . . . .” In short, just as Richard Nixon was playing the “China card,” Mao was playing “the United States card.”

In the fifteen years or so since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, historians have been revising their understanding of that conflict in the light of new revelations from behind what was once known as the Iron Curtain. The World Was Going Our Way contributes to that process by demonstrating the centrality of the KGB to the “third world” struggle which dominated so much of the thirty year period after 1961. It also serves as a counterpart to the numerous works dealing with the activities of the Central Intelligence Agency which have appeared since the Church Committee hearings in 1975. Overall Andrew concludes that despite numerous tactical successes, often attributable to its “active measures,” the KGB’s effort to win the Cold War in the “third world” was a strategic failure.


Those of bus of a certain age spent decades being lectured by the Left about how the Marxism of the Third World was popular and entirely indigenous and how our attempts to help governments there defeat it was naught but Imperialism.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

ONLY HUMAN:

Some Border Patrol Agents Take a Chance on Love: It's an open secret: By day they deport illegal immigrants, but at night they date them. (Nicholas Riccardi, December 26, 2005, LA Times)

Terrazas faces deportation again and Ruiz, 30, is on leave from the patrol. A second agent has been charged with felonies for giving Terrazas a short ride across the border from Mexico. It is one of four felony cases stemming from a federal crackdown against corruption on the Arizona border.

That push has highlighted an open secret along the border: romance between illegal immigrants and those responsible for deporting them.

Some locals say that such relationships are inevitable in a town where the nearest movie theater is 51 miles north and the nearest nightclubs lie just across the border in Agua Prieta, Mexico. The clandestine romances, they add, also make a mockery of efforts targeting illegal immigrants, such as laws being considered by Congress that would mandate fences along sections of the border and fine employers who hire illegal aliens.

But such lines between the legal and illegal can be hard to draw on the southwestern border. For generations, families have easily moved back and forth between the U.S. and Mexico, and even Douglas' mayor says he doesn't know whether longtime residents are in the country legally or not. Border Patrol agents, often young, single and new to the area, can get caught between the clear dictates of U.S. immigration law and the ambiguities of the heart.

"The absurdity of it gets played out in the day-to-day lives of Border Patrol agents," said Jennifer Allen, director of the Border Action Network, an immigrant rights group based in Tucson. "Everybody knows somebody [in the U.S. illegally] who has some kind of relationship with a Border Patrol agent. Either someone in their family is married to one, or they're sleeping with one. People's lives are very complicated and intertwined and they're not very clear-cut."


Maybe the illegals could wear yellow stars?


December 25, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:08 PM

REVOLUTIONARY! (via Mike Daley):

Capacity Constraints (Irwin Stelzer, 12/19/05, Sunday Times of London)

If the Federal Reserve Board's monetary policy gurus have any doubt that "possible increases in resource utilization … have the potential to add to inflation pressures", as they said in last week's statement accompanying their 13th consecutive increase in interest rates, they need look no further than Shell Oil's announcement the following day.

The new consensus that crude oil prices will stay at or above $50 per barrel has had several consequences. Like its oil-industry competitors, Shell has upped its exploration and development expenditures, in its case by 27% to $19 billion. Kuwait has decided to draw on Western expertise to help it develop its untapped reserves, which look a lot more attractive at $50 than they did at $10. Other oil companies are scrambling for drilling rigs, labor and supplies.


So because gas costs more right now they're looking for more of it--that's never happened before, huh?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:52 PM

HARD TO BALANCE THAT JOB WITH CHIEF OF STAFF:

Don Evans Rejects Top Russian Oil Job (NewsMax, 12/20/05)

Former Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, a close friend of President Bush, said Monday he will not accept the offer of a top job at Russian state oil company OAO Rosneft.

Evans said he had decided against pursuing the offer because he could not commit to the time required to do the job correctly.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:32 PM

THE CIVIL WAR WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL, NO?:

Detainees Face Limited Access to Courts: But Bill Awaiting Bush Signature Would Shield Terror Suspects from U.S. Abuse (Josh White, December 24, 2005, Washington Post)

An amendment sponsored by Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) eliminates detainees' ability to challenge the condition of their detentions through habeas corpus petitions. Graham, asserting that U.S. courts have become clogged by "frivolous" claims on behalf of nearly 300 detainees in Cuba, favored denying foreign terrorism suspects the same rights in federal court that are afforded to U.S. citizens.

Instead, he proposed allowing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the Combatant Status Review Tribunal decisions, in which detainees are ruled "enemy combatants" or "no longer enemy combatants."

Those who are considered enemy combatants can be held indefinitely. Detainees convicted by military commissions -- of which there have been none completed in the four years the Guantanamo Bay prison has operated -- are afforded federal court review.

Graham has called it "a balanced approach" that will allow Congress more oversight and have the federal court "looking over the tribunal's shoulder."

Military law experts worry that the legislation actually strips the federal courts of some of the judicial branch's integrity, for the first time since the Civil War suspending of habeas corpus rights and removing the courts from evaluating the executive branch's decisions to hold detainees indefinitely.


The courts would, of course, have laughed if German POWs had sought to be released during WWII.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:27 PM

WHEREAS THE LEFT THINKS THEY'VE BEEN TRICKED INTO HATING ALL MUSLIMS:

The future of America -- in Iraq (Robert D. Kaplan, December 24, 2005, LA Times)

IF YOU WANT to meet the future political leaders of the United States, go to Iraq. I am not referring to the generals, or even the colonels. I mean the junior officers and enlistees in their 20s and 30s. In the decades ahead, they will represent something uncommon in U.S. military history: war veterans with practical experience in democratic governance, learned under the most challenging of conditions. [...]

Regardless of whether you support or oppose the U.S. engagement in Iraq, you should be aware that that country has had a startling effect on a new generation of soldiers often from troubled backgrounds, whose infantry training has provided no framework for building democracy from scratch.

At a Thanksgiving evangelical service, one NCO told the young crowd to cheers: "The Pilgrims during the first winter in the New World suffered a 54% casualty rate from disease and cold. That's a casualty rate that would render any of our units combat ineffective. But did the Pilgrims sail back to England? Did they give up? No. This country isn't a quitter. It doesn't withdraw."

Not withdrawing means bringing stability and liberal values to a society in which people have been trained to be subjects, not citizens. Young commanders in Iraq are experiencing in the bluntest terms the intractable cultural and political realities of a world that the U.S. seeks to remake in its own image, even as their own life struggles — as well as their religious faith, which is generally deeper than that of secular elites — make them not only refuse to give up but to feel betrayed by those who would.

To label them conservative is to miss the point. Having ground-truthed the difficulty of implanting democracy in a place with no experience of it, Iraq has stripped them of any ideology they might have had. At the same time, they have become emotionally involved with building Iraqi democracy. They have developed a distrust of an American media that have not, in their eyes, recorded advances they feel they have made in reducing the level of combat or getting a nascent electoral system started. In a vast country of 23 million people, they rarely see the car bombings that kill a few dozen every day and are reported on the news at home. But they daily see the progress in front of their eyes.


Thus do the Realists lose an entire generation.

MORE:
Freedom had a good year (Joshua Muravchik, December 24, 2005, LA Times)

This week, Freedom House released its survey for 2005. [...]

Eight countries plus the Palestinian Authority, not yet officially a country, moved up — either from "not free" to "partly free" or from "partly free" to "free." Four countries moved down. In all, this made it a good year for freedom.

But here's the really interesting part. Of the nine countries that improved their ratings, no fewer than six are Muslim countries. Indonesia moved from "partly free" to "free," while Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Mauritania and the Palestinian Authority moved from "not free" to "partly free." Of the four countries that became less free in 2005, none was a Muslim country.

To anyone who has followed the Freedom House data year to year, these changes are remarkable. Since the fall of Portugal's military dictatorship in 1974, a tide of freedom and democracy has washed over the globe. Every region has recorded strong gains, including even such a poor and troubled area as sub-Saharan Africa and the socially mutilated lands of the former Soviet empire. But until this year, the Muslim world had remained a stubborn exception.

In 2001, Freedom House first highlighted this remarkable disparity. Of the 47 countries that had Muslim majorities, only one was "free," 18 were "partly free" and 28 were "not free." Among the non-Muslim countries, the proportions were nearly the opposite: 85 were "free," 40 "partly free" and only 20 "not free." Worse, the Muslim world was growing more repressive, not more free.


Thanks, Osama.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:23 PM

THEY MUST HAVE STRONG ROOFS:

Joyous Christmas celebrations across India (Times of India, Dec 25, 2005)

Christians across India on Sunday joyously observed Christmas, a festival that has acquired a universal appeal in this land of over one billion, with people from other religions too joining in the festivities.

From Chandigarh in the north to Chennai in the south, and from Mumbai in the west to Kohima in the northeast, the faithful flocked to churches for the midnight mass and to pay obeisance at the nativity tableau that depicts the birth of Jesus Christ.

Millions of homes across the country were gaily decorated with lights, buntings, stars, Santa Claus cut-outs and Christmas trees from under which children eagerly sought out the gifts laid out for them.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:17 PM

ASK NOT FOR WHOM THE ANACONDA COILS:

For Gorshkov, Navy pilots head to US for training (SHIV AROOR, December 24, 2005, Indian Express)

By the time Russian-built aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov arrives in 2008, the Navy will have a contingent of 32 pilots, trained in specialised deck-based fighter operations at the US Navy training command in Pensacola, Florida.

With the first batch of four Lieutenant-rank officers are already under training there, the next is scheduled to go in March.

The selection of venue for training to operate Russian-built MiG-29K fighters off the Gorshkov may seem strange but the government was compelled to accept the Pentagon’s offer because Russia has no facilities for intermediate deck-based flight training. The US Navy training school in Pensacola trains Naval F/A-18 Super Hornet pilots.


It's a carom shot that only seems strange if you don't consider who the common enemies of the three are.


Posted by Matt Murphy at 3:06 PM

SING IN LATIN, AT MIDNIGHT MASS, FOR THE FULL EFFECT:

O Come All Ye Faithful : Lyrics

O Come All Ye Faithful
Joyful and triumphant,
O come ye, O come ye to Bethlehem.
Come and behold Him,
Born the King of Angels;
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
Christ the Lord.

O Sing, choirs of angels,
Sing in exultation,
Sing all that hear in heaven God's holy word.
Give to our Father glory in the Highest;
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
Christ the Lord.

All Hail! Lord, we greet Thee,
Born this happy morning,
O Jesus! for evermore be Thy name adored.
Word of the Father, now in flesh appearing;
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
O come, let us adore Him,
Christ the Lord.


Adeste Fideles

Adeste Fideles
Laeti triumphantes
Venite, venite in Bethlehem
Natum videte
Regem angelorum
Venite adoremus, Venite adoremus,
Venite adoremus, Dominum

Cantet nunc io
Chorus angelorum
Cantet nunc aula caelestium
Gloria, gloria
In excelsis Deo
Venite adoremus, Venite adoremus,
Venite adoremus, Dominum

Ergo qui natus
Die hodierna
Jesu, tibi sit gloria
Patris aeterni
Verbum caro factus
Venite adoremus, Venite adoremus,
Venite adoremus, Dominum


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:32 AM

COVERING FOR THAT CRACKER IN THE WHITE HOUSE:

Levees Weakened as New Orleans Board, Federal Engineers Feuded (Stephen Braun and Ralph Vartabedian, December 25, 2005, LA Times)

When the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and New Orleans levee officials joined forces in July 1985 to protect the city from a long-feared hurricane, the two agencies could not agree on how to proceed. It was the beginning of a dysfunctional partnership that ushered in two decades of chronic government mismanagement.

Corps engineers wanted to install gates in front of the city's three main internal canals to protect against violent storm surges from Lake Pontchartrain. The Orleans Levee District, the city's flood protection agency, preferred to build higher flood walls for miles along the canals. For five years, neither side yielded.

But in October 1990, a deft behind-the-scenes maneuver by the levee board forced the corps to accept higher flood walls. As Senate and House negotiators gathered to craft the Water Resources Development Act of 1990, Louisiana's congressional delegation quietly inserted a lobbyist's phrasing ordering the corps to raise the levee walls.

"It was stealth; legislative trickery," recalled New Orleans lawyer Bruce Feingerts, who lobbied for the levee board. "We had to push every button at our disposal."

The gambit was a crucial victory over the corps by the Orleans district, the most powerful and well-financed among 18 Louisiana boards that supervise more than 340 miles of storm levees across the hurricane-prone southern half of the state. The corps had to abandon its floodgate plan and shoulder 70% of the project's costs while allowing the Orleans board to hire its own consultants to design the strengthened levees.

But their fractious partnership proved disastrous. While the corps and the Orleans board settled into an acrimonious 15-year relationship, spending $95 million to buttress the city's canal levees, their shared supervision failed to detect crucial weaknesses inside the flood walls before Hurricane Katrina struck.

"No one felt the urgency, none of us," said Lambert C. Boissiere Jr., a former Orleans levee commissioner. "The corps and our own engineers told us the levees were strong enough. They were all dead wrong."


The Hurricane was caused by George Bush's opposition to Kyoto and the flooding by his racism. Period. I know because the Left told me....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:02 AM

LET'S SEE THE LEFT TRY AND MAKE THAT AN ISSUE:

In Criminal Cases, a Court Nominee Hews to Rules (JONATHAN D. GLATER, 12/25/05, NY Times)

Perhaps not surprisingly, the judge, a former federal prosecutor, has often - though far from uniformly - ruled against defendants. But it is not clear that he stands out: In appeals of criminal convictions generally, defendants face a steep uphill battle. Nationally, just 5.6 percent of such appeals result in some kind of reversal, according to the federal Office of Court Administration.

Judge Alito's opinions in criminal cases are meticulously written, with careful deference to the findings of trial court judges and juries and scrupulous determination to fit his decisions into the framework built by past cases. He hews to the rules.

"The perception is, he's coming from an extremely conservative point of view," said George Newman, a defense lawyer in Philadelphia who has argued cases before the judge. "He's not a good defense judge."


And no one minds.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:38 AM

GOD IS MADE OF STERNER STUFF:

God's old neighborhood a review of Where God Was Born A Journey by Land to the Roots of Religion by Bruce Feiler (Jonathan Kirsch, December 25, 2005, LA Times)

Feiler tends to dramatize his own experiences. Thus, for example, an excursion by helicopter above the land of Israel is rendered as a moment of crisis and then revelation: "I feel as if I'm in a full-body migraine," writes Feiler. "And then, just as suddenly, quiet. The sound dissolves, my body relaxes. I'm in the air, in a war. I'm at peace," he continues, referring to the armed conflict between Israel and its Palestinian-Arab adversaries. Indeed, "Where God Was Born" is essentially a confessional work. [...]

Nor does Feiler shrink from the harsh theological implications of violence in the name of God. "There is one God, and God controls the world," insists a Hasidic Jew in the aftermath of a terrorist suicide bombing in Jerusalem. "God controls the bomb, and the bomber." In fact, Feiler, who is Jewish, experiences a soul-shaking spiritual crisis after visiting the Jewish homeland, and he ends up distancing himself from the Bible: "I was learning that I could no longer rely on the once familiar pillars of my religious identity: King David, the Temple, the Western Wall. I had to find my own route to God."

But Feiler is always looking for points of connection and reconciliation among Jews, Christians and Muslims, all of whom share a scriptural tradition that seems only to sharpen the conflicts among them. He acknowledges that King David is depicted in the Bible as a bloodthirsty warrior and conqueror, but he also reminds his readers of the linkage between David and Jesus: "The interfaith roots of David run deep in this soil." He shows us the contents of the field kit issued to chaplains who accompany U.S. troops into battle: "a crucifix, a screw-together chalice, communion wine and wafers, a rosary, a kippah [Jewish head covering], teffilin (Jewish prayer boxes), and Muslim prayer beads."

For Feiler, the contrast between the Promised Land and the Babylonian Exile is especially instructive, and he explicitly defends the Diaspora as a crucial element of Jewish identity. Indeed, he seems to suggest that "Holy" and "Land" ought to be decoupled. "The surprising lesson of the Exile is that God does not abandon us in moments of despair, nor does he save us," affirms Feiler. "Only we can save ourselves from exile. By the rivers of Babylon, we should not weep for Zion. We should not seek vengeance on our enemies. We should redeem ourselves."


An especially powerful Psalm and a rebuke to those, like Mr. Feiler, who seek a cuddly God, 137: The Mourning of the Exiles in Babylon
By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.

We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.

For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.

How shall we sing the LORD's song in a strange land?

If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.

If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.

Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.

O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:25 AM

UNLEASH NATIONALISM YOU GET NATIONALIST RABBLE ROUSERS:

China 'jails democracy activist' (BBC, 12/25/05)

A Chinese democracy activist has reportedly been jailed for 12 years for helping to organise anti-Japanese protests in China earlier this year.

The wife of Xu Wanping said he had been found guilty of incitement to subvert state power at a closed hearing.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:59 AM

SPEAKING OF DEMOCRATS' WEDGE ISSUES...:

Mo. May Vote on Stem Cell Research: Scientists Fight Possible Ban as Criticism Mounts (Peter Slevin, December 25, 2005, Washington Post)

The Stowers Institute and Washington University in St. Louis are potent lobbying forces and prime backers of the Missouri amendment drive. The national roster of supporters includes the Lance Armstrong Foundation, the Christopher Reeve Foundation, the Parkinson's Action Network and the American Diabetes Association.

Before voters can address the amendment, which would also create oversight mechanisms and outlaw the creation of a cloned human, supporters must overcome a legal challenge filed by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund.

"The primary evil with human cloning is they're cloning a human for the purposes of harvesting the parts, the stem cells," said lawyer Kevin Theriot. "The real problem is the ballot title and summary says the purpose of the initiative is to ban human cloning when in fact it authorizes a type of human cloning."

Cole County Senior Judge Byron Kinder set a hearing for Jan. 19. "I assume we're going to have to go into the question of when does life begin," Kinder said.

The principal local challenger is Missourians Against Human Cloning, incorporated last month by Missouri Catholic Conference executive Weber. The Catholic conference and the Missouri Baptist Convention formally joined the case last week.

Catholic bishops asked parish priests and deacons to speak about the issue at Mass.

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Leo Burke has described the proposed research as "intrinsically evil." Burke -- who said he would deny communion to Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a Roman Catholic, because of his support of abortion rights -- said parishioners must not succumb to "false promises and statements by this initiative's proponents."


Ethics in Research Debated: Stem Cell Debacle Spurs Calls for Improved Oversight (Rob Stein, December 25, 2005, Washington Post)
The stunning revelation that a South Korean researcher faked landmark stem cell experiments has sparked an intense new debate about the safeguards designed to prevent and catch scientific fraud.

While it remains unclear what motivated Hwang Woo Suk, the case has highlighted how the increasingly rapid pace of science, and rising international competition, may be intensifying the temptation to fake results, experts said.


That mad scientist is the perfect poster boy for the Death Lobby.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:55 AM

20 FREAKIN' %?:

In Iraq, A Push For Unity On Vote: Factions Negotiate Following Protests (Jonathan Finer, December 25, 2005, Washington Post)

Each of the country's three largest communities -- Sunni Arabs, Shiite Arabs and ethnic Kurds -- voted overwhelmingly on Dec. 15 for lists of parliamentary candidates that represented its own group. According to preliminary, unofficial ballot counts, the largest share of votes was won by the alliance of Shiite Muslim religious parties that leads Iraq's outgoing government. Minority Sunni Arabs, meanwhile, appeared to have won fewer votes than they had anticipated.

That voting pattern, and the subsequent unrest and charges of fraud by Sunnis, exacerbated long-standing fears and distrust that had emerged since the fall of Saddam Hussein almost three years ago, Iraqi officials and Western diplomats said. In recent weeks, Shiite and Sunni leaders have called for the formation of sectarian armies to police their respective regions, a step some observers say could be a precursor to open clashes between the groups. The Kurds, who dominate most of northern Iraq, already have their own fighting force, as do several Shiite parties.

"Every group here is afraid of every other group: The Sunnis are afraid, the Shiites are afraid, and the Kurds are afraid," said a Western diplomat in Baghdad who agreed to be interviewed on the condition he not be named. "And the response to that has been to sort of draw together as a kind of self-preservation tactic. When it came down to it, people voted on the basis of identity, and now it is time to walk everybody back and choose a government that represents the country. This is a critical time."


The Sunni were always destined to have a psychic break when forced to confront how small a minority they really are. Now it's important to give them a bit more power than they've won, in order to buy their participation in a system they'll never control.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:49 AM

RUBE GOLDBERGISM:

Constituting Israel: Israel, like Britain, has no written constitution. Most Israelis today say the country should have one. But can Israel ever agree on how to define itself as a nation? (David B. Green, December 25, 2005, Boston Globe)

If Sharon's stroke had been more serious, the country, between governments, could well have been plunged into a constitutional crisis. That is, if it had a constitution.

When Israel came into existence as a state, in May 1948, its founders expected it to be a matter of years, if not months, before it adopted a constitution. Until then, its Declaration of Independence enumerated the basic principles upon which the state would stand, including equality of rights for all citizens, and ''freedom, justice, and peace as envisaged by the Prophets of Israel." It also anticipated the preparation of a constitution, and when it became clear that that wasn't happening, the Knesset resolved to enact a number of initial ''basic laws," which were meant to set out the workings of the fundamental institutions and principles of the state and to serve as the building blocks of the eventual document.

Nonetheless, 57 years and 11 basic laws later, Israel still lacks a constitution. Some would even say that the country's lack of a document of basic principles of government explains the political mess that it is in.

Nearly three-quarters of the Israeli public is in favor of a constitution, and a committee of the Knesset has spent the past three years holding hearings on the subject, preparing to draft its own version of one. But saying that Israelis desire a constitution is like saying that they would like to be at peace with their Palestinian neighbors: It doesn't begin to suggest the major constitutional issues that divide them.


There was an amazing story this week about how, after winning the election, Ariel Sharon would simply get to appoint up to a third of the new Knesset.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:46 AM

UNIQUE EVEN WITHIN THE ANGLOSPHERE:

On the beach: Why the recent riots in Australia should surprise no one (Yvonne Abraham, December 25, 2005, Boston Globe)

Part of the animus can be explained by familiar factors. Sept. 11 and the terrorist attacks in Bali and London have bred anti-Arab, anti-Muslim sentiment. And as in France, young Muslim men in Sydney's heavily Lebanese west and southwest, with disproportionately high unemployment and poverty rates, are disaffected. Additionally, Lebanese gangs have committed several violent, high-profile crimes in recent years, including a series of horrific rapes, feeding stereotypes and ill will.

But another part of the tension is peculiarly Australian. Despite its reputation for welcoming immigrants-30 percent of Sydney's current population is foreign-born-Australia can be a difficult place to be one. Especially if you're Lebanese. And especially lately. Over the past 10 years, Prime Minister John Howard's Liberal-National coalition government has taken a harder official line against immigrants in a quest for more conservative votes. Further widening the divisions between Lebanese and Anglo-Australians, many Lebanese youth live in more insular communities than the generations that preceded them. They are also less willing to behave like guests in somebody else's country.

Growing up in working-class Sydney in the '70s, being Lebanese was the second-worst thing imaginable. Only Aborigines ranked lower. ''Wogs," the Anglos called us, and often ''dirty wogs." We heard it everywhere: shouted from passing cars, on the playground, at shopping malls.

They could spot us a mile away. In the United States, assimilation comes relatively easily for many Lebanese immigrants, particularly for those who are Christian, like my family. When I arrived in Boston 12 years ago, I was struck by how quickly I went from being a member of an easily identifiable, oft-maligned minority to being simply white.


Folks consistently underestimate how different America is.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:42 AM

SO MUCH FOR THEIR RECOVERY:

Cabinet approves austere 2006 budget worth 79.7 trillion yen (MAYUMI NEGISHI, 12/25/05, Japan Times)

The Cabinet formally approved on Saturday a 79.686 trillion yen general account budget for fiscal 2006 that would help slow down growth of the nation's debt. [...]

Starting in January, taxpayers will see income taxes go up by roughly 10 percent when tax breaks in place since 1999 are halved. The government plans to completely remove the 20 percent tax break worth a maximum 250,000 yen in January 2007. Meanwhile, a residential-tax cut of 15 percent will also be rolled back in two stages starting in June.

In addition, the ruling coalition has agreed to raise tobacco taxes next July, increasing the cost of a pack of cigarettes by 20 yen. Liquor taxes on low-malt beer and wine will also go up.

"We need to re-examine our preconceptions of the elderly as weak members of society who need protection," said Finance Minister Sadakazu Tanigaki. "We need to ask people to bear a burden that reflects their ability to pay, so that we do not leave a heavy burden for our children to carry."

With these tax hikes along with hefty tax revenue from large corporations, the government expects revenue to rise to 45.878 trillion yen in fiscal 2006, up 4.3 percent from the current year.


It's what happens when you have no kids and no immigration.


MORE:
Falling birth rates not just a problem in Europe (MARK STEYN, 12/25/05, Chicago SUN-TIMES)

Here's a story from Friday's Japan Times:

''Japan's population has started shrinking for the first time this year, health ministry data showed Thursday, presenting the government with pressing challenges on the social and economic front, including ensuring provision of social security services and securing the labor force.''

Happy New Year, guys! And, as the reporter adds, ''Japan joins Germany and Italy in the ranks of countries where a decline in population has already set in.'' And don't forget Russia, which is even further ahead in the demographic death spiral. Of the great powers of the 20th century, America's still healthy birth rate, like its still healthy Christianity, is now an anomaly.

Demography is not necessarily destiny. Today's high Muslim birth rates will fall, and probably fall dramatically, as the Roman Catholic birth rates in Italy, Ireland and Quebec have. But demographics is a game of last man standing. It's no consolation that Muslim birth rates will be as bad as yours in 2050 if yours are off the cliff right now. The last people around in any numbers will determine the kind of society we live in.

You can sort of feel that happening already. ''Multiculturalism'' implicitly accepts that, for a person of broadly Christian heritage, Christianity is an accessory, an option; whereas, for a person of Muslim background, Islam is a given. That's why, as practiced by Buckinghamshire County Council in England, multiculturalism means All Saints Church can't put up one sheet of paper announcing its Christmas carol service on the High Wycombe Library notice board, but, inside the library, Rehana Nazir, the ''multicultural services librarian,'' can host a party to celebrate Eid.

To those of us watching Europe from afar, it seems amazing that no Continental politician is willing to get to grips with the real crisis facing Europe in the 21st century: the lack of Europeans. If America believes in the separation of church and state, in radically secularist Europe the state is the church, as Jacques Chirac's ban on head scarves, crucifixes and skull caps made plain. Alas, it's an insufficient faith.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:38 AM

HERE'S A TASK FOR YOU--TRY AND FIND A JOB THAT PAYS MINIMUM WAGE:

Democrats to woo voters on wage issue: Frozen minimum pay seen as spur (Rick Klein, December 25, 2005, Boston Globe)

New Year's Day will bring the ninth straight year in which the federal minimum wage has remained frozen at $5.15 an hour, marking the second-longest period that the nation has had a stagnant minimum wage since the standard was established in 1938.

Against that backdrop, Democrats are preparing ballot initiatives in states across the country to boost turnout of Democratic-leaning voters in 2006. Labor, religious, and community groups have launched efforts to place minimum-wage initiatives on ballots in Ohio, Michigan, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Arkansas, and Montana next fall.

Democrats say the minimum wage could be for them what the gay-marriage referendums were in key states for Republicans last year -- an easily understood issue that galvanizes their supporters to show up on Election Day.


Hard to know what's funnier, their belief that minimum wage matters in a full employment economy or their unshakable faith that voters care. How have Democrats done during the 9 years it's been frozen?


December 24, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:03 PM

OUR SIDE:

Rumsfeld eats Christmas dinner with troops in Iraq (Reuters, Dec 24, 2005)

"When you read things and hear things that express doubt about the future here in Iraq, or in Afghanistan, know that there have always been doubts expressed, there have always been those who have suggested that the cause could not be successful, that the cause would be lost," he said.

"In fact it was the people who persevered that proved them wrong. The great sweep of human history is for freedom and we're on the side of freedom.

"In the struggle between freedom and tyranny, freedom ultimately prevails."

Rumsfeld said the war in Iraq would go down in history as the "liberation of a country that once was an ally of terrorists".

"It will recount the battles that defeated Saddam's regime and the struggles that helped Iraq along its path to democracy, ushering in a new chapter in the Middle East, a hopeful era."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:16 AM

MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY HANNUKAH, JIGGY KWANZAA, MOROSE DARWIN DAY TO ALL:

I've posted some stuff from our Christmas archives, but there's more here. At any rate, the standing rib roast will be done this afternoon, then its gifts, an outdoor candlelight service with living nativity in Lyme, NH, and then stockings tomorrow and the Chanukah services at the Roth Center.

All of us hope that you and yours will have a healthy and happy Christmas and Hanukah. You bring us an enormous amount of enjoyment throughout the year, but it's always a pleasure to take time to tell you how much we appreciate everyone's participation at Brothers Judd. Be well, friends.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:43 AM

FRAUD WITH AN IMPRIMATUR (via Robert Schwartz):

Global Trend: More Science, More Fraud (LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN and WILLIAM J. BROAD, December 20, 2005, NY Times)

The South Korean scandal that shook the world of science last week is just one sign of a global explosion in research that is outstripping the mechanisms meant to guard against error and fraud.

Experts say the problem is only getting worse, as research projects, and the journals that publish the findings, soar.

Science is often said to bar dishonesty and bad research with a triple safety net. The first is peer review, in which experts advise governments about what research to finance. The second is the referee system, which has journals ask reviewers to judge if manuscripts merit publication. The last is replication, whereby independent scientists see if the work holds up.

But a series of scientific scandals in the 1970's and 1980's challenged the scientific community's faith in these mechanisms to root out malfeasance. In response the United States has over the last two decades added extra protections, including new laws and government investigative bodies.

And as research around the globe has increased, most without the benefit of such safeguards, so have the cases of scientific misconduct.


Boy, you've really got to be faith-addled to think that science will become any more reliable just because government gets involved.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:39 AM

WOULD YOU TRUST YOUR NATIONAL SECURITY TO THIS MAN?:

Liberal judge (Robert Novak , 12/24/05, Townhall)

Federal District Judge James Robertson, who resigned from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) court in protest over secret wiretaps ordered by President Bush, is regarded in Washington legal circles as one of President Bill Clinton's most liberal and partisan judicial appointments.

Robertson, 67, has ruled consistently against the Bush administration's handling of enemy combatants. On July 15 this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed his 2004 ruling that a military commission could not try alleged terrorist Salim Ahmed Hamdan.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:32 AM

CLOSE ENOUGH FOR GOVERNMENT WORK:

IMF deems Iraq stable, grants $685 million loan (Patrice Hill, December 24, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The International Monetary Fund yesterday approved a new $685 million loan for Iraq, saying the country has stabilized its economy despite continued violent conflict.

The loan, the second from the IMF after a $436 million emergency loan in 2004, reflects the lending agency's judgment that Iraq's government is doing its best to revive the war-torn economy. The loan clears the way for major debt relief from Western nations.

"The Iraqi authorities were successful in promoting macroeconomic stability in 2005, despite the extremely difficult security environment," said IMF Deputy Managing Director Takatoshi Kato. He noted growth slowed in 2005 after a strong spurt in 2004.

"The medium-term outlook for Iraq is favorable, but subject to many risks," he said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:19 AM

YOU MEAN DICK DURBIN'S WRONG ABOUT THEM BEING NAZIS?:

From Heckles to Halos: In dramatic contrast to the Vietnam War era, U.S. service personnel now are being treated to strangers' spontaneous bursts of gratitude. (Faye Fiore, December 24, 2005, LA Times)

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.

Many Americans have conflicted feelings about the Iraq war, but not about the warriors. The gestures of gratitude and generosity that occur with regularity at Peggy Sue's — across Interstate 15 from Ft. Irwin, a military desert training site — have become commonplace across the United States.

A spontaneous standing ovation for a group of soldiers at Los Angeles International Airport. Three $20 bills passed to a serviceman and his family in a grocery store in Georgia. A first-class seat given up to a servicewoman on a plane out of Chicago.

These bursts of goodwill have little to do with the holiday season or with political sentiments about the war. In contrast to the hostile stares that greeted many Vietnam veterans 40 years ago, today's soldiers are being treated as heroes throughout the year, in red states and blue, by peace activists and gung-ho supporters of the Iraq mission. The gestures are often spontaneous, affiliated with no association or cause, and credit is seldom claimed.


On the other hand are the liberal elites, Stars turn backs on America's troops in Iraq (Jamie Wilson, December 24, 2005, The Guardian)
During world war two American troops away from home for Christmas were entertained by Marlene Dietrich, Bing Crosby and the Marx Brothers. Even in Vietnam Bob Hope was guaranteed to put in an appearance. But soldiers in Iraq are more likely to get a show from a Christian hip-hop group, a country singer you have probably never heard of and two cheerleaders for the Dallas Cowboys.

Just as the seemingly intractable nature of the war has led to a growing recruitment crisis, so the United Services Organisation, which has been putting on shows for the troops since the second world war, is struggling to get celebrities to sign up for even a short tour of duty.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:12 AM

SCRATCH AN EXTINCTION, FIND AN INTELLIGENT DESIGN:

Scientists find 'mass dodo grave' (BBC, 12/24/05)

Scientists have discovered the "beautifully preserved" bones of about 20 dodos at a dig site in Mauritius.

Little is known about the dodo, a famous flightless bird thought to have become extinct in the 17th century. [...]

The dodo was mocked by Portuguese and Dutch colonialists for its size and apparent lack of fear of armed, hungry hunters.

It took its name from the Portuguese word for "fool", and was hunted to extinction within 200 years of Europeans landing on Mauritius.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:04 AM

LE PEN DID QUITE WELL, AFTER ALL:

Sarkozy rebuts the critics who label him far-rightist (Agence France-Presse, DECEMBER 23, 2005

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French interior minister who has ambitions to become president in the 2007 election, hit back Friday at critics accusing him of far-right tendencies in a lively and direct interview with the newspaper Libération.

"I am a scrupulous republican, probably less narrow-minded than you," he told the left-leaning daily.

He dismissed recent campaigns against him as being too quick to draw parallels between him and Jean-Marie Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, or FN, for Sarkozy's vigorous crackdown on illegal immigration and his promotion of increased policing and law-and-order legislation.

Such campaigns included an AIDS activist group, Act Up, whose posters of Sarkozy's photo with the tag "Vote Le Pen" appeared in Paris this week.

Sarkozy said his firm policies on the right drew voters away from the more radical positions of Le Pen, who placed second in the first round of the 2002 presidential election, which was eventually won by Jacques Chirac.

"Who are the FN voters?" Sarkozy asked. "No doubt there is a small number of true fascists and racists, but the overwhelming majority are people who are crying out for help. They are afraid, feel abandoned.

"The fact that I am being heard by all these people should make you happy."

The simple reality is that he's not going to lose political popularity by being seen to have gays and Muslims for enemies.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:57 AM

DAM TESTS:

Vast dam proposal is a test for China (Jim Yardley, DECEMBER 23, 2005, The New York Times)

Far from the pulsing cities that symbolize modern China, this tiny hillside village of crude peasant houses seems disconnected from this century and the last. But follow a dirt path past a snarling watchdog, sidestep the chickens and ducks and a small clearing on the banks of the Nu River reveals a dusty slab of concrete lying in a rotting pumpkin patch.

The innocuous concrete block is a symbol of a struggle over law that touches every corner of the country.

The block marks the spot on the Nu River where officials here in Yunnan Province want to begin building one of the biggest dam projects in the world. It would produce more electricity than even the mighty Three Gorges Dam but would also threaten a region considered an ecological treasure. This village would be the first place to disappear.

For decades, the Communist Party has rammed through such projects by fiat. But the Nu River proposal, already delayed for more than a year, is now unexpectedly presenting the Chinese government with a quandary of its own making: Will it abide by its laws?

They're a long way from the central Judeo-Christian insight, that certain rights precede the State, which then exists on the central Anglo-American insight of the sufferance of the citizenry, but perhaps they can at least accept the basic notion that the state too is bound by the law.

MORE:
China's Probe of Mining Disasters Finds Corruption, Chaos (Edward Cody, December 24, 2005, Washington Post)

The Chinese government announced Friday that it found "astonishingly serious" corruption, chaotic management and lax enforcement of safety rules in investigating coal mine disasters that have killed thousands of Chinese workers this year.

Li Yizhong, who heads the cabinet-level Work Safety Administration, said at a news conference that 96 people have been turned over for criminal prosecution this year for their roles in the explosions and floodings that occur with relentless regularity in the coal industry as mine owners race to keep up with demand. In addition, 21 mine managers and 105 government and Communist Party officials were demoted, fired or otherwise sanctioned, including two deputy provincial governors, he said.

More than 6,000 workers perished in Chinese coal mines during 2004, making mines here the most dangerous in the world. More than 4,000 miners were killed in the first nine months of this year, and the rhythm has continued unabated, including 171 who died last month at the state-owned Dongfeng Coal Mine in Heilongjiang province.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:53 AM

AXIS OF GOOD FILES:

Japan backs joint US missile plan (Leo Lewis, 12/24/05, BBC)

Japan has approved a joint missile defence programme with the US.

The project aims to produce an advanced version of the US system, which seeks to destroy incoming missiles before they reach their targets.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:19 AM

THANKS, ADMIRAL POINDEXTER:

Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report (ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN, 12/24/05, NY Times)

The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.

The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.

As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said. [...]

Officials in the government and the telecommunications industry who have knowledge of parts of the program say the N.S.A. has sought to analyze communications patterns to glean clues from details like who is calling whom, how long a phone call lasts and what time of day it is made, and the origins and destinations of phone calls and e-mail messages. Calls to and from Afghanistan, for instance, are known to have been of particular interest to the N.S.A. since the Sept. 11 attacks, the officials said. [...]

The use of similar data-mining operations by the Bush administration in other contexts has raised strong objections, most notably in connection with the Total Information Awareness system, developed by the Pentagon for tracking terror suspects, and the Department of Homeland Security's Capps program for screening airline passengers. Both programs were ultimately scrapped after public outcries over possible threats to privacy and civil liberties.


The notion that the Administration would abandon data-mining just because some congressmen got their panties in a twist fundamentally misapprehended the solemn obligations of those who are charged with providing national security.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

PAID BY ANOTHER DRAWN SWORD?:

What Bush could learn from Lincoln (Robert Kuttner, December 24, 2005, Boston Globe)

MY CHRISTMAS present to George W. Bush is a copy of Doris Kearns Goodwin's splendid study of Lincoln and his Cabinet, ''Team of Rivals." President Bush believes in redemption, and so do I. Here are just a few things Bush might profitably learn from our first Republican president.

Lincoln assumed the presidency at a time when the nation was horribly divided, not into culturally warring ''blue" states and ''red" ones, but into a real civil war between blues and grays -- the states that stayed in the Union and those that seceded. Even among the unionists, Lincoln's own Republican Party and Cabinet were bitterly rent between those who wanted to accelerate emancipation and punish the South and those who gave top priority to keeping the Republic whole.

Lincoln's priority, always, was to preserve the Union and to reduce the sectional and ideological bitterness. As Goodwin brilliantly shows, he did so by the force of his personality and the generosity of his spirit.


One doesn't expect liberals to have any historical knowledge, after all, history refutes their ideology, but every American has to be aware that Lincoln killed 600 or 700 thousand fellow citizens to re-establish unity. With Democrats upset that the President is monitoring calls by terrorists it's hard to believe they'd support an actual war against folks who are anti-American.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:04 AM

YOU CAN COME OUT FROM UNDER THE BED:

Student's tall tale revealed: Confesses fabricating US surveillance story (Jonathan Saltzman, December 24, 2005, Boston Globe)

It rocketed across the Internet a week ago, a startling newspaper report that agents from the US Department of Homeland Security had visited a student at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth at his New Bedford home simply because he had tried to borrow Mao Tse-Tung's ''Little Red Book" for a history seminar on totalitarian goverments.

The story, first reported in last Saturday's New Bedford Standard-Times, was picked up by other news organizations, prompted diatribes on left-wing and right-wing blogs, and even turned up in an op-ed piece written by Senator Edward M. Kennedy in the Globe.

But yesterday, the student confessed that he had made it up after being confronted by the professor who had repeated the story to a Standard-Times reporter.

The professor, Brian Glyn Williams, said he went to his former student's house and asked about inconsistencies in his story. The 22-year-old student admitted it was a hoax, Williams said.


Couldn't we have tortured him first?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:02 AM

SHOULD HAVE JUST BANNED CARS IN BOSTON INSTEAD:

Big Dig costs may rise by millions: US memo says total could reach $14.7b (Raphael Lewis, December 24, 2005, Boston Globe)

The US Department of Transportation's inspector general has drafted an internal memo that says the Big Dig's cost may rise by tens of millions of dollars, according to state, industry, and federal officials.

One of the officials pegged the estimated increase at $75 million. If the estimate proves accurate, the project would cost $14.7 billion instead of the current $14.625 billion, an increase that Massachusetts taxpayers or tollpayers would have to absorb, because the federal government has capped its contribution to the controversial megaproject.

A spokesman for the inspector general's office emphasized that the document is a draft and may change.


December 23, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:19 PM

IF THE WORK IS HARD THOSE DOING IT ARE IMMIGRANTS:

Immigrants find opportunity in ruined New Orleans (Jeff Franks, Dec 23, 2005, Reuters)

Much of New Orleans lies abandoned and destroyed after Hurricane Katrina struck nearly four months ago, but for Latin American immigrants the storm-ravaged city has become a land of opportunity.

While New Orleans residents are slow to return, the immigrants, most of them illegally in the United States, have swarmed in to do the hard work of cleaning up and rebuilding that others so far have shunned.

They are not here because of altruism -- New Orleans is just another place in a strange land to them -- but because there is a huge unfulfilled demand for labor and, as a result, high wages they cannot get in their homeland or in other U.S. cities.

In a sight common in the southwestern U.S., but new to New Orleans, they crowd street corners starting at daybreak, offering themselves as day laborers to anyone who needs them.


Makes it hard to summon sympathy when you hear a story about how the displaced can't find work.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 9:17 PM

RELIGION IF NECESSARY, BUT NOT NECESSARILY RELIGION

While we’re at it (Fr Richard Neuhaus, First Things, November, 2005) (Scroll Down)


Don’t we know how pushy those evangelical Christians can be? That is among the questions raised in protest against what I thought was a rather light-hearted comment in the October issue about the problem of “pervasive religion” at the Air Force Academy in Colorado. Well yes, some people—not only evangelicals and not only Christians—can be pretty obnoxious in pressing their convictions on others. And not only their religious convictions. Their causes would be better served by the learning of elementary good manners. An almost certain way of exacerbating bad manners in the public square is to try to impose good manners by regulations of law. Civilization, as has often been observed, depends upon obedience to the unenforceable, which is another way of saying that civilization depends upon civility. In my commentary I suggested—in a spirit of what now appears to have been unwarranted hopefulness—that that lesson had been learned at the Air Force Academy. But here is a Laurie Goodstein story in the New York Times with the headline “Air Force Bans Leaders’ Promotion of Religion.” It seems new Air Force guidelines will proscribe anything that might be perceived as favoring a particular religion or even, according to the proposed text, “the idea of religion over nonreligion.” The guidelines were largely drafted by Rabbi Arnold E. Resnicoff, a former navy chaplain and former director of interreligious affairs for the American Jewish Committee, who was hired as special assistant to the secretary and chief of staff of the Air Force. The need for such guidelines had been pressed by Representative Steve Israel of New York, an influential member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Mikey Weinstein, an academy graduate who has agitated against the Christian tenor of activities at the school. A professor of law at Yeshiva University is quoted on the new rules: “What I liked about them is they went so far out of their way to say the government should not be endorsing religion, because that’s not always been true in the military.” That, one might observe, is a breathtaking understatement. From George Washington’s Farewell Address and throughout American history, government leaders have strongly and explicitly endorsed religion, and nowhere has that been so emphatically the case as in the military. The attempt to extirpate religion from the official life of the military is a rewriting of history in the name of pluralism and sensitivity. Despite the adage that there are no atheists in foxholes, there have always been those in the military who dissent from the dominant religious affirmation. They were and are a small minority. The new thing, following a half century of Supreme Court rulings in hostility to religion, is the idea that a minority has the right to be protected from reminders that it is a minority. This gives even the smallest minority effective veto power over the public voice under government auspices, and nothing is more comprehensively under government auspices than the military. Anything the minority deems offensive or not to its liking must be excluded. Also in the military, the protocols of civility are subject to negotiation, but the new Air Force regulations are riddled with confusions that are likely to increase the putative problems they are designed to resolve. For instance, says the Times, “they allow for ‘a brief nonsectarian prayer’ at special ceremonies like those honoring promotions, or in ‘extraordinary circumstances’ like ‘mass casualties, preparation for imminent combat and natural disasters.’” Is a mention of Jesus or Sinai sectarian? How brief is “brief,” and how many casualties are required to warrant an extra minute of prayer time? Perhaps most important, why should the government endorse or any observant Jew, Christian, or Muslim go along with the idea that public prayer should be limited to “extraordinary circumstances”? The limitation of prayer to moments of great mourning or danger encourages the most debased notion of “the God of the gaps”—of religion in the form of last-resort superstition reserved for times of crisis. Although one notes that prayer will be permitted also for “honoring promotions,” which perhaps reflects the belief of the Air Force in the dubious notion that God has a hand in its personnel decisions. The proposed regulations are a prime instance of attempting to turn faith into a tame and inoffensive civil religion that should offend everyone who understands that the nation and its military are “under God”—meaning the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Who cannot be recruited to anyone’s service. All that having been said, I am reliably informed that some evangelical officers at the Air Force Academy were seriously out of line in using their rank to promote their faith on military time. If true, that needed to be corrected, but is better corrected by obedience to the unenforceable than by regulations that invite evasion.

To the secular mind set, secular jerks are just marginal aberrations, to be dismissed summarily as a dysfunctional minority, but religious jerks are a mainstream menace, formed intrinsically by their faith.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:45 PM

WHAT, YOU THOUGHT WINK, WINK MEANT I APPROVED?:

Among Those Told of Program, Few Objected (DOUGLAS JEHL, 12/22/05, NY Times)

As members of Congress seek more information about the eavesdropping program authorized by President Bush, their requests are being complicated by the fact that Congressional leaders in both parties acquiesced in the operation. [...[

"The record is clear; Congressional leaders at a minimum tacitly supported the program," Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the chairman of House Intelligence Committee, said this week. Mr. Hoekstra said Democrats should "attempt to understand why their leaders did not feel the same sense of outrage about the program" that some in the party are now expressing. [...]

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the committee, released a letter this week that he sent to Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 expressing concern about the program.

But Senator Roberts issued a statement on Tuesday saying that he had "no recollection of Senator Rockefeller objecting to the program at the many briefings he and I attended together," and that "on many occasions Senator Rockefeller expressed to the vice president his vocal support for the program; his most recent expression of support was only two weeks ago."

At least seven Democratic lawmakers are known to have been briefed about the program since its inception in 2001, and only two, Mr. Rockefeller and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, are known to have expressed written concern about it. A third, Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the former Senate Democratic leader, said in an e-mail message on Thursday that he too had expressed "grave concern for this practice" of eavesdropping on American citizens inside the United States.

Among the others, Representative Jane Harman of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledged in a statement this week that she had been briefed about the program since 2003 and regarded it as "essential to U.S. national security."


Mustn't Tom Daschle have worked in the phrase "deeply troubling" at some point?

MORE:
Power We Didn't Grant (Tom Daschle, December 23, 2005, Washington Post)

The shock and rage we all felt in the hours after the attack were still fresh. America was reeling from the first attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor. We suspected thousands had been killed, and many who worked in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not yet accounted for. Even so, a strong bipartisan majority could not agree to the administration's request for an unprecedented grant of authority.

The Bush administration now argues those powers were inherently contained in the resolution adopted by Congress -- but at the time, the administration clearly felt they weren't or it wouldn't have tried to insert the additional language.


The resolution to which Mr. Daschle refers reads in part: "[T]he President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States..." In other words, Congress recognized that not only does the president have broad authority and powers in the national security area but they are constitutional and so can not be diminished nor need be enhanced by them.

MORE:
Presidential Wiretapping: Disaggregating the Issues (Cass Sunstein, December 20, 2005, The Faculty Blog)

The legal questions raised by President Bush's wiretapping seem to me complex, not simple. Here is a rough guide: (1) Did the AUMF authorize his action? (2) If not, does the Constitution give the President inherent authority to do what he did? (3) If the answer to (1) or (2) is yes, does his action violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)? (4) If the answer to (3) is yes, is FISA constitutional, or is it inconsistent with the President's inherent authority? (5) If the answer to (1) or (2) is yes, does the wiretapping nonetheless violate the Fourth Amendment?

I have already suggested that it is plausible to give a "yes" answer to (1), certainly if we do not consider the effect of FISA. It needn't be conclusive that Congress didn't "intend," with the AUMF, to authorize wiretapping. Once the AUMF is in place, the President can certainly engage in surveillance of some kinds, eg, surveillance of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. It isn't a big stretch to say that he can engage in surveillance of people with known Al Qaeda affiliations who are calling to or from the United States. (If Osama Bin Laden is calling New York, it's clear, I think, that the AUMF allows the President to listen to the call.) If there were doubt about the President's power under the AUMF, a plausible claim of inherent power, under (2), would justify reading the AUMF to allow the President to engage in surveillance. (Of course nothing I have said suggests that under the AUMF, the President can engage in surveillance of people without a tie to organizations or nations associated with the attacks of 9/11.)

What about (2)? The Supreme Court has not decided this question, and some lower courts seem to have ruled in the President's favor on this one. Orin Kerr, at the Volokh Conspiracy, has an excellent post that covers this issue (and others I am discussing here). It is not clear that the President is right on (2), but it isn't clear that he is wrong.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:06 PM

IF IT'S FRIDAY, IT MUST BE CADMIUM:

2nd toxic spill poses threat; benzene hits Russian city (Chicago Tribune, December 23, 2005)

China's government rushed Thursday to shield the country's southern business center, Guangzhou, from a toxic spill of cadmium flowing toward the city of 7 million--the second manmade disaster to hit a Chinese river in six weeks.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:26 PM

THAT'S WHAT THE AXIS IS FOR:

Who Lost Nepal? (Robert Kaplan, December 2005, Wall Street Journal)

Nepal, sandwiched between the two rising economic and demographic behemoths of the age—China and India—could be the first country since the fall of the Berlin Wall where communists emerge triumphant. If the Bush administration does not act decisively, that's what might happen. The administration should not take solace in the flurry of negotiations between the Maoist insurgents (who control most of the hinterlands) and the country's political parties in Kathmandu, which could undermine the last vestige of legitimate royal authority while further strengthening the insurgents.

By canceling Special Forces training missions to the besieged Royal Nepalese Army, and with the possibility of lethal cuts of American aid to the local military, the administration, along with Washington, has bought into popular abstractions about how to best implant democracy while ignoring the facts on the ground.

Nepal is fast becoming a replay of both Cambodia in the mid-1970s and El Salvador a decade later. In Cambodia, the monstrous Khmer Rouge were threatening the capital of Phnom Penh, home to a pathetically undemocratic yet legitimate regime to which a Democratic Congress had cut off aid—a result of the Watergate-inflicted weakness of the Nixon administration. In El Salvador, murderous right-wing forces that nevertheless represented a legitimate state were pitted against murderous left-wing ones that represented the geopolitical ambitions of the Soviet Union and Cuba. Though the media emphasized the atrocities of the right wing, the Reagan administration had little choice but to work with them. Eventually, the right wing in El Salvador, with the help of a small number of Army Special Forces trainers, won the day. And in the years that followed the Salvadoran state and military were reformed.

Winning the day did not mean outright success on the battlefield. It meant bloodying the left's nose enough to give the state an edge in negotiations. Ronald Reagan, a Wilsonian, was also a realist. President Bush now needs to take Reagan's El Salvador model to heart in Nepal.


Not that he's wrong in principle, but this is one where we need the Indians to lead and us to follow.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:23 PM

THIRD WAY REVOLUTIONARY AND CONSERVATIVE AREN'T CONTRADICTIONS:

On the home stretch (Paul Kelly, December 24, 2005, The Australian)

JOHN Howard began the year being accused of timidity and finished it being accused of ruthlessness. Most professionals believe Howard will remain in office for another election, but Howard's 2005 successes are so comprehensive that they suggest a career near to completion.

This year offered powerful evidence that Howard's image as a conservative is utterly misleading. History will show that Howard is better understood as a change agent, a complex mixture of pragmatism, ideology and utilitarianism. The key to understanding Howard lies in the way he constantly shifts his balancing point between preserving tradition and advancing reformist change. His judgment about this trade-off defines his political success.

Howard's opponents are prisoners of this schism. They decry him as a bone-hard conservative, then brand him as an extremist at decisive moments such as the 1998 GST debate, the 2001 refugee crackdown and this year's industrial shake-out.

The past year has exposed Howardism as a philosophy in a purer form than before. This is because some of the previous constraints on Howard's operations were lifted. What made 2005 different from Howard's previous nine years of power was his Senate control despite the Barnaby Joyce break-outs.

This year Howard converted into laws the potential bequeathed by the 2004 election when the Coalition won control of both houses of federal parliament for the first time since 1981.


Tony Blair is stuck in the Labour Party and W 's never had 60 seats in the Senate, or they'd be doing the same as quickly. Their eventual successors -- David Cameron & John McCain -- are likely not to face those constraints.

MORE:
Labor's hold on states at risk (Ean Higgins and Sean Parnell, December 24, 2005, The Australian)

THE Liberals and Nationals have moved within striking distance of breaking Labor's stranglehold on state power, with Labor losing its lead in NSW and struggling in Queensland.

Two Newspolls show the ALP's two bastion states are up for grabs at their next elections, due in 2007.

While Queensland's Peter Beattie faces declining personal support and has failed to break a deadlock in party preference, in NSW Labor has lost its lead over the state Coalition for the first time since the departure of former premier Bob Carr in July.

The Newspolls, conducted exclusively for The Weekend Australian over the past two months, show a voter backlash after a series of crises engulfed the two longest-serving Labor administrations in the country.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:17 PM

REARGUARD ACTION (via The Other Brother):

Evolution takes science honours (Paul Rincon, 12/23/05, BBC News)

Research into how evolution works has been named top science achievement of 2005, a year that also saw fierce debate erupt over "intelligent design".

As it slips away the seek to reassure themselves that all is well...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:10 PM

DON'T YOU FEEL VIOLATED?:

US monitored Muslim sites for radiation: report (Reuters, 12/23/05)

U.S. officials have secretly monitored radiation levels at Muslim sites, including mosques and private homes, since September 11, 2001 as part of a top secret program searching for nuclear bombs, U.S. News and World Report said on Friday.

The news magazine said in its online edition that the far-reaching program covered more than a hundred sites in the Washington, D.C., area and at least five other cities.


What about all of us who may have handled radioactive material for reasons unrelated to Islamic extremism but might have been caught accidentally by this surveillance?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:06 PM

NO WMD...NO OIL...NO BASES...:

No Plans for Long-term U.S. Bases in Iraq, Rumsfeld Says (Jim Garamone, Dec. 23, 2005, American Forces Press Service)

The United States has not discussed basing American troops in Iraq, and would do so only following negotiations with the new Iraqi government, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said here today.

"At the moment, there are no plans for long-term bases in the country," Rumsfeld told a Marine during a question and answer session here today. [...]

The United States would base troops in the nation only if it would be mutually beneficial, he said.


...next they'll tell us this war was about nothing more than liberating 27 million Iraqis and bringing them liberty.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:53 PM

IN OTHER WORDS, THE REPORT IS USELESS

Government Finds Seesaw View of Housing Market (The New York Times, Vikas Bajaj, 12/23/05)

New home sales make up just 15 percent of all housing sales. That is one reason economists caution against reading too much into this report. Another is its significant margin of error, which was plus or minus 8.9 percent this month, enough to erase most of the drop in sales.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:54 AM

HARRIETISH:

Alito Said Attorneys General Can't Be Sued for Illegal Wiretaps (Bloomberg, 12/23/05)

Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito wrote in a 1984 memo that U.S. attorneys general should be immune from being sued for ordering illegal wiretaps.

Even so, Alito, then a Justice Department lawyer, recommended against pressing the claim in a case involving 1970s wiretaps ordered by former Attorney General John Mitchell to investigate a suspected plot to kidnap National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger and blow up utility tunnels in Washington.

``I do not question that the attorney general should have this immunity, but for tactical reasons I would not raise the issue here,'' Alito wrote in the June 12, 1984, memo to then-U.S. Solicitor General Rex Lee. ``I start from the premise that absolute immunity arguments are difficult to advance successfully.''

Instead, Alito, then an assistant to the solicitor general, recommended the government ask the Supreme Court to allow the Justice Department to appeal a lower court's ruling that Mitchell could be sued over the wiretapping.


Posted by David Cohen at 11:50 AM

THAT'S SOME BRIAR PATCH

President Bush Job Approval (Rasmussen Reports, 12/23/05)

Fifty percent (50%) of American adults approve of the way George W. Bush is performing his role as President. That's up six points since the President's speech on Sunday night.
Rasmussen attributes the rise to the President's speech. It was a good speech, but isn't it clear that the President owes this rise to the New York Times and their fawning coverage of how tough he is in the fight against terror at home?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:38 AM

THE SHRIVELLING OF BLUE AMERICA:

Census estimate a concern for state: Seats in Congress, US funding at risk (Scott Helman, December 23, 2005, Boston Globe)

Massachusetts lost residents for the second year in a row, new federal Census estimates show, underscoring an accelerating population shift from the Northeast to the South and West that threatens to erode the state's political and economic clout.

Only two other states, along with the District of Columbia, lost population from July 1, 2004, to July 1 of this year, according to US Census estimates released yesterday. The Bay State lost about 8,600 residents, or .1 percent of its population, according to the estimates.

If the trend continues, specialists say, the state will face serious consequences: fewer seats in Congress, companies choosing to locate or expand elsewhere, a shrinking labor force, and less federal funding for transportation, housing, and other initiatives.

Of such shifts is the permanent Republican majority made.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:44 AM

WHAT A CRACK UP:

Moongazing reveals the chaotic world of Uranus (Kelly Young, 22 December 2005, NewScientist.com)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:25 AM

WHERE WERE THE MINUTEMEN?:

Mexicans Head North to Snare Holiday Bargains: The annual border crush illustrates growing social and economic ties in the San Diego-Tijuana region. (Richard Marosi, December 23, 2005, LA Times)

The pedestrian lane at the San Ysidro port of entry backed up nearly a quarter-mile into Mexico, weaving past the churro vendors, discount drugstores and tin-shack candy booths.

Gloria Escobar, standing near a display of Santa Claus pinatas, already had waited half an hour to cross into California. Only one more hour left, she hoped.

"It's worth the sacrifice," Escobar said one morning this week. "In San Diego, the stores are better than Tijuana…. Everyone in this line is going for Christmas shopping."

The annual holiday season crush at the border reached its height this week as Dodger Stadium-size crowds from Mexico headed north in search of bargains at swap meets, outlet stores and suburban shopping malls.

They endured extra-long waits in the pedestrian and vehicle lanes, which were already jammed with thousands of Mexicans who commute regularly to jobs in the San Diego area.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:17 AM

MY NAME IS W:

U.N. Hit by a Bolt From the Right: John Bolton is seen as 'brilliant' or as 'a bully.' But the U.S. ambassador is having an impact. (Maggie Farley, December 23, 2005, LA Times)

Some call him "a bully," and others say he is "brilliant." But opinion is divided about whether he is effective — if he is cleaning up the mess, or adding to it.

"He is having a definite impact," said Ambassador Mihnea Motoc of Romania, a temporary member of the Security Council. "Others wish they could do things the same way." [...]

Just as member states were brushing themselves off from the last collision Bolton precipitated, over an agreement on how to reform the U.N. before the World Summit in September, the U.S. ambassador is setting up a new showdown.

He has threatened to block the world body's budget for 2006-07 unless diplomats commit to "real reform" by the end of 2005, a year that has seen the organization severely damaged by revelations of corruption and mismanagement in the Iraq oil-for-food program, the disclosure of sexual exploitation by peacekeepers and the U.N.'s difficulty in remaking itself.

The budget battle prompted Secretary-General Kofi Annan to cancel a trip this month to Asia and warn that Bolton's gambit could exacerbate the very problems it is meant to solve.

"He has an agenda, and he's pursuing it with a conviction that is uncommon here," said Algerian Ambassador Abdallah Baali, who sometimes clashes with Bolton in the Security Council but considers him a friend. "He's doing it his way, which is not the way we do it at the U.N. We are used to a little more compromise."


The President has always said he beat his alcohol problem without doing a program, but it's always been striking how his governing style borrows from 12-step ideology. One of the things they teach family members is that all too often the people around the dysfunctional person will alter their own behavior and attitudes to avoid confrontation, thereby enabling the addict or becoming co-dependent on his addiction. In effect, the illness becomes the center of gravity around which everyone sets their own orbits. Similarly, George Bush has demonstrated time and again that if he just sticks to his guns others will adapt to him, shifting the entire political debate and system in his direction. Sending John Bolton to the UN is a perfect example of applying this theory.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:10 AM

OUR KIDS GOT THEM IN THEIR HAPPY MEALS YESTERDAY:

Notebooks Come in at Under a Thousand With Speed and Style (THOMAS J. FITZGERALD, 12/22/05, NY Times)

The first notebook computers to dip below $1,000 were slow, not very stylish and not widely embraced by consumers. That was more than five years ago, which in the digital era is a lifetime.

Since then, competition and lower-cost components have driven down notebook prices over all, giving consumers a broad array of machines in the sub-$1,000 range - many of them able to handle the computing needs of mainstream users.

In fact, the average price of notebooks sold at major retail stores in November fell to $980 - a 19 percent drop from November 2004, when the average price was $1,215 - the first time the average price dipped under $1,000, according to a monthly survey by Current Analysis, a research company based in Sterling, Va.

Units below $1,000 are available from most major notebook makers and offer a range of features, including wide-screen displays, fast processors, built-in wireless connectivity, DVD burners, productivity software and all of the ports and slots found on more expensive models. Features they tend not to have are extra-large screens, ultrasmall designs, large hard drives and high-end processors and graphics abilities.


Posted by David Cohen at 8:08 AM

THE DATELINE IS LIKE A KNIFE

Bush Cutting U.S. Troops Levels in Iraq (Rober Burns, AP, 12/23/05)

FALLUJAH, Iraq - President Bush has authorized new cuts in U.S. combat troops in Iraq, below the 138,000 level that prevailed for most of this year, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Friday. Addressing U.S. troops at this former insurgent stronghold, Rumsfeld did not reveal the exact size of the troop cut, but Pentagon officials have said it could be as much as 7,000 combat troops.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:05 AM

BLOOMBERG TO BIG APPLE TAXPAYERS, DROP DEAD::

Workers Choose to Come Back and Talk (STEVEN GREENHOUSE and SEWELL CHAN, 12/23/05, NY Times)

Thousands of New York City transit workers put down their picket signs and streamed into bus depots and railyards last night to restart the nation's largest transit system, after leaders of their union agreed to a tentative framework for a new contract and ended a 60-hour strike that hobbled the city. [...]

The abrupt return - many strikers simply laid down their placards and walked into the buildings they had been picketing - capped a day of fast-moving developments in a labor showdown that just a day before seemed headed for an intractable and ugly stalemate.

Despite the end of the strike, a final settlement of the dispute remains to be reached. But officials hinted that in exchange for the union's ending the strike, the authority would significantly scale back or even abandon its insistence on less-generous pensions for future workers. In return, the union would consider having its members pay more for health insurance. The negotiations will now resume under an agreement among all parties not to speak with reporters.


No Reagan or Thatcher, he.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:54 AM

NEARLY DONE:

Blair, in a surprise visit to Iraq, finds progress (The Associated Press, Reuters, DECEMBER 22, 2005)

Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain paid a surprise visit to Iraq on Thursday, saying that the country's security and political situation had improved over the last year, but refusing to set a timetable for the withdrawal of British troops.

His visit came hours before the U.S. defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, flew into Baghdad on another surprise visit. Rumsfeld, one of the architects of the downfall of Saddam Hussein, whose trial was adjourned Thursday until Jan. 24, was visiting U.S. commanders and assessing the situation on the ground.

Rumsfeld said any cutbacks in troop levels beyond those in place before the elections for the Iraqi Parliament last week would depend on assessments on the ground, while Blair said Britain might start pulling troops out in six months.

He cited a sea change in the situation in Iraq compared with a year ago.

Blair hints troops could be home in months (FRASER NELSON, 12/23/05, The Scotsman)
TONY BLAIR yesterday signalled that British troops could begin to leave Iraq within six months as he made a surprise visit to Basra to tell servicemen they should be "very, very proud" of their role in its transition to democracy.

In a fleeting visit to the British-controlled south of Iraq, the Prime Minister told soldiers that they had dealt terrorism a "huge blow" by creating the conditions for the election earlier this month which will now lead to a full Iraqi government.

While he said the new ministers could decide whether coalition troops stay or go, he gave his clearest sign yet that the Ministry of Defence plans to start winding down troops from next summer.


US to make Iraq troop level cuts (BBC, 12/23/05)
President George W Bush has authorised cuts in US troops levels in Iraq, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld said during a visit to the country.

Speaking to troops in Falluja, Mr Rumsfeld did not specify a number but said the US force would be cut by two brigades - several thousand staff.

Further reductions will be considered "at some point in 2006", he said.


At this rate the President will cut the deficit in half in just two years.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 7:17 AM

NATURE SELECTS FOR PIPES AND SLIPPERS

Freedom to swing (National Post, December, 22nd, 2005)

For decades, social scientists have worried that the breakdown of the traditional family would lead to the total erosion of sexual mores in mainstream society. In this brave new post-Christian libertine world, it was feared, wife-swapping, neighbourhood orgies and key parties would become mainstays of middle-aged couples' weekend social agendas.

Needless to say, this never happened. It turns out that, whatever licence society may give us, common sense alone is enough to keep most people from throwing their Camry key into a neighbour's salad bowl. The 1960s ideal of "free love" is a myth: In the real world, sexual promiscuity and "open" relationships typically lead to confusion, heartbreak and shattered homes -- not to mention venereal disease. This is something mature people recognize instinctively.

But it is not the role of government to enforce life lessons. And if people want to go on trying to have their cake and eat it, too, the law should let them. That is why we applaud the Supreme Court of Canada for its judgment regarding the prosecution of James Kouri and Jean-Paul Labaye.

Messrs. Kouri and Labaye operated swingers clubs in Montreal, in which visiting adults would swap sexual partners. Both were originally convicted of operating a bawdy house. But on appeal, Mr. Kouri's conviction was affirmed while Mr. Labaye's was overturned. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that both men should go free. In so doing, it properly articulated a narrow definition of indecency. "The threshold is high," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote. "As members of a diverse society, we must be prepared to tolerate conduct of which we disapprove, short of conduct that can be objectively shown beyond a reasonable doubt to interfere with the proper functioning of society."

As noted above, swinging is an unpopular activity because the damage it does to relationships can generally be expected to outweigh the transient sexual thrills it provides. But as with such obsolete crimes as fornication and adultery, the harm is confined to those adults who freely partake in it: In the cases at issue before the Supreme Court, no one was coerced, bribed or tricked into swinging. Since there is no "victim," we find it hard to see why such activity should be outlawed.

Canada’s principal conservative newspaper is commenting here on yesterday’s Supreme Court decision that effectively threw out any notion of public decency as a legitimate basis for law and mandated the old J. S. Mill objective “harm” test beloved by liberals for generations. Presumably the near dead silence with which the decision was received indicates most people either agree or are completely unable to articulate any misgivings. What strikes one about this analysis is the complete denial of sweeping social changes that have occurred since the sixties and the confident assumption that most people will naturally adhere to a religiously-inspired morality on grounds of rational self-interest. It is amusing how, when discussing issues like divorce and gay marriage, liberals and libertarians will evince horror at the cruelty and injustice of a thwarted sexual-urge, but then blithely assume the vast majority of people are actually quite boring and will naturally shrug off temptation and choose traditional middle-class virtue unaided. Reading the Post’s confident assurances here, one would never suspect we live in an era of forty percent divorce rates, parentless and poor children, an explosion of porn for all tastes, teenage mental illness and an exploding sex industry with all manner of attendant exploitation and crime. It is one thing to argue that it is all a necessary price of freedom, quite another to look at it all with eyes wide open and tell oneself a modern fairy tale about how there are no victims.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

MAKE A JOYFUL NOISE, THE TRAINS ARE BACK:

Grudging Praise for an Absent System (JAMES BARRON, 12/23/05, NY Times)

For three days, New Yorkers could not watch the closing doors, could not try to make sense of garbled announcements, could not wonder why the express always pulls out just as the local pulls in.

So the news that transit workers were going back to work left many New Yorkers thinking one of those only-in-New-York thoughts: a subway car is a beautiful thing. As they looked forward to swiping their MetroCards again and squeezing into sardine-tight seats in impossibly crowded cars, they voiced grudging affection for a subway system they wish they did not have to live with but cannot live without.

"We all whine in the subway," said Samuel Kroma, a messenger who lives in Jamaica, Queens, "but we all want it. There's no other means of transportation. This city wasn't planned for cars."


The species wasn't.


December 22, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:16 PM

THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY FORWARD:

Britain's new political setup (DAVID HOWELL, 12/23/05, Japan Times)

Just as commentators have been writing about a fundamentally new political "setup" in Japan, following Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's overwhelming election victory, so also the same language is being used about British politics. [...]

[I]n establishing, and giving credibility to a new political setup, Cameron, who is 39, and his chief lieutenant, George Osborne, who is only 34, have to confront exactly the same two facts of 21st century life as those facing Japan.

These are, first, that the needs of a modern society can no longer be met by an all-powerful state that owns and provides everything centrally for its citizens' welfare, and second, that people must feel they live in a nation with a purpose and international status that deserves their loyalty and distinguishes it from the globalized culture that threatens to drain countries of their personality and diversity.


The better comparison is probably to George W. Bush or Kim Beazley.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:14 PM

THE DEFEATED IN DECLINE:

Population already contracting (Japan Times, 12/23/05)

Japan's population has started shrinking for the first time this year, health ministry data showed Thursday, presenting the government with pressing challenges on the social and economic front, including ensuring provision of social security services and securing the labor force.

The Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry's annual survey estimates the balance of domestic births of Japanese against deaths in 2005 to be minus 10,000, marking the first natural decline since the government first began compiling the data in 1899.

Even on an aggregate population basis, including foreign residents, the balance is projected to be minus 4,000 in 2005, registering a fall one year earlier than projected by the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, which had predicted a decline after 2006.

Japan joins Germany and Italy in the ranks of countries where a decline in population has already set in.


Hardly surprising these three lead the way into the abyss.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:26 PM

TOO BAD THERE ARE SO FEW MODERATE LIBERALS:

Europe: A History (Norman Davies)

Conservatism began to crystallize as a coherent ideology in conjunction with liberal trends. It was not opposed to democracy or to change as such, and should not be confused with simple reactionary
positions. What it did was to insist that all change should be channelled and managed in such a way that the organic growth of established institutions of state and society--monarchy, Church, the social hierarchy, property, and the family--should not be threatened. [...] Like the liberals, the conservatives valued the individual, opposed the omnipotent state, and looked for a reduction of central executive powers. Through this, they often turned out to be the most effective of would-be reformers, toning down proposals coming from more radical points on the spectrum, and acting as the go-between with the ruling court. The ultimate distinction between liberal conservatives and moderate liberals was a fine one. In many democracies, the large area of agreement between them came to define the "middle ground" of political life.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:24 AM

FINALLY, SOME STAGE MANAGEMENT:

They would take one of us away and he'd return in a sheet, dripping in blood: A brave Iraqi takes the stand and tells how seven of his brothers were tortured and killed 'on Saddam's orders' (Adrian Blomfield, 22/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

It was the first time since he went on trial that Saddam Hussein seemed lost for words.

Gone were the histrionics and bluster of previous court appearances, when the former dictator upstaged everyone from judge to fellow defendants with his interruptions and grandstanding.

Instead the limelight was taken by a softly spoken witness who comported himself in every way Saddam has not since he took to the dock. Ali Hassan al-Haidari was dignified, erudite, compelling - and brave.

While the vast majority of other witnesses have so far chosen - understandably so - to testify behind a curtain, sometimes with their voices distorted, Mr Haidari stood just feet away from the once most feared man in Iraq.

Saddam seemed to shrink beside him. He sucked his glasses, and occasionally took notes. Much of the time he seemed to be doodling. It was as though he could not meet the eyes of his accuser.

Dressed almost identically to Saddam in a brown suit and a white shirt, Mr Haidari recalled the 1982 massacre at Dujail, where Saddam is accused of orchestrating the mass reprisals in retaliation for an alleged attempt on his life. Mr Haidari, who was only 14 at the time, told how he and all 43 members of his family were rounded up and taken to the Ba'ath party headquarters in Dujail.

"I saw my brother being tortured in front of my eyes," he said, looking straight at Saddam. "I was terrified. They would take one of us away and he would return in a sheet, dripping in blood."

Seven of his brothers were executed, he testified. Like so many Iraqis, he has no idea, he said, where they were buried.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:08 AM

OUT WITH THE NEW, IN WITH THE OLD:

Blair appeals for party support to fight challenge of resurgent Tories (George Jones, 22/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Tony Blair admitted yesterday that he was "battling on all fronts" as he faced a resurgent Tory Party led by David Cameron and increasing opposition from Labour MPs to his health, education and welfare reforms.

He appealed to his party not to retreat to its "political comfort zone" but to fight Mr Cameron's attempts to reclaim the centre ground which had delivered three election victories for New Labour. [...]

"What's the big idea coming from the Conservative Party? To try and become more like New Labour.

"The truth is we should be confident as New Labour in the reform programme, because whether it is on pensions, or it is on school standards, or it is choice in the NHS free at the point of use, or on anti-social behaviour, or even difficult things like Europe, we are the ones making the weather. That is why, however difficult it is, we stick with it and we carry it through."

But he signalled that he was ready to compromise on education reforms, which have run into strong opposition within the Cabinet and the Labour Party.


As Labour reverts to Old Labour the Tories can indeed seize the ground that New Labour held, just as W seized the New Democrat turf.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:04 AM

THEY WANT THE WHOLE ENCHILADA:

Hong Kong votes down political overhaul (Keith Bradsher, DECEMBER 22, 2005, The New York Times)

Democracy advocates on Wednesday defeated a government-backed legislative proposal to revamp the political system here, dealing a sharp setback to the chief executive and Chinese leaders in Beijing, as well as to the prospects for any substantial political changes soon.

Donald Tsang, the Beijing-backed chief executive, had lobbied lawmakers extensively for the past two months and, in a departure from past practice for leaders here, had even walked city streets to buttonhole passers-by and ask them to support the plan. The two-part proposal called for doubling the number of people allowed to vote for chief executive here, to 1,600, and for expanding the 60-member Legislative Council to 70 members.

But democracy advocates were united in opposing the plan because it did not include a timetable for one-person, one-vote general elections.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:34 AM

THE PRC OR THE FAITHFUL?:

Chinese priests defiant in pre-Christmas standoff (Ben Blanchard, 12/22/05, Reuters)

Dozens of Chinese Catholic priests and nuns holed up for a week in a building they claim as their own vowed to stay put on Thursday, just three days before Christmas, until they get their way.

Surrounded by police in the empty building in northern Tianjin and braving freezing nights, the group of about 50 said they were not going anywhere.

"We're desperately hoping for a resolution as soon as possible," priest Wu Jingwei said. "We've not come to cause trouble and we don't want this to escalate.

"We're priests, we don't fight. We've never experienced this before. We want the government to take this thing seriously and sort it out soon," he added.

"But we cannot be frightened out. We will not compromise."

The Tianjin conflict is the latest of several arrests and confrontations that have highlighted tensions between religious forces and government control in China, even as Beijing seeks diplomatic relations with the Vatican.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:27 AM

EVEN OUR PARIS IS UNFRENCH (via David Hill, The Bronx):

Screws Tighten on NYC Transit Union (DAVID B. CARUSO , 12.21.2005, Forbes)

Threatened with huge fines and possible jail time, the city's transit union suggested Wednesday that it would be willing to end a strike that has shut down bus and subway service for two days - if the city drops its plan for changing workers' pensions. [...]

On the streets Wednesday, commuters struggled through the first day of winter.

At Pennsylvania Station, railroad officials used bullhorns to corral people trying to board the commuter train lines and closed off a city block to line people up. At Grand Central Terminal, more than 1,000 people pushed to get on shuttle trains to the Bronx.

Isaac Flores, who works at a law firm in midtown, was part of a complicated, four-person car pool.

"They're too spoiled," Flores said of the transit workers. "They want to retire at age 55. They're making more money than a cop."

Myra Sanoguet, who was with him, said they saw a group of pickets during the drive. Just briefly, "we were thinking about running them over," she said.


While Democrats continue under the delusion that Americans are sympathetic to unions generally, nevermind public employee unions.

MORE:
Tough Stance, Tougher Fines: Union Leader Is in a Corner (STEVEN GREENHOUSE, 12/22/05, NY Times)

When Roger Toussaint, the president of the transit workers' local, defiantly announced a strike, he proclaimed that his union was taking a proud stand against the concessions that employers had demanded nationwide.

But Mr. Toussaint has quickly discovered that engaging in an illegal walkout can leave a union with a weak hand. His union faces a $1 million fine for each day on strike, a state judge is threatening to throw him in jail and thousands of individual strikers stand to lose two days' pay for each day out.

Not only that, but the mayor, the governor and editorial writers are denouncing the union as greedy and showing contempt for the law. The front page of The New York Post screamed, "You Rats." And the transit workers' parent union has come out in opposition to the strike.


They handed the Mayor a sword, time to use it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:08 AM

NO, THANKS, WE DON'T CARE FOR ANY KOOL-AID (via Gene Brown):

War and Peace: Lincoln and Bush on vigilance and responsibility. (Mackubin Thomas Owens, 12/21/2005, Weekly Standard)

IN JUNE of 1863, Abraham Lincoln wrote a letter to Erasmus Corning, who had sent him the resolutions of the Albany Democratic convention censuring the Lincoln administration for what it called unconstitutional acts, such as military arrests of civilians in the North. This letter remains the best articulation of the problems that a democratic republic faces when confronted by a crisis that threatens the very existence of that republic.

The essence of Lincoln's argument was that certain actions that are unconstitutional in the absence of rebellion or invasion become constitutional when those conditions exists--in other words, "that the Constitution is not in its application in all respects the same in cases of rebellion or invasion involving the public safety, as it is in times of profound peace and public security."

This past Saturday, President Bush issued his equivalent of the Corning letter. [...]

THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY of the American republic, there has been a tension between two virtues necessary to sustain republican government: vigilance and responsibility. Vigilance is the jealousy on the part of the people that constitutes a necessary check on those who hold power, lest they abuse it. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, "[I]t is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind those whom we are obliged to trust with power."

But while vigilance is a necessary virtue, it may, if unchecked, lead to an extremism that incapacitates a government, preventing it from carrying out even its most necessary and legitimate purposes, e.g. providing for the common defense. "Jealousy," wrote Alexander Hamilton, often infects the "noble enthusiasm for liberty" with "a spirit of narrow and illiberal distrust."

Responsibility, on the other hand, is the prudential judgment necessary to moderate the excesses of political jealousy, thereby permitting limited government to fulfill its purposes. Thus in Federalist 23, Alexander Hamilton wrote that those responsible for the nation's defense must be granted all of the powers necessary to achieve that end. Responsibility is the virtue necessary to govern and to preserve the republic from harm, both external and internal. The dangers of foreign and civil war taught Alexander Hamilton that liberty and power are not always adversaries, that indeed, the "vigor" of government is essential to the security of liberty.

President Bush, like Lincoln before him, has taken actions that reflect his agreement with this principle.


One interesting aspect of this whole debate is that FISA grew out of the Democrats effort to protect anti-war/anti-American groups, many of them funded by Moscow, during the Cold War. They were able to hammer them through Congress because the post-Watergate GOP had been so weakened politically. But there was never any public support for safeguarding the secrets of the radical Left then, anymore than anyone much cared about the Clinton administration going after militia groups following Oklahoma City. Nor do folks mind now that people with ties to Islamic extremists are the targets. Few of us being extremists ourselves, we just aren't bothered by the notion of the government going after extremists. Indeed, we like it.

MORE:
Arrests reveal Zarqawi network in Europe (Anton La Guardia, 22/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

A wave of arrests across Europe has thrown new light on a European terrorist network being developed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most prominent insurgent in Iraq.

A growing number of terrorism investigations in Britain, Germany, Bosnia, Denmark and most recently Spain and France are linked to the man who has masterminded countless suicide bombings in Iraq, personally beheaded hostages and bombed three hotels in his native Jordan.

Some of the suspected networks appear to be involved only in supporting his operations in Iraq. But counter-terrorism officials are worried that Zarqawi could be planning to use his base in Iraq to start attacking Europe.

Security officials are particularly worried by indications that he wants to recruit white extremists who will be more difficult to detect than Arabs or Asians.


Of course, the Democrats' position is that if the enemy is already in your country he deserves privacy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:59 AM

SIMPLIFY AND CODIFY:

A Flat-Out Winner for Tax Reform (Daniel J. Mitchell, December 22, 2005, Washington Post)

The flat-tax revolution in Eastern Europe is particularly compelling. Nine nations from the old Soviet bloc have adopted the flat tax -- which taxes income at one rate -- and others are poised to. In an ironic twist, these countries are rejecting the class-warfare politics of yesteryear and building tax systems specifically designed to attract investment, fuel economic growth and treat all citizens fairly.

Russia, for instance, enjoys the benefits of the 13 percent flat tax it adopted in 2001. The tax quickly yielded positive results. Revenue poured into government coffers as tax evasion and avoidance became much less profitable. Inflation-adjusted personal income tax revenue has more than doubled since the flat tax was implemented.

But Russia was simply learning from its neighbors. Estonia was the first, adopting a 26 percent flat rate in 1994. Latvia and Lithuania followed in the mid-1990s, with 25 percent and 33 percent rates, respectively. Serbia was next; in 2003 it went with a 14 percent rate. Last year, it was Slovakia (19 percent) and Ukraine (13 percent). This year it's been Romania (16 percent) and Georgia, which boasts the lowest rate -- 12 percent.

Estonia has been cutting its rate: It's at 24 percent and will drop to 20 percent before the end of the decade. Lithuania also has decided to make its flat tax more competitive; the rate will go from 33 to 24 percent.

The flat tax is not a silver bullet. But combined with other market reforms, it provides a significant economic boost. All three Baltic nations are enjoying strong growth, averaging over 5 percent per year. No wonder the "Baltic Tigers" became role models for the region. This growth is generating plenty of tax revenue, in part because tax evasion has been dramatically reduced. And the rich are paying the lion's share: In Estonia, for instance, the top 10 percent are paying 41 percent of the tax.


A consumption tax is preferable, but, regardless of which you choose, if you do it by constitutional amendment and don't allow any other form of federal taxation you'd also manage to clean up politics considerably, since folks wouldn't get to lobby for special tax breaks anymore.


MORE:
The Tiny Tigers: Accepted into the European Union last year, the former eastern bloc countries are the latest to capitalize on globalization. Followed by Slovenia and Slovakia, the Baltic States have set a cracking pace with their radical economic reforms. Their fervor is alarming its old-school neighbors in the West. (Marion Kraske and Jan Puhl, 12/22/05, Der Spiegel)

In no other place in Europe are entrepreneurs and consumers as optimistic as in Poland. Last year the country boosted its export volume by nearly 12 percent. The World Bank recently upgraded the "emerging" Czech Republic into a "developed" nation. Former Deputy Prime Minister Martin Jahn forecasts: "There will be fewer and fewer investments where low-cost labor plays a central role." The subtext: We can be both low-wage and high-tech.

Even remote Lithuania, the poorest country in the EU along with Latvia, is planning its offensive: "The initial upswing was driven by booming exports; most recently, domestic demand is booming," the World Bank said of the Baltic republic.

Hungary and Slovenia have been ranked the top economies of all the countries in transition by the rating agency Dun & Bradstreet. Germany is Hungary's biggest foreign investor with about €10 billion. In addition to Audi and Deutsche Telekom, the country has attracted scores of automotive suppliers. Slovenia has sewn up the Balkans as an investment destination: Slovenian companies are thriving in the countries that emerged when multi- ethnic Yugoslavia fell apart. They speak the language; they understand the mentality.

Today, low wages are but one of many selling points in these countries. They have shed layers of bureaucracy, simplified their tax systems, invested in education, and overhauled their infrastructure. A bottomless resolve to make up for all the deprivations of the socialist regime is fueling these changes. The economic creed of eastern Europe is defined by a mood of new departure. "In the next 10 years, the gap between per capita incomes in the old and new EU member states will progressively close," forecasts Andreas Polkowski of the Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA). "Some regions may even overtake us." [...]

Slovakia's meteoric rise began as late as 1998 with the fall of autocratic leader Vladimír Meciar. Since then, launching a company just takes a matter of days, the national pension system is being supplemented by capital funding, and unemployment benefits are accorded only to those who actively look for work and are willing to do part-time community service - until a real job materializes. But the heart of Slovakia's reforms is a flat tax rate.

Since January 1, 2004, a uniform rate of 19 percent has applied to income, corporate and value-added taxes. The driving force behind the reforms is Deputy Prime Minister and Treasury Secretary Ivan Miklos, who considers himself a trailblazer on the European reform stage.

When he talks about the major economies in the western half of the continent, sympathy and arrogance mingle. Of course, the 45-year-old says, large countries can institute reforms, too. But they only opt to do so "when they're at the point of no return."

The Latvians are equally self-confident. Their capital of Riga has seen a major makeover in the past few years. The once cold and remote Soviet satellite has become a modern city with Scandinavian chic. The buildings in its old quarters have been renovated; luxury limousines squeeze through their narrow lanes. Porsche can't even keep up with orders for Cayennes and 911s. At least that's the word at trendy cafes such as "Sarkans."


It's the quintessential quandry: if economic liberalization works for them then what are we supposed to do?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:53 AM

THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC ISN'T PLATO'S:

The Trouble With Hillary: How running for president, alas, makes her even less likable. (Kurt Andersen, New York Magazine)

Each time John McCain stoops to commit some purely, nakedly political act, like campaigning for George W. Bush’s reelection or giving his okay to the teaching of “intelligent design” in public schools, I cringe. There are so few national politicians wired to speak candidly, from the heart and the hip, that I have a soft spot for almost all of them—Bob Kerrey, sure, but also Bob Dole and Bill Weld, even nuts like Jesse Ventura. So when McCain behaves like a normal politician, it’s a disturbing departure from my Frank Capra script for him.

The same kind of gesture from Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, simply confirms what one thinks already, since the script for her (more Cukor, less Capra) is all about cool calculation and calibration in service to the main chance. She is, after all, the feminist who at age 35, seven years married, started calling herself Hillary Rodham Clinton in order to give her husband a better chance at winning back the governorship in old-fashioned Arkansas. So when she announced the other day that she was signing on as a co-sponsor of a new anti-flag-desecration bill—Look at me! I’m jerking right!—it seemed in character. It was one more fragment of evidence, unattractive but inevitable, that she is not really running for reelection to the Senate from New York.

Duh. But I still found it disheartening. Not because I imagine the Flag Protection Act poses any serious jeopardy to free speech. Rather, as an exemplary gesture by the presumptive 2008 nominee, it was a vivid small example of the routine, ritual dishonesty that infuses our political discourse so thoroughly.


The intellectual classes have this odd notion that politics should be divorced from what normal people want, then wonder why Americans despise them.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:16 AM

MORAL MAJORITY:

In Poll, 54% Back Alito's Confirmation (Richard Morin, December 22, 2005, Washington Post )

A majority of Americans now support the confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court to fill the seat of retiring Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey found that 54 percent say the Senate should confirm Alito, while 28 percent say he should not be approved. That marks a modest increase in public support for Alito since November, when 49 percent said he should be confirmed and 29 percent said he should not. In both surveys, about one in five Americans said they did not know enough about the nominee to have an opinion.

Alito, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, is now about as popular as John G. Roberts Jr. was on the eve of his Senate confirmation hearings in September, the survey found.


The more the Left tars him as a Rightwing fundamentalist the better America likes him.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:13 AM

IT ALWAYS WINS WITH THE VOTERS:

Petition vs. gay marriage advances: Number of signers breaks state record (Raphael Lewis, December 22, 2005, Boston Globe)

Backers of a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Massachusetts have shattered a 20-year-old record for the most certified signatures ever gathered in support of a proposed ballot question.

Secretary of State William F. Galvin this week certified the signatures of 123,356 registered voters, nearly twice as many as the number required to get on the ballot. [...]

The petition drew the signatures of Governor Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann; former House speaker Thomas M. Finneran, now the president of the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council; and former Boston mayor Raymond L. Flynn. If the petition receives the support of at least 25 percent of the Legislature in two successive sessions, it would appear on the ballot in November 2008.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

MORAL CLIMATE CHANGE MATTERS MORE:

A Risk of Total Collapse (Dylan Evans, 22 December, 2005, Dylan.org.uk)

Is it possible that global civilization might collapse within our lifetime or that of our children? Until recently, such an idea was the preserve of lunatics and cults. In the past few years, however, an increasing number of intelligent and credible people have been warning that global collapse is a genuine possibility. And many of these are sober scientists, including Lord May, David King and Jared Diamond - people not usually given to exaggeration or drama. [...]

The collapse of modern civilization would entail the deaths of billions of people but not the end of the human race. A few Mayans survived by abandoning their cities and retreating into the jungle, where they continue to live to this day. In the same way, some would survive the end of the industrial age by reverting to a pre-industrial lifestyle.


You must have to be a secular liberal not to recognize that we've been watching the collapse of European civilization, but that the West will endure in portions of the Anglosphere .

MORE:
No to gay vows (Michael Harvey and Ben Packham, 23dec05, Herald Sun)

SIR Elton John and his gay partner might have said "I do", but John Howard says "I won't".

The Prime Minister yesterday ruled out following Britain's lead in officially allowing gay marriages.

Entertainer John and his long-time partner David Furnish were among 700 homosexual couples to marry, giving them similar legal rights as heterosexual couples.

However Mr Howard said he opposed gay unions and felt marriage could only exist between a man and woman.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:01 AM

THE DENIAL OF EVIL:

Immoral equivalence: Spielberg's not so subtle commentary about our post 9-11 world is the ultimate obscenity (Jonathan Tobin, Dec. 22, 2005, Jewish World Review)

It should be noted that the film has already come in for justified criticism for being primarily based on a book whose primary source was a fraud. Vengeance by George Jonas purported to tell the tale of a disillusioned Mossad agent, but it turned out the man was just a cab driver with an Israeli accent, and not an ex-spy. But even if we discount this, the film still fails its subject matter. That's because the goal here is not merely to wrongly argue that the battle against Palestinian terror is as criminal as anything the terrorists have done; its purpose is also to humanize the terrorists.

In a Time magazine story on his movie, Spielberg said the insertion of a fictional conversation between the leader of the Israeli team and a PLO operative was essential to his vision of the film. In it, the Arab speaks of his longing to recover his family's dignity and property that he claims they lost to Israel.

Without this and other elements that serve to break down the legitimacy of killing the men behind the attack on the Olympics, he says the film would not have been worth making. What Spielberg seems most proud of is the fact that those who seek to destroy Israel — and either slaughter or scatter its people — are not "demonized." They are, he insists, "individuals. They have families."

To which we can only reply, "So what?" You could say the same of the 9/11 hijackers, as well as the operatives of Hamas, and Fatah (from whom the members of "Black September" — a front for the PLO — came) who have cut down Jews in pizza parlors, bus stops and at Passover seders. And even go on and include the German villains of Spielberg's World War II films.

But the problem with this film isn't just an obsessive refusal to be judgmental about terrorism or the tedious speechifying that overwhelms the action. There's something even more insidious at play here.

The main character, the Israeli agent Avner (played by Eric Bana), doesn't just loose his marbles because of a mission whose efficacy might well be debated. Spielberg's Avner rejects not merely a policy but Israel itself, which he abandons for the apparently more humane confines of Brooklyn, N.Y.


Even his Holocaust film is, after all, about a "good" German.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:57 AM

THE LIFE YOU TAKE MAY BE YOUR OWN:

More convicts reoffend after release from jail (Richard Ford, 12/22/05, Times of London)

MORE criminals are returning to a life of crime within months of serving jail or community sentences than at any time since Labour came to power, figures released quietly yesterday show.

More than 60 per cent of young male thugs and muggers are convicted of another offence within two years of ending their sentence. Three quarters of young male burglars and thieves also reoffend, according to the Home Office figures placed unannounced on its departmental website.

A massive 90 per cent of offenders on the drug treatment and testing order, designed to tackle the link between drug use and prolific offending, go on to commit more crimes. The programme costs the Government £53 million annually. There is also a high dropout rate by offenders given the orders, which were introduced across England and Wales five years ago.

The figures are a severe blow to the Government, which is attempting to end the “revolving-door” syndrome, in which offenders are constantly in and out of jail.


There's a high price to being frivolous about punishment.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:53 AM

CAN'T CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION BY STATUTE:

'Warrantless' searches not unprecedented (Charles Hurt, December 22, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Previous administrations, as well as the court that oversees national security cases, agreed with President Bush's position that a president legally may authorize searches without warrants in pursuit of foreign intelligence.

"The Department of Justice believes -- and the case law supports -- that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the president may, as he has done, delegate this authority to the attorney general," Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick said in 1994 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

That same authority, she added, pertains to electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.

More recently, the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court -- the secretive judicial system that handles classified intelligence cases -- wrote in a declassified opinion that the court has long held "that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." [...]

In a 2002 opinion about the constitutionality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the USA Patriot Act, the court wrote: "We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:43 AM

NOT GELLIN':

In Berlin, a Cultural Wall Sets Turks Apart: In a Muslim enclave, many find their futures -- and identities -- are torn between countries. (Jeffrey Fleishman, December 22, 2005, LA Times)

The Gummi Bear marked the cultural divide between Annette Spieler and the inquisitive little girl.

The principal at the elementary school in the Wrangel neighborhood here, Spieler offers candy as rewards for good grades. One Muslim student asked whether Gummi Bears were made with gelatin, an ingredient often derived from pigs. Spieler had never encountered such a question, but upon checking, she discovered that they were.

"The girl refused it," Spieler said, sitting in her office the other day as stragglers from recess echoed through the hallway. "It was an indication of how the neighborhood has changed. When I came here in 1991, I didn't see as many head scarves as I see now, or as many immigrant women wrapped up all over. But now I see it everywhere. The Islamic religious life is strengthening and it's coming into the schools."

The 12-square-block neighborhood in west Berlin has long been a place where new arrivals to the city flock, struggling to establish themselves and then to escape the incessant hum of courtyard factories and the rattle of machine shops. Bordered by a canal and train tracks, colored with graffiti and scented with wood smoke, the neighborhood today is a glimpse of the immigration pressures that Germany and the rest of Europe face.

It is a microcosm of how a nation's half-hearted efforts at integration have instead created a troubled immigrant population with its own languages, codes and ethos — a separate world. [...]

"I saw my first Turk in 1962," said Harald Zugehoer, who was born in Wrangel in 1949. He moved to a country house south of Berlin years ago, but kept his metal shop in the neighborhood. "People who say integration will never work are right. Berliners are half-spiritual and half-atheist. They can't handle this dogmatic kind of Islam."


It will work eventually, when Germans are integrated into the new Islamic society the Turks create.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:36 AM

THE GHOST OF SENATOR CLELAND MUST NOT SPEAK:

New Life for Patriot Act Is No Bush Win: The Senate's six-month extension effectively kills a deal to make key provisions permanent. (Richard B. Schmitt and Mary Curtius, December 22, 2005, LA Times)

In a major setback for the White House on a top domestic priority, the Senate on Wednesday passed a six-month extension of the Patriot Act, due to expire Dec. 31, even though President Bush had demanded that most of the law become permanent.

It's bad for the President, who's trying to protect national security, but greatr for Karl Rove who now gets to use it as a mid-term election issue.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THE SECOND FACE (via Mike Daley):

Religion in the Public Square: A Textbook Case (Joseph Knippenberg, 12/21/05, The American Enterprise)

One of the great debates in contemporary legal and political theory is how various participants in a liberal and pluralistic political order should make their arguments. One of the most prominent arguments, advanced by the late Harvard philosophy professor John Rawls and his followers, calls for everyone who wishes to participate in the public square to make use of “public reason,” articulating positions in such a way as in principle to be accessible to everyone. In other words, to be entitled to participate in the public debate, I have to be prepared to offer arguments that depend, not upon a revelation given “only” to me, but upon reasons that are intelligible to our “unaided reason” (I’m tempted to say “to the reason God gave us”). If I can’t offer such reasons, so the argument goes, if I rely upon a faith that I share only with my fellow churchgoers, then my position can’t be admitted into the debate. I’m not entitled to win the argument because, in effect, my victory would mean that an essentially and exclusively religious position would gain the force of law. If my voice is motivated by what some would call an “irrational animus,” it must be marginalized, lest I use it to oppress others. If I can’t in principle persuade by an appeal to reason, then I can’t be permitted to participate in the debate.

It's a standard that, of course, delegitimizes the Declaration and Constitution and so is literally anti-American.


December 21, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:55 PM

NEVER TRUST A FED MAN OVER 30:

If Inflation Falls in the Forest…: If we listened to the media, no one would have heard the biggest price decline in 56 years. (Noel Sheppard, Dec. 21, 2005, Free Market Project)

Ever since Hurricane Katrina made landfall in late August sending oil prices to $70 per barrel and gasoline above $3 a gallon, the media have been in a panic over a return of ’70s-style inflation. Such concerns reached a fevered-pitch in October when a gauge of consumer prices rose by the largest amount in 25 years. Yet, when the Labor Department released numbers last week showing that inflation had declined by the greatest percentage in 56 years, rather than using this data to ease the public’s concerns about rising prices, the press either downplayed the report or totally ignored it. [...]

America has been in a disinflationary cycle since the early ’80s, with a few very short-lived spurts of above-trend price rises since. Yet, the thought of a return to ’70s-style stagflation strikes fear into all who lived through it. As a result, the press have a solemn responsibility to report these figures to the public in as impartial and factual a manner as possible…or is that asking too much?


Which is why the Fed Chairman should be someone who was no more than a minor in the 70s.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:55 PM

WAR?:

President had legal authority to OK taps (John Schmidt, December 21, 2005, ChicagoTribune)

President Bush's post- Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents.

The president authorized the NSA program in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America. An identifiable group, Al Qaeda, was responsible and believed to be planning future attacks in the United States. Electronic surveillance of communications to or from those who might plausibly be members of or in contact with Al Qaeda was probably the only means of obtaining information about what its members were planning next. No one except the president and the few officials with access to the NSA program can know how valuable such surveillance has been in protecting the nation.

In the Supreme Court's 1972 Keith decision holding that the president does not have inherent authority to order wiretapping without warrants to combat domestic threats, the court said explicitly that it was not questioning the president's authority to take such action in response to threats from abroad.

Four federal courts of appeal subsequently faced the issue squarely and held that the president has inherent authority to authorize wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant.

In the most recent judicial statement on the issue, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence ... We take for granted that the president does have that authority."

The passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978 did not alter the constitutional situation.


Indeed, the notion that spying on the enemy isn't inherent in the war-making powers of a commander-in-chief is bizarre.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:43 PM

TEMPLATE:

After Iraq'selection: The parliamentary elections in Iraq represent the conclusion of one of the most successful processes from tyranny to democracy in history (Bartle Bull, January 2006, Prospect)

With the election on 15th December of a new four-year national parliament, Iraqis have concluded one of the most successful constitutional processes in history. Rarely, if ever, before has an important country moved from tyranny to pluralism so quickly, with so little bloodshed, and with such a quality and degree of popular participation.

The popularity of Iraq’s new constitution (approved by 80 per cent of voters in October’s referendum) and the similarly singular scale of voter turnout in this election (above 70 per cent, according to preliminary estimates) mean that the government formed by the new Iraqi parliament will enjoy a degree of legitimacy that is peerless in the middle east and unsurpassed globally. The Iraqi achievement, seen in its context – a national psyche brutalised by 30 years of sectarian totalitarianism, the presence of 170,000 foreign soldiers, and highly politicised ethnic and sectarian divides – is uniquely impressive.

I decided, having spent the January election season living on various floors in the huge Baghdad slum of Sadr City, to spend the latest election period with the other major Iraqi demographic group that, having suffered most under the rule of the Ba'ath party, now has the most to gain from the new freedom: the Kurds. (The Marsh Arabs suffered perhaps worst of all under the Ba'athists, but with a population of about 20,000 are barely electorally significant compared to the Kurds or the Shia urban poor.)

What I saw in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdistan regional government, was dancing in the streets.

How would German views of WWII be different if we'd only had to kill 30,000 of them to get rid of Hitler?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:12 PM

THE LAST GOOD FROG:

Tocqueville at 200: What would he think of democracy in today’s America? (Michael Novak, 12/21/05, National Review)

He hit the bulls-eye when he wrote that the truly distinctive genius of America was to solve the riddle that Europe and Asia had failed to solve, how to incorporate the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom into each other, "forming a marvelous combination":

Religion regards civil liberty as a noble exercise of man's faculties, the world of politics being a sphere intended by the Creator for the free play of intelligence. Religion, being free and powerful within its own sphere and content with the position reserved for it, realized that its sway is all the better established because it relies only on its own powers and rules men's hearts without external support.

Freedom sees religion as the companion of its struggles and triumphs, the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its rights. Religion is considered as the guardian of mores, and mores are regarded as the guarantee of the laws and pledge for the maintenance of freedom itself.

Tocqueville could observe around him in 2005 that the United States was, if anything, more religious than it had been in 1831. On television on autumn weekends, more Americans watch football than anything else; that is where the biggest audiences are. Those same weekends, more Americans attend church or synagogue than watch football, whether on TV or at all the stadia all around the nation put together.

What does their religion — almost entirely Jewish and Christian — add to American civic and political life? you might ask. It grounds Americans' sense of personal dignity in the conviction that each woman and each man is made in the image of the Creator, and is loved by that Creator. It also grounds their fundamental right to freedom of conscience in the knowledge that God made human minds free, and chose to be approached by them based upon the evidence of their own minds, and through their own free choice, not through coercion. For such is the nature of the Jewish and Christian God.

These beliefs have always given Americans confidence in the idea that liberty is universal, intended by the Creator for all humans. Their philosophy of natural rights is backed up by their faith in the God Who addresses them in their liberty.


What would strike all of the great conservative thinkers most it the improbable fact that despite the enduring health of democracy in America the pendulum is swinging back towards society and away from the state.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:19 PM

THEY JUST KEEP WINNING (via AWW):

Cheney Breaks Senate Tie on Spending Cuts (ANDREW TAYLOR, 12/21/05, Associated Press)

The Republican-controlled Senate passed legislation to cut federal deficits by $39.7 billion on Wednesday by the narrowest of margins, 51-50, with Vice President Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote.

The measure, the product of a year's labors by the White House and the GOP in Congress, imposes the first restraints in nearly a decade in federal benefit programs such as Medicaid, Medicare and student loans.

"This is the one vote you'll have this year to reduce the rate of growth of the federal government," said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, in a final plea for passage.


Democrats even managed to hand the Administration all the credit on an issue that had been riling people up.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:34 AM

PLUGGING THE HEIR:

A book tour or whistle-stops?: Sen. John McCain's signings look a lot like campaign rallies as crowds question him on Iraq and human rights at every turn. (Anne-Marie O'Connor, December 21, 2005, LA Times)

At moments like this, you had to remind yourself McCain is on a book tour. Such a popular book tour that a seasoned media advisor for President Bush, Mark McKinnon, who once worked for liberal Democrats, joined McCain at book signings in three Texas cities earlier this month and has told McCain he might be available to help with a presidential run in 2008, according to McCain staffers. [...]

Will Bush loyalists in the Republican Party ever forgive McCain for upstaging Bush early in the 2000 primaries? Or, more recently, for forcing Bush to yield to his amendment spelling out a ban on torture, after reports that CIA operatives were running secret detention centers overseas?

Some Bush camp followers apparently found forgiveness in their hearts. As McCain moved through Texas, media strategist McKinnon accompanied McCain to book signings in Austin, San Antonio and Houston, a McCain aide said.

McKinnon helped arrange a dinner in Austin that included James R. Huffines, chairman of the University of Texas System Board of Regents and a senior advisor to Texas Gov. Rick Perry; rock singer Sheryl Crow; and her fiancé, Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong, according to the Austin American-Statesman.

McKinnon, who puzzled some of his oldest friends when he went to work shaping Bush's media campaign for 2000 and again in 2004, has told McCain staffers he would be interested in assisting a McCain run in 2008, provided that a candidate preferred by Bush doesn't run, a McCain aide said.

The aide said McKinnon was an "informal advisor" to McCain; McCain said he considers McKinnon a friend.

"I told the senator, as I've told the president, that if McCain chooses to run, and if people close to the president don't run, specifically Jeb Bush or Condi Rice, then I would be inclined to support him," McKinnon wrote in an e-mail, when asked about his relationship with McCain.

"I got to know the senator [McCain] when he campaigned for the president in 2004. I admire him, I respect him and I like him," McKinnon wrote. "I was glad to help facilitate a recent book-signing trip through Texas."


Karl isn't far behind.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:31 AM

CREATING A SENSE OF YOUR OWN INEVITABILITY:

Cameron meeting puts Labour in a spin (HAMISH MACDONELL, 12/21/05, The Scotsman)

JACK McConnell triggered a damaging rift with his colleagues in London yesterday when he held a ground-breaking meeting with David Cameron to discuss how his Labour-led Executive would work with a Tory government at Westminster.

Labour MPs reacted with surprise and dismay to the meeting. One Labour MP said he had hoped the First Minister "would have been a bit more sensible", criticising him for giving credibility to the idea of a Tory victory at the next general election.

Mr Cameron was making his first visit to Scotland since becoming the Tory leader.

He made a point of coming to the Scottish Parliament - which Tony Blair has failed to visit - and had a short private meeting with Mr McConnell.


Obviously early, but Mr. Cameron is carrying himself awfully well.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:25 AM

FINDING OUT WHO YOUR REAL ALLIES ARE:

Navy diver's killer held in Beirut (Nicholas Kralev and Gary Emerling, December 21, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The Lebanese killer of a U.S. Navy diver was in custody in Beirut yesterday, according to U.S. officials who decried his release from a German prison last week and pledged to bring him to the United States for trial.

Relatives of the victim -- Waldorf, Md., native Robert Dean Stethem -- said yesterday they were "devastated" to learn of the killer's release and urged the Bush administration to demand an explanation from Germany.

"Just to see him free slays us," said Richard Stethem, father of the seaman whose beaten body was thrown onto a Beirut runway in 1985. [...]

A life sentence in Germany ranges between 20 and 25 years, with the possibility of parole after 15 years. Hamadi, now 41, was convicted in 1989, and the two years served prior to that were deemed part of his sentence. [...]

A senior State Department official said Hamadi was in "temporary custody" in Lebanon, although it was not clear where or when he was arrested.

Mr. McCormack said Washington was "talking to the Lebanese government" about bringing him to the United States, but that the issue was complicated by the lack of an extradition treaty with Lebanon.

Germany refused to extradite Hamadi to the United States because he could face the death penalty. It also argues that he has been punished for his crime....

Maybe Morgenthau had a point...


MORE:
Gonzales Asked Germany to Hold Hijacker (ANNE GEARAN, December 21, 2005, AP)

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales personally asked the German government not to release a terrorist accused of killing a Navy diver, but was rebuffed, the Bush administration said Wednesday.

Mohammed Ali Hamadi was freed on parole by German authorities after serving 19 years of a life sentence for the 1985 hijacking of a TWA plane during which a U.S. Navy diver was killed. The 17-day ordeal riveted the United States and brought Middle East terrorism home for many Americans.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:19 AM

BUILDING THE PERFECT CIRCLE:

Defending Science by Defining It (David Brown and Rick Weiss, December 21, 2005, Washington Post)

The ruling gives two arguments for why intelligent design is not science but is, in the judge's words, "an old religious argument for the existence of God."

The first is that intelligent design invokes "a supernatural designer," while science, by definition, deals only with natural phenomena. Second, the court found that intelligent design suffers from blatant flaws in logic, one of the chief tools of science.

Since the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, "science has been limited to the search for natural causes to explain natural phenomena," Jones writes, noting that the scientific revolution was explicitly about the rejection of "revelation" in favor of empirical evidence.

Since then, he writes, "science has been a discipline in which testability, rather than any ecclesiastical authority or philosophical coherence, has been the measure of a scientific idea's worth."

As part of that fact-based approach, Jones emphasizes, science goes out of its way to avoid a search for "meaning" or "purpose."

By contrast, intelligent design's views on how the world got to be the way it is offer no testable facts, choosing instead to rely on authoritative statements.


You can hardly make this stuff up. In the first place, he simply makes an authoritative statement himself, defining science in such a way that it banishes even the study of the Big Bang, which is by definition supernatural, having created Nature. As a logical matter, he's trapped himself in a tautology: only natural causes can be considered in science, therefore anything outside of Nature is unscientific, irrespective of whether it impacts phenomena. Truly, ignorance is bliss.

As to the notion that explanations of evolution are scientific, in the sense the judge contends,the greatest Darwinist of all time disposed of that one himself:

Darwin founded a new branch of life science, evolutionary biology. Four of his contributions to evolutionary biology are especially important, as they held considerable sway beyond that discipline. The first is the non-constancy of species, or the modern conception of evolution itself. The second is the notion of branching evolution, implying the common descent of all species of living things on earth from a single unique origin. Up until 1859, all evolutionary proposals, such as that of naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, instead endorsed linear evolution, a teleological march toward greater perfection that had been in vogue since Aristotle's concept of Scala Naturae, the chain of being. Darwin further noted that evolution must be gradual, with no major breaks or discontinuities. Finally, he reasoned that the mechanism of evolution was natural selection.

These four insights served as the foundation for Darwin's founding of a new branch of the philosophy of science, a philosophy of biology. Despite the passing of a century before this new branch of philosophy fully developed, its eventual form is based on Darwinian concepts. For example, Darwin introduced historicity into science. Evolutionary biology, in contrast with physics and chemistry, is a historical science - the evolutionist attempts to explain events and processes that have already taken place. Laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques for the explication of such events and processes. Instead one constructs a historical narrative, consisting of a tentative reconstruction of the particular scenario that led to the events one is trying to explain. [...]

One of the surprising things that I discovered in my work on the philosophy of biology is that when it comes to the physical sciences, any new theory is based on a law, on a natural law. Yet as several leading philosophers have stated, and I agree with them, there are no laws in biology like those of physics. Biologists often use the word law, but for something to be a law, it has to have no exceptions. A law must be beyond space and time, and therefore it cannot be specific. Every general truth in biology though is specific. Biological "laws" are restricted to certain parts of the living world, or certain localized situations, and they are restricted in time. So we can say that their are no laws in biology, except in functional biology which, as I claim, is much closer to the physical sciences, than the historical science of evolution.


Of course, Darwin too acknowledged that his theory wasn't based on any evidence, just faith:
When we descend to details, we can prove that no one species has changed (i.e. we cannot prove that a single species has changed): nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory. Nor can we explain why some species have changed and others have not.

...and was explicit, if accidentally so, that his motivation for inventing the theory was simply theological:
With respect to the theological view of the question. This is always painful to me. I am bewildered. I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see as plainly as others do, and as I should wish to do, evidence of design and beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice.

This escape from God is why Darwin was embraced, as Edward Larson explains in his fine book, Evolution:
By the 1870s, Darwin was an international celebrity. Even if people did not believe they descended from apes, they talked about it--and about Darwin. And for many of those who did believe, Darwin became a kind of secular prophet or high priest. Secluded in his remote country home at Downe, perpetually ill or supposedly so according to some, Darwin played the part of hermit sage receiving favored guests on his own terms. [...] Surveying the scene, Huxley sent Darwin a sketch of a kneeling supplicant paying homage at the shrine of Pope Darwin. Given their almost visceral contempt for Catholicism, both Huxley and Darwin surely enjoyed the irony.

Hardly a surprise then that 150 years on, Darwinism serves no scientific function, only a political one. And, in politics in a democracy, the minority never prevails for long.


MORE (via Tom Corcoran):
It’s God or Darwin: Competing designs (David Klinghoffer, 12/21/05, National Review)

Tuesday's ruling by a federal judge in Pennsylvania, disparaging intelligent design as a religion-based and therefore false science, raises an important question: If ID is bogus because many of its theorists have religious beliefs to which the controversial critique of Darwinism lends support, then what should we say about Darwinism itself? After all, many proponents of Darwinian evolution have philosophical beliefs to which Darwin lends support. [...]

In fact, both Darwin and design have metaphysical implications and are expressions of a certain kind of faith. ID theorists are not willing to submit to the assumption that material stuff is the only reality. Darwinism takes the opposite view, materialism, which assumes there can never be a supernatural reality.

In this it only follows Charles Darwin, who wrote the Origin of Species as an exercise in seeking to explain how life could have got to be the way it is without recourse to divine creative activity.


The judge's decision is anticonstitutional precisely because it establishes a state religion.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:12 AM

THEY TAKE THE BLAME, THEY GET THE CREDIT:

Presidential Prosperity Games (Robert J. Samuelson, December 21, 2005, Washington Post)

The economy is strong, but Bush isn't the cause. Consider some standard economic statistics:

For the past three years, gross domestic product (the economy's output) has grown at an annual rate of nearly 4 percent -- almost as good as the late 1990s.

Payroll jobs have increased by nearly 4.5 million since May 2003.

The unemployment rate of 5 percent is lower than the average for the 1990s (5.7 percent).

Productivity -- output per hour worked -- has been rising at a 3.3 percent rate since early 2003, faster than even the 1995-2000 average of 2.7 percent.

Good stuff. The White House's bubbly appraisal isn't just fluff. Households' net worth -- what people own minus what they owe -- is a record $51 trillion. If today's economic performance continued forever, we'd all be blessed. The trouble (for the White House, at least) is that many Americans don't seem impressed. In November, the Conference Board's consumer confidence index stood at 98.9, where an index of 100 indicates confidence levels in 1985. In 1985 unemployment was 7.2 percent.


To his credit, Mr. Samuelson writes the same column when presidents are being blamed for sketchy economic conditions, but no one listens then either. This is W's boom, even if he owes it all to Reagan and Volcker.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:09 AM

THE FUTURE PICTURED:

Chinese Police Bring Villagers To Heel After Latest Uprising (Edward Cody, 12/21/05, Washington Post )

Two weeks after a protest that culminated in gunfire and bloodshed, the rebellious farmers and fishermen of Dongzhou have been reduced to submission. Authorities have sealed off the seaside village and flooded its streets and lanes with police patrols, residents said, and an unknown number of men have been summoned by a knock on the door and hauled away for interrogation.

As a result, the spirit of defiance that pushed several thousand villagers to clash with riot troops and People's Armed Police on Dec. 6 has been replaced by fear, foreboding and resentment, according to conversations with a number of residents. Normal life has been suspended inside the community, they said, and outsiders who approached Monday were halted by police at a barrier with a sign that read: "Entry Not Allowed."

"We seldom go outside our houses anymore," said one villager contacted by telephone. "We seldom talk to other villagers. People are afraid to, because the police are patrolling all around the village. We are afraid that if we get together, they might arrest us for some reason or another."

Dongzhou, on the southeast edge of Shanwei city about 125 miles northeast of Hong Kong, has come under a wave of repression.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:02 AM

WHAT DEBT?:

Revenue Is Starting to Burn Holes in States' Pockets: Fiscal Posture Turns Around (T.R. Reid, December 21, 2005, Washington Post)

A $300 million tax refund in Hawaii. A full day of kindergarten for every 5-year-old in Delaware. A light-rail line from Denver's airport to downtown. Cheap health insurance for middle-class families in Illinois. Property tax cuts in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A new tram lift for Wyoming's biggest ski resort.

With legislatures from Augusta to Honolulu due to gather next month to approve spending for fiscal 2007, the states are awash in proposals such as these to take advantage of budget surpluses. After four tough years of tax increases and budget cuts, state governments are cautiously starting to spend again amid climbing tax revenues.

"Revenues improved notably in fiscal 2005, enabling many states to begin restoring funding to programs cut during the previous economic downturn," noted a Fiscal Survey of the States issued yesterday by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers.


When they faced budget shortfalls after the Greenspan slowdown of '00-'01, we were supposed to feel sorry for them and throw federal money their way. Now they're awash in money again and right back to squandering it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:52 AM

FRISTMASTIME IS HERE:

In Still-Busy Senate, Showdown Is Today (CARL HULSE, 12/21/05, NY Times)

Some are calling it Fristmastime on Capitol Hill.

Five days before the holiday, the Senate remains at work, poised for decisive votes Wednesday on major legislation. The results will determine whether the Congressional session ends on a triumphal note for Republicans, or whether Democrats will celebrate blocking Republican priorities like Arctic oil drilling and spending cuts.

"It is make it or break it," Senator Mel Martinez of Florida said Tuesday as he left a closed lunch where Republicans, led by the majority leader, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, had laid out strategy for the next 24 hours. [...]

The crucial votes now at hand deal not only with Arctic oil drilling and budget cuts but also with wartime military spending, Pentagon policy, and education and health care appropriations. Both parties have been marshaling their forces, making certain all senators will be on hand Wednesday. Democrats checked Tuesday on the status of Senators Jon Corzine, who is busy preparing to take office as governor of New Jersey, and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, who is recovering from knee surgery. Vice President Dick Cheney cut short a trip to South Asia and the Middle East so that he would be present if his vote was needed to break any ties.

Veteran legislators say that preholiday theater is not unusual and that Congressional leaders often use the calendar to try to enact measures that would never pass otherwise.

"I have been here 27 years, including, I think, two of those years on Christmas Eve," said Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia. "I actually observed fisticuffs between two of the most respected Republican senators ever to serve in this body on Christmas Eve."

As for Mr. Frist, he said he had no problem with working this close to the holiday.

"I used to be a surgeon," he said. "People got sick all the time on the 20th, the 21st."


If you ever wondered how the Democrats went from the majority to 40%, just look at what "victory" would mean for them and how it defines their party: more spending, higher taxes and gas prices, and weaker national security.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:45 AM

OKAY, NOW WE'RE CERTAIN THE TORIES WILL FIGURE IT OUT...:

Irish most happy, Brits most unhappy with EU (Teresa Küchler, 12/20/05, EUOBSERVER)

Support for the EU is declining among the union's citizens, according to a new commission survey, while Europeans generally back the idea of an EU constitution and reject Turkish EU accession.

The "Autumn Standard Eurobarometer", presented on Tuesday (20 December) reveals that an average of 50 percent of European citizens consider EU membership of their country "a good thing", down from 54 percent in spring this year. [...]

Of the 25 member states, Austria and the UK appear the most eurosceptic, with just 32 percent of Austrians and 33 percent of Brits saying EU membership is a good thing for their country, followed by Latvia (36 percent), Finland (38 percent) and Sweden and Hungary (both 39 percent).



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:41 AM

SUCKERS:

Damon jumps to Yankees (Gordon Edes and Chris Snow, December 21, 2005, Boston Globe)

A Red Sox offseason of discontent and upheaval took another shocking turn last night when free agent center fielder Johnny Damon, who had achieved rock star status in Boston, defected to the New York Yankees, agreeing in principle to a four-year, $52 million contract that will become official when he passes a physical.

He'll remind Yankee fans of Bernie Williams...of the last two years.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:34 AM

SOME FOLKS NEED KILLING (via Bryan Francoeur):

Cops say woman, son held by rapist for two days (Norman Miller, December 21, 2005, Boston Herald)

A lucky break probably saved the life of a Framingham woman who was kidnapped and viciously raped in front of her toddler son over nearly 48 hours, police say.

The woman’s nightmare ordeal only ended after she mouthed “help me” to a Plymouth liquor store clerk who happened to be a domestic violence counselor. The clerk called 911, leading to the woman’s dramatic rescue and the arrest of Evandro Doirado, 28, of Framingham. [...]

It began Saturday when, police said, Doirado believed he had stabbed a man to death in a botched drug deal.

“He wanted to ‘enjoy himself’ before he went to prison. Those are his words,” said Lt. Vincent Alfano. “Before I go to jail, I want to have a good time.’ ” Doirado picked out his victim at random in a Wal-Mart parking lot, Alfano said. “He approached her and kidnapped her by force with the child in the backseat.” Doirado drove the woman around Framingham, raping her several times and forcing her to withdraw $500 from an ATM machine. She was raped first in the parking lot of an apartment complex in Framingham then again in the lot of a Stop & Shop in Natick. She was also raped at a McDonald’s parking lot, but police said the woman does not recall where they were. Doriado made the woman drive to Plymouth, where he checked into the Pilgrim Sands motel, Plymouth District Attorney Timothy Cruz said.

“He basically committed unspeakable acts against her over two days,” Cruz said. “This is your worst nightmare here.”

And now, because it's the "humane thing" to do, her tax dollars go to support Doirado for the rest of his natural life.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:29 AM

AH, MODERN SCIENCE...:

Most dog bites aren't serious and can be avoided (Linda Wilson Fuoco, December 21, 2005, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

Teetering between fraud and the self-obvious.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:04 AM

THE LONELINESS OF THE LONG-DISTANCE STOIC

Stop apologising for being Christian (Simon Heffer, The Telegraph, December 21st, 2005)

So, in common with many who have suffered from the secularisation of the European mind since the mid-19th century, I must make my way down the Cresta Run to the grave without the considerable comfort of religion. However, as I do so, I rejoice wholeheartedly as an atheist that I live in a Christian culture, and I know that, in that undeniably hypocritical act, I am not alone.

Indeed, it is not just those who, like me, were born into Christian families who feel this way: so do many Muslims and Jews, and it is one of the reasons that they are so happy to live in our country and be surrounded by that culture.

It is bewildering, therefore, that there should apparently be people here who take such offence at Christmas, and against whom a brace of archbishops feel the need to take up their croziers. I suspect they are very few in number and exert an influence far in excess of their real strength. Like all extremists and bullies, they deserve no tolerance at all.

They might merit some of our pity: if they shut themselves off from the Christian culture, whether from the beauty of the liturgy, the serenity of church music, or from admiring the reticulated tracery of an east window, then their lives can only be deeply impoverished. They must also conduct a pretence that some of our most fundamental institutions are expressly Christian: notably our monarchy, and the Established Church of which our monarch is Supreme Governor. Parliament still begins each day's deliberations with prayers.

Our oldest schools and universities have intrinsic links with the Anglican Church. Our very system of justice is implicitly Christian. Our history is Christian since the dawn of the seventh century. More to the point, it is by the will of the majority, in our democracy, that all this remains so.[...]

The modern Left exercises a militant anti-Christianity not so much because of a cultural cringe in the face of immigrant minorities, but because of its general wish to dismantle history. Once you have erased Christianity, you have erased (or at least made appear irrelevant) much of the past 1,400 years. "Modernisation" in all its political forms is about the tabula rasa, and there are few ways of creating one of those so effective as the destruction of the traditional faith.

These are the noble sentiments of a civilized man, but it is hard to be overly-cheered by the thought that the future of Western civilization lies in the hands of decent atheists trying to defend their Christian heritage.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 5:58 AM

IF WE COULD JUST FEEL EACH OTHER’S PAIN

Canada-US relations: Why can’t we be friends?" (Brian Russell, Globe and Mail, December 20th, 2005)

Canada-U.S. relations are at their worst since the early 1960s, perhaps ever. One need only look quickly at the raft of concerns that have caused friction in the past five years to see the pattern - missile defence, softwood lumber, border security, beef, Iraq..... need I go on?[...]

The answer is not an economic one, it is social and cultural; the two countries are moving further apart. On almost every important social issue you can think of the U.S as a nation (not just its government) is, or has moved, to the right while Canada has not. Regional differences matter, but on major social issues the U.S is a more conservative, southern country than ever before. It is also taking a view of its role in the world that is both narrower (for us or against us) and broader (democratic evangelism) at the same time.

The result of this disconnect is a much stronger distrust on both sides of the border. More Canadians regard the U.S. as the home of rabid fanatics and more Americans regard Canada as host to virtual pacifist socialism. This distrust has led to animosity in Canada against any intimation of American dominance or leadership and a knee-jerk anti-Americanism. It has also led to an increasing isolation of Canada in the corridors of power in Washington and a concomitant diminution of influence.

The problem of distrust and ignorance is spreading its tentacles into every aspect of the relationship. The most obvious examples are economic, but the reason the Prime Minister feels it is good politics to America-bash is because it is. It speaks to a significant stream in Canada's national consciousness. This stream is soon to become a dangerous whitewater rafting destination unless it is diverted and emptied, not by passive acquiescence but by a new commitment to reality on both sides.[...]

Canada and the U.S. need to throw out the hoary stereotypes and develop a new relationship based on a shared understanding of what each is today. Both sides need to challenge their assumptions about the other and look beyond the past. A binational dialogue and increases in exchanges would be a start. This new relationship may not be warm and fuzzy, but it will certainly be more realistic and productive. After the initial shock wears off, we might actually like each other.

Dialogue and exchanges, that’s the ticket. In the spirit of improving cross-border relations, Brothersjudd is pleased to announce we will be hosting a workshop on Canadian-American relations, at which Orrin Judd, Robert Schwartz and Raoul Ortega will try to help their Canadian neighbours shed a few hoary stereotypes about rabid fanatics.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

HARD TO GO WRONG WITH PECANS:

Cranberry-Pecan Quick Bread (The Splendid Table)

From The New England Table by Lora Brody. © 2005 by Lora Brody. Used with permission of Chronicle Books LLC, San Francisco, CA.

Makes 1 loaf

* 2 cups (10 ounces) unbleached all-purpose flour
* 1 1/2 teaspoons baking powder
* 1/2 teaspoon baking soda
* 1/4 teaspoon salt
* 1/4 teaspoon ground cloves
* 1/4 teaspoon ground cardamom
* 6 tablespoons (3/4 stick; 3 ounces) unsalted butter, melted
* 2/3 cup (6 ounces) buttermilk (see note)
* Finely grated zest and juice of 1 large navel orange
* 1 extra-large egg
* 2/3 cup (5.34 ounces) granulated sugar
* 1 cup (4 ounces) fresh or frozen whole cranberries, coarsely chopped
* 3/4 cup (3 ounces) pecans, toasted (see note) and coarsely chopped

Preheat the oven to 350°F with the rack in the center position. Butter an 8 1/2-by-4-by-2 1/2-inch loaf pan. Dust with flour and shake the pan to coat the inside. Knock out the excess. Set aside.

Sift the flour, baking powder, baking soda, salt, cloves, and cardamom into a medium mixing bowl. Set aside. Combine the melted butter, buttermilk, and orange zest and juice in a small bowl. Set aside.

Use a whisk or a handheld or stand mixer on high speed to beat together the egg and sugar in a large mixing bowl until they are thick and light yellow in color. Whisk in or beat in on low speed the melted butter mixture. Scrape down the sides of the bowl with a rubber spatula several times during the mixing. Stir or mix in the flour mixture and finally the cranberries and nuts just to combine. Pour and scrape the batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with the rubber spatula.

Bake until a cake tester inserted in the center of the loaf comes out clean, 55 to 60 minutes. Transfer the pan to a wire rack and let the bread cool in the pan for 15 minutes, then turn the loaf out onto the rack. Set it right side up to cool completely before slicing.

The baked and cooled loaf can be stored at room temperature, wrapped in plastic wrap, for up to 2 days, or refrigerated for up to 1 week. It may also be frozen for up to 3 months.

Note: Powdered buttermilk, found in the baking section of most supermarkets, eliminates the need to keep fresh buttermilk in the refrigerator. Simply add to your recipe with the dry ingredients the amount of powder specified on the package, then substitute water for the buttermilk called for in the recipe. Store the powdered buttermilk in the refrigerator for up to 1 year.

Note: To toast pecans, preheat the oven to 350°F with the rack in the center position. Place the nuts on a heavy-duty, rimmed baking sheet in a single layer and bake, stirring occasionally, until they are golden brown and fragrant, 10 to 12 minutes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THE 'TRANE HAS LEFT THE STATION:

Jazz Gem Made in '57 Is a Favorite of 2005 (BEN RATLIFF, 12/21/05, NY Times)

My favorite jazz record released this year, and one of my favorites of any year, was made in 1957. I first heard "Thelonious Monk Quartet With John Coltrane at Carnegie Hall" (Blue Note) at the Library of Congress in April, after the news of its discovery had been made public. It sounded pretty good then, but you can never really tell when hearing something over a high-quality sound system in front of interested parties. I have listened to it repeatedly since, and it seems to be much better than I first thought - solid, juicy, truly great.

Another of the year's new jazz records - John Coltrane's "One Down, One Up: Live at the Half Note" (Impulse) - was made in 1965. It disqualifies itself from consideration for my list of the year's best jazz albums only because it has been heard, in bits and pieces, on illegal tapes for 40 years. (I got mine from a great saxophonist who wanted to spread the word.) But it is also, I think, a masterpiece.

There's a reason why these records stand out as the year's best, and I get the sense that many people feel they know that reason.

They believe, or have heard, that jazz crinkled up and collapsed after Coltrane. That the musicians have defaulted on audiences, going deep into their own heads instead. That there's been no successor, because Coltrane broke the mold, threw away the key, set the bar too high, stretched the envelope as far as it would go, established a holding pattern, and other truth-obscuring clichés.

It would simplify things, but no. In fact, I don't think the reason has much to do with Coltrane per se - other than the obvious fact that he made superior music. (He did create a few stock models in jazz that persisted for an impressively long period after his death, but that's a different matter.)

These are among the year's great albums because they are high-quality proofs of one of jazz's basic properties: the possibility for transcendence on the gig, for a great band to be even better. This is true in any kind of music, but it is much more true in jazz.



December 20, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:19 PM

THAT'S REASONABLE WITH A SMALL "R":

1st Amendment 'doesn't create church-state wall of separation' (WorldNetDaily.com, December 20, 2005)

Writing for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Richard Suhrheinrich said the ACLU's "repeated reference 'to the separation of church and state' ... has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."

Suhrheinrich wrote: "The ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that ... the government [is kept] out of the religion business,' does not embody the reasonable person."

The court said a reasonable observer of Mercer County's display appreciates "the role religion has played in our governmental institutions, and finds it historically appropriate and traditionally acceptable for a state to include religious influences, even in the form of sacred texts, in honoring American traditions."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:15 PM

EVEN WORSE THAN THE ITALIANS, AGAIN:

Germany frees killer of U.S. diver (Chris Burns, 12/20/05, CNN)

A Hezbollah militant sentenced to life in Germany for murdering a U.S. Navy diver during the 1985 hijacking of a U.S. jetliner has been freed, officials said.

The German government denied on Tuesday the release was related to the freeing of a German hostage in Iraq.


At least when the Italians bought their hostage there was a chance the money might not end up being successfully spent to kill Americans, the Germans traded a guy who already has.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:36 PM

YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN, TOMMY (via Rick Turley):

We won't be seen to support the war, says M&S as it refuses to send gifts to British troops (Colin Freeman in Baghdad and Jasper Copping, 18/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

[W]ith Christmas just around the corner, soldiers from the Royal Irish Regiment wrote to five leading stores back home and asked for some stocking-fillers to give the troops next weekend.

But not only were they dismayed to get nothing more than a solitary teddy bear from Harrods, they have been told by Marks & Spencer that it cannot give them any gifts in case it is seen as support for the war.

James Norrie, the M&S customer services manager wrote: "We do appreciate that work like yours is very valuable but unfortunately it is simply not possible for us to support every request. Please be assured that community work is very important to us."

But when contacted by the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Norrie insisted that the request had been properly considered, adding: "The letter I sent was what I had been instructed to send by my supervisor, who said we couldn't send anything out as it would look like we would be supporting the war in Iraq. To my understanding, we can't be seen to be supporting the Labour Government's war."



Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:30 PM

MEMO TO MEL:

Foxman: Spielberg's 'Munich' treats Israel fairly (HILARY LEILA KRIEGER, Dec. 20, 2005, Jerusalem Post)

Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman on Tuesday defended Steven Spielberg's new film Munich from criticism that it morally equates Israel with terrorists and is historically inaccurate.

"We do not think this is an attack on Israel. We do not think this is a film of moral equivalency," Foxman told a group of journalists.


Next time put Jim Caviezel in a kaffiya and Abe Foxman will help you sell tickets.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:04 PM

SCRATCH A GENOCIDAL MANIAC FIND AN APPLIED DARWINIST (via Brian Boys):

Stalin's half-man, half-ape super-warriors (CHRIS STEPHEN AND ALLAN HALL, 12/20/05, The Scotsman)

THE Soviet dictator Josef Stalin ordered the creation of Planet of the Apes-style warriors by crossing humans with apes, according to recently uncovered secret documents.

Moscow archives show that in the mid-1920s Russia's top animal breeding scientist, Ilya Ivanov, was ordered to turn his skills from horse and animal work to the quest for a super-warrior.

According to Moscow newspapers, Stalin told the scientist: "I want a new invincible human being, insensitive to pain, resistant and indifferent about the quality of food they eat."


The problem with Homo Sovieticus was one of the soul, not the genes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:41 PM

THE TERRORISTS HAD TO KNOW BUT I WAS SHOCKED:

Bush’s Snoopgate: The president was so desperate to kill The New York Times’ eavesdropping story, he summoned the paper’s editor and publisher to the Oval Office. But it wasn’t just out of concern about national security. (Jonathan Alter, 12/26/05, Newsweek)

No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story. The Times will not comment on the meeting, but one can only imagine the president’s desperation.

The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations.


Isn't the real problem that the Americal Left both didn't think we were listening to those with ties to extremists and thinks it not a normal and predictable thing to do in wartime?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:32 PM

I DON'T CARE IF IT'S A DISASTER IN THE MAKING, THERE ARE A BILLION OF THEM!:

Big Enough To Know Better: China has grown for three decades at a pace no other country has ever sustained. But 2006 may be the year when we begin to see problems. (Fareed Zakaria, 12/26/05, Newsweek)

Most people don't really understand China's economic story. It looks like an oxymoron: central planning that works. As a result, many assume that, like Japan in the 1980s, China will stumble and collapse. But this misreads the two situations. Japan was a relatively small country that had become a huge economy by turning very modern. In that era its per capita GDP was almost the same as America's, about $30,000. But growing a supersophisticated economy required that every aspect of Japan's society be modern. As it turned out, there was much in Japan, from its banking system to its politics, that was not.

China is a different story. Its per capita GDP, even after this revision, is just $1,700. At some point, it will face all the kinds of problems Japan did. But well before that, it will surely be able to double its GDP to $3,400 per capita, which would bring it up to Brazil's level. When that happens, China, because it has 1.3 billion people, will be the second largest economy in the world. Size matters.


Why? Why does the agglomeration of an enormous number of poor people into one unsustainable administrative unit matter, other than in negative terms for that state?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:26 PM

ROME LOST TO ITS RELIGIOUS MINORITY TOO:

Fiddling After Paris Burned: A month after widespread riots, France's efforts to address the 'root causes' of the unrest are looking more and more like purely cosmetic changes. (Eric Pape and Christopher Dickey, 12/20/05, Newsweek International)

For now, at least, the fires have died out—but an acrid bitterness still hangs in the air. Ask those on the football pitch behind the high wire fences of Montfermeil. Year after year, coach Kaddor Slimane, a son of Algerian immigrants who grew up in neighboring projects, has seen his teams win their league's sportsmanship award. Yet what does their good behavior mean in the "outside" world, where they are seen through the lens of limitations and stereotypes? "The French are racist," he says. "They just don't want to admit it." Life in the projects isn't so bad when you are a child, says Amad, a 24-year-old community activist who declined to give his last name for fear of racist attacks. "But once you reach a certain age, you're fed up. There's nothing to do except play soccer or hang out," in voiceless exile from the "other" France.

The politicians whose inaction and confusion (and seeming indifference) contributed to the violence, on the other hand, have rediscovered their voices. Almost as if the riots never happened, many are once again speaking in familiar platitudes and posturing about law and order. "All those who participated in the riots will have to pay, today or tomorrow," France's Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy declared on Dec. 15 at an homage to injured police and firefighters. Then he waded into the crowd, alongside his political rival, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, for handshakes and photos.

For a brief moment, in the immediate aftermath of the riots, genuine change seemed possible.


To whom? Did anyone really think watching minorities explode in anger was going to make the French less nativist?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:22 PM

STARVE THE TAXEATERS:

Transit union calls strike in NYC (Desmond Butler, December 20, 2005, Associated Press)

Subways and buses ground to a halt Tuesday morning as transit workers walked off the job at the height of the holiday shopping and tourist season, forcing millions of riders to find new ways to get around.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who had said the strike would cost the city as much as $400 million a day, joined the throngs of people crossing the Brooklyn Bridge as he walked from a Brooklyn emergency headquarters to City Hall.

"It's a form of terrorism, if you ask me,'' said Maria Negron, who walked across the bridge. "I hope they go back to work.''


No political issue is more important to America's future than breaking the public service unions.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:17 PM

NO GO, GONZO:

A shortstop solution (David Lefort, 12/20/05, Boston.com)

Tony Graffanino surprisingly accepted the Red Sox’ arbitration offer on Monday, meaning he is essentially signed for 2006 (though the Sox could trade or release him during spring training). His return creates a logjam at second base, with the newly acquired Mark Loretta already penciled in as the starter.

Where does that leave Graffanino? One option is to make him a utilityman, though Alex Cora seems a better fit in that role. Another possibility the Sox should consider is to move either Loretta or Graffanino to shortstop, a position both have played at some point during their careers.

On the surface, moving someone across the infield to play such an important position doesn’t seem like a good idea; but consider the facts ...

# Defense: Graffanino and Loretta have made a combined 421 appearances at shortstop, with Loretta owning the lion’s share with 328. Graffanino made 13 errors in 339 chances (.962 fielding percentage, which is eight points better than Renteria’s 2005 percentage), and Loretta had 21 errors in 1,213 chances. Only two shortstops in major league baseball last season had a better fielding percentage than Loretta’s career .983 mark at short. Let that sink in for a minute.

What about zone rating and range factor? Both Graffanino and Loretta have similar numbers in those categories (at the shortstop position) as Gonzalez, who is considered one of the best defensive shortstops in the National League.


There's just no getting around that career .290 on-base percentage for Alex Gonzalez.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:23 PM

HILL AND HARRY ON THE SPOT:

Bush Insists on Tools to Fight Terror: The president sharply defends domestic spying without court approval and calls Senate's failure to renew the Patriot Act 'inexcusable.' (Edwin Chen and Janet Hook, December 20, 2005, LA Times)

In an unusually personal challenge, he called on Democratic senators from California, Nevada and New York to justify their votes to delay the law's extension. "I want senators from New York or Los Angeles or Las Vegas to go home and explain why these cities are safer," Bush said.

Bush's pugnacious performance in the nearly hourlong news conference seemed a contrast to Sunday evening, when he delivered a televised speech on the war in Iraq that was notable for its conciliatory tone toward his critics.

On Monday, the president was talking not about Iraq, on which his policies are widely unpopular, but about law enforcement measures against suspected terrorists in the United States — an issue on which he has won, and held, consistent public support.


With such a large majority of Americans and a majority in the Congress supporting renewal of the Patriot Act he could hardly pick a better issue to face off with the Democratic leadership over.

MORE:
President Takes the Offensive With Press (Michael A. Fletcher, December 20, 2005, Washington Post)

News conferences have never been President Bush's favorite venue, which is probably the main reason he's held fewer than any modern president. But any discomfort he felt yesterday was for the most part well concealed.

In the face of repeated skeptical questions on the Iraq war and whether he acted within the law in ordering a domestic spying program, Bush apparently decided that a passionate offense was his best defense. In a morning event in the White House East Room, he answered questions for 56 minutes, sometimes conveying humor, sometimes impatience, but never anything less than full confidence in his own answers. [...]

The morning's dominant impression was of a president who feels so strongly about his own presidential prerogatives that he was ready to take on all comers who might disagree.


CIVIL LIBERTIES & SECURITY: DEMS FOR TERROR (Dick Morris, December 20, 2005, NY Post)
ANYONE who wonders whether the Democratic Party in general and Sen. Hillary Clinton in particular are really tough on terror — or are just posing for the cameras — needs to look at the vote by the entire Democratic Senate delegation (excepting only Nebraska's Ben Nelson and South Dakota's Tim Johnson) to prevent closure of their filibuster against the Patriot Act extension. [...]

One of the key provisions due to expire in two weeks is one that President Bill Clinton presented as the cornerstone of his response to the escalation of terrorism in the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

The measure allows "roving wiretaps" — so that the FBI can tap all phones a suspect uses, rather than just one specific number. Hillary's vote to let this provision expire is incredible.

Back in the '90s, the Republican-controlled Congress refused to enact the legislation promptly — and the Clintons excoriated the GOP for dragging its feet on this vital proposal.


It's no coincidence that Larry Craig is the leader of Republicans opposing the current measure, his state being a locus of white separatist movements.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:12 PM

CAN'T BE GOOD FOR THE TICKER:

Spending Cuts May Require Cheney Tiebreaker (ANDREW TAYLOR, 12/20/05, Associated Press)

A Senate vote on a deficit-reduction bill looks to be so tight that Vice President
Dick Cheney was rushing home from an overseas diplomatic mission to be the tiebreaker for saving one of the Bush administration's top priorities.

The showdown vote loomed on the bill, which would cut some federal benefits and trim budget deficits by $40 billion through the end of the decade.

Cheney was in Pakistan Tuesday to check on U.S. aid to victims of an October earthquake that killed as estimated 75,000 people. He also met with President Pervez Musharraf.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:08 PM

HOW ABOUT TAKING DOWN ONE LETTER FOR EACH EXECUTION?:

Schwarzenegger to Hometown: Remove My Name ( JENNIFER COLEMAN, 12/20/05, Associated Press)

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday told officials in his hometown in Austria to remove his name from a sports stadium and stop using his identity to promote the city.

The governor's request came after politicians in Graz began a petition drive to rename the stadium, reacting to Schwarzenegger's decision last week to deny clemency to condemned inmate Stanley Tookie Williams. Opposition to the death penalty is strong in Austria.

In a letter that began ``Dear Mister Mayor,'' Schwarzenegger said he decided to spare the Graz city council ``further concern'' should he be forced to make other clemency decisions while he's governor. Another inmate is scheduled to be executed in California Jan. 17.

``In all likelihood, during my term as governor, I will have to make similar and equally difficult decisions,'' Schwarzenegger said in the letter.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:04 PM

SO MUCH FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Judge Bars 'Intelligent Design' From Pa. Classes (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, 12/20/05)

"Intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.

Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said. [...]

Jones wrote that he wasn't saying the intelligent design concept shouldn't be studied and discussed, saying its advocates "have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors."

But, he wrote, "our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."


Thou shalt have no other God but Darwin....

MORE (via Dale Light):
Is string theory in trouble? (Amanda Gefter, 17 December 2005, NewScientist.com)

Ever since Albert Einstein wondered whether the world might have been different, physicists have been searching for a “theory of everything” to explain why the universe is the way it is. Now string theory, one of today's leading candidates, is in trouble. A growing number of physicists claim it is ill-defined and based on crude assumptions. Something fundamental is missing, they say. The main complaint is that rather than describing one universe, the theory describes 10500, each with different constants of nature, even different laws of physics.

But the inventor of string theory, physicist Leonard Susskind, sees this “landscape” of universes as a solution rather than a problem.

Is it premature to invoke anthropic arguments - which assume that the conditions for life are extremely improbable - when we don't know how to define life?

The logic of the anthropic principle requires the strong assumption that our kind of life is the only kind possible. Why should we presume that all life is like us - carbon-based, needs water, and so forth? How do we know that life cannot exist in radically different environments? If life could exist without galaxies, the argument that the cosmological constant seems improbably fine-tuned for life would lose all of its force. And we don't know that life of all kinds can't exist in a wide variety of circumstances, maybe in all circumstances. It a valid objection. But in my heart of hearts, I just don't believe that life could exist in the interior of a star, for instance, or in a black hole.

Is it possible to test the landscape idea through observation?

One idea is to look for signs that space is negatively curved, meaning the geometry of space-time is saddle-shaped as opposed to flat or like the surface of a sphere. It's a long shot but not as unlikely as I previously thought. Inflation tells us that our observable universe likely began in a different vacuum state, that decayed into our current vacuum state. It's hard to believe that's the whole story. It seems more probable that our universe began in some other vacuum state with a much higher cosmological constant, and that the history of the multiverse is a series of quantum tunnelling events from one vacuum to another. If our universe came out of another, it must be negatively curved, and we might see evidence of that today on the largest scales of the cosmic microwave background. So the landscape, at least in principle, is testable.

If we do not accept the landscape idea are we stuck with intelligent design?

I doubt that physicists will see it that way. If, for some unforeseen reason, the landscape turns out to be inconsistent - maybe for mathematical reasons, or because it disagrees with observation - I am pretty sure that physicists will go on searching for natural explanations of the world. But I have to say that if that happens, as things stand now we will be in a very awkward position. Without any explanation of nature's fine-tunings we will be hard pressed to answer the ID critics. One might argue that the hope that a mathematically unique solution will emerge is as faith-based as ID.


My faith is better than your faith.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:56 PM

ENDGAME:

Pakistan comes out fighting (Syed Saleem Shahzad, 12/21/05, Asia Times)

With a number of regional oil and gas pipeline projects involving Pakistan in the offing, Islamabad is determined to take advantage of them, both in terms of potential transit revenue and in meeting the country's growing energy needs.

The problem, though, is that the projects involve highly restive Balochistan province, where tribals have for years waged a low-intensity rebellion against the central government, in part to demand a better share of the economic pie of the resource-rich province.

Now the Pakistan government wants to secure the region once and for all, and believes that the only way to do it is through forcibly "urbanizing" Balochistan's tribes.


The War on Terror has always been destined to end in the tribal areas of western Pakistan, which are essentially ungoverned.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:54 PM

HE KEEPS GOOSESTEPPING ALONG BUT NO ONE'S FOLLOWING:

Iran Music Ban Falls on Deaf Ears (AP, Dec. 20, 2005)

Hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's ban on Western music fell on deaf ears Tuesday, as shop owners and music enthusiasts in the Iranian capital continued selling, buying and listening to everything from hip-hop to country rock.

The official IRAN Persian daily reported Monday that Ahmadinejad, as head of the Supreme Cultural Revolutionary Council, ordered the enactment of an October ruling by the council to ban all Western music, including classical music, on state broadcast outlets.

"This president speaks as if he is living in the Stone Age. This man has to understand that he can't tell the people what to listen to and what not to listen to," said Mohammed Reza Hosseinpour as he browsed through a Tehran music shop.

The shop's owner said he did not expect the president's ban to be implemented.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:51 PM

MAKING GREENSPAN A USURER:

Producer Prices Fall More Than Expected; Housing Starts Strong (Fox News, December 20, 2005)

U.S. producer prices fell a larger-than-expected 0.7 percent last month, the biggest drop in 2-1/2 years, according to a government report on Tuesday that showed prices well contained outside of the volatile food and energy areas.

The drop in the producer price index, a gauge of prices received by farms, factories and refineries, was the largest since April 2003 and reflected a 4 percent drop in energy costs, which swamped a 0.5 percent gain in food prices, the Labor Department said.

The so-called core PPI, which strips out those volatile costs to provide a better gauge of underlying inflation pressures, edged up just 0.1 percent. [...]

[C]ore producer prices have risen just 1.7 percent over the last year.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:43 PM

SOCIETY, NOT THE STATE:

When government withers (Suzanne Mettler, 12/20/05, CS Monitor)

These budget cuts continue a quarter century of governance guided largely by the idea that, in Ronald Reagan's words, "Government is not the solution ... government is the problem." But an assessment of these decades reveals that as government's role in citizens' lives diminishes, so, too, does active civic engagement. [...]

But since the mid-1970s, younger generations of Americans have disengaged from politics. Participation in voting, for instance, has plummeted among the young and less advantaged. Not even the higher turnout rates in the exceptional 2004 election brought levels back to where they had been: Among 18-29-year-olds, 61 percent of those with some college education voted, compared with 73 percent in 1972, and 34 percent of those with no college voted compared with 42 percent in 1972. This year's Election Day featured dismal turnout rates.


Huh? The point of withering the government is to get people to depend less on it, so of course they begin to care less about it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:34 PM

NOT JUST UNDENIABLE, DESIRABLE:

Germany Talks Torture, and Finds Hypocrisy: To torture or not to torture. That, surprisingly, has become a burning question in Germany this week. Germany's new interior minister has drawn fire for saying authorities must act on information from terror suspects even if it was obtained unlawfully. Is he condoning prisoner abuse or just being realistic? (David Crossland, 12/20/05, Der Spiegel)

The hypocrisy is undeniable. Germany has been condemning the detention without trial of terror suspects by the US and other countries while at the same time secretly sending agents to interrogate them.

The new interior minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, said last week that German intelligence officers had interviewed one prisoner being held in a Syrian jail that human rights groups say tortures prisoners, and one in Guantanamo Bay. The frank admission came as a surprise, but Schäuble wasn't finished. He went on to say Germany couldn't afford to ignore information provided by suspects even if it may have been obtained illegally.

"It would be completely irresponsible if we were to say that we don't use information where we cannot be sure that it was obtained in conditions that were wholly in line with the rule of law. We have to use such information," Schäuble told the Stuttgarter Zeitung newspaper. He added that German intelligence officers were not allowed to take part in any torture or "to expect, so to speak with a nudge and a wink, that torture takes place," he added.


Honesty is always hypocritical.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:27 PM

WANT TO SEE DEMOCRAT HEADS EXPLODE?:

A president can pull the trigger (John Yoo, December 20, 2005, LA Times)

Neither presidents nor Congress have ever acted under the belief that the Constitution requires a declaration of war before the U.S. can engage in military hostilities abroad. Although this nation has used force abroad more than 100 times, it has declared war only five times: the War of 1812, the Mexican-American and Spanish-American Wars, and World Wars I and II. Without declarations of war or any other congressional authorization, presidents have sent troops to fight Chinese Communists in Korea, to remove Manuel Noriega from power in Panama and to prevent human rights disasters in the Balkans. Other conflicts, such as the Persian Gulf War, received "authorization" from Congress but not declarations of war.

Critics of these wars want to upend this long practice by appeals to an "original understanding" of the Constitution. The Constitution, however, does not set out a clear process for starting war. Congress has the power to "declare war," but this clause allows Congress to establish the nation's legal status under international law. The framers wouldn't have equated "declaring" war with beginning a military conflict — indeed, in the 100 years before the Constitution, the British only once "declared" war at the start of a conflict.

Further, the Constitution specifies no step-by-step process to govern war-making, yet it is specific every other time it imposes shared power on the executive and legislative branches.

Why no strict war-making process? Because the framers understood that war would require the speed, decisiveness and secrecy that only the presidency could bring. "Energy in the executive," Alexander Hamilton argued in the Federalist Papers, "is a leading character in the definition of good government. It is essential to the protection of the community against foreign attacks."

And, he continued, "the direction of war most peculiarly demands those qualities which distinguish the exercise of power by a single hand."

Instead of specifying a legalistic process to begin war, the framers wisely created a fluid political process in which legislators would use their funding power to control war.


How about a recess appointment to O'Connor's seat for Professor Yoo?

MORE:
Legal Analysis of the NSA Domestic Surveillance Program (Orin Kerr, 12/19/05, Volokh Conspiracy)

On the whole, I think there are some pretty decent arguments that this program did not violate the Fourth Amendment under existing precedent. There are a bunch of different arguments here, but let me focus on two: the border search exception and a national security exception. Neither is a slam dunk, by any means, but each are plausible arguments left open by the cases.

The border search exception permits searches at the border of the United States "or its functional equivalent." United States v. Montoya De Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531, 538 (1985). The idea here is that the United States as a sovereign has a right to inspect stuff entering or exiting the country as a way of protecting its sovereign interests, and that the Fourth Amendment permits such searches. Courts have applied the border search exception in cases of PCs and computer hard drives; if you bring a computer into or out of the United States, the government can search your computer for contraband or other prohibited items at the airport or wherever you are entering or leaving the country. See, e.g., United States v. Ickes, 393 F.3d 501 (4th Cir. 2005) (Wilkinson, J.).

As I understand it, all of the monitoring involved in the NSA program involved international calls (and international e-mails). That is, the NSA was intercepting communications in the U.S., but only communications going outside the U.S. or coming from abroad. I'm not aware of any cases applying the border search exception to raw data, as compared to the search of a physical device that stores data, so this is untested ground. At the same time, I don't know of a rationale in the caselaw for treating data differently than physical storage devices. The case law on the border search exception is phrased in pretty broad language, so it seems at least plausible that a border search exception could apply to monitoring at an ISP or telephone provider as the "functional equivalent of the border," much like airports are the functional equivalent of the border in the case of international airline travel. [UPDATE: A number of people have contacted me or left comments expressing skepticism about this argument. In response, let me point out the most persuasive case on point: United States v. Ramsey, holding that the border search exception applies to all international postal mail, permitting all international postal mail to be searched. Again, this isn't a slam dunk, but I think a plausible argument -- and with dicta that seems to say that mode of transportation is not relevant.]

The government would have a second argument in case a court doesn't accept the border search exception: the open question of whether there is a national security exception to the Fourth Amendment that permits the government to conduct searches and surveillance for foreign intelligence surveillance.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:52 AM

THE NEW ALIGNMENT IN ACTION:

A fateful finale at WTO (Keith Bradsher, 12/19/05, The New York Times)

What changed in those 30 hours was the result of a series of deals by ministers from around the world who stayed up all night in nonstop talks.

The European Union, faced with being blamed for a collapse of negotiations, changed course and introduced a crucial proposal on agriculture.

India, the champion of the developing world since the days of Gandhi but now a computer programming power as well, played a crucial intermediary role in persuading poor countries to accept portions of the agreement calling for freer trade in services like telecommunications and banking.

And the Venezuelan delegation, forced to decide whether it would bring the entire negotiations to a halt over its objections to the provisions on services, backed down at the last moment and allowed the Hong Kong Declaration to be approved by consensus.

So our ally (India) was key and the bad guys (EU and Hugo) lost.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 8:45 AM

YES, I’M COMIN’ BACK TO SERVE A SECOND TERM

Bush’s support jumps after long decline
(MSN, December 20th, 2005)

President Bush's approval rating has surged in recent weeks, reversing what had been an extended period of decline, with Americans now expressing renewed optimism about the future of democracy in Iraq, the campaign against terrorism and the U.S. economy, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News Poll.

Bush's overall approval rating rose to 47 percent, from 39 percent in early November, with 52 percent saying they disapprove of how he is handling his job. His approval rating on Iraq jumped 10 percentage points since early November, to 46 percent, while his rating on the economy rose 11 points, to 47 percent. A clear majority, 56 percent, said they approve of the way Bush is handling the fight against terrorism -- a traditional strong point in his reputation that nonetheless had flagged to 48 percent in the November poll.[...]

The Post-ABC News poll suggests that the massive turnout in last week's elections in Iraq, coupled with a public relations offensive in which the president delivered five speeches and held one news conference in 19 days, have delivered a substantial year-end dividend to a president badly in need of good news.

Imagine the rage leftists must feel when their carefully crafted political fantasies are undermined by successive huge crowds of Iraqis braving death to vote.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:28 AM

OSAMA AIN'T A CITIZEN:

Legal Test Was Seen as Hurdle to Spying: Some say the court's tougher standard of 'probable cause' led to the surveillance order. (Richard B. Schmitt and David G. Savage, December 20, 2005, LA Times)

The 1978 law creating the secret tribunal, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, authorizes intelligence gathering in cases in which the government can establish "probable cause" that the target is working for a "foreign power" or is involved in terrorism.

In briefing reporters Monday, Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales said that President Bush's 2002 order allowed for surveillance in cases in which officials had "a reasonable basis" to conclude that one of the parties to the communication had terrorist links. Those judgments were made not by a court, as the law provides, but by shift supervisors at the National Security Agency.

Some experts said that easier-to-satisfy "reasonable basis" standard probably was a key reason for the administration's decision. "It is certainly different than probable cause," said Michael J. Woods, a Washington lawyer and former head of the national security law unit at the FBI. "That, in my mind, is a much more likely reason why they maintained this" surveillance program.


So long as it involves foreigners, a sneaking suspicion will satisfy most Americans.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:16 AM

TOOKIE WON'T DO THE SAME:

Clarke orders inquiry after robber freed to kill (LAURA ROBERTS, 12/20/05, The Scotsman)

CHARLES Clarke, the Home Secretary, has announced an urgent investigation into why a violent robber and convicted drug dealer was released on parole to kill the financier John Monckton.

Damien Hanson, 24, was granted parole after partially completing a 12-year prison sentence for attempted murder - even though parole board members had never met him.

The process of interviewing offenders had been scrapped four months previously.

Three months later, Hanson fatally stabbed John Monckton and seriously injured his wife, Homeyra, at their home in Chelsea, London.

Hanson had been in and out of prison since the age of 14 and an official assessment had put his chances of reoffending at 91 per cent.


Ah, the tender sensibilities of the Euros--so instead of executing their Hansons they collaborate in the murder of their Moncktons.

MORE:
Not that they have any genuine regard for life, Drink deaths jump 350% in 20 years (HAMISH MACDONELL, 12/20/05, The Scotsman)

THE extraordinary rise in Scotland's alcohol culture was exposed in new figures published yesterday, which showed a massive 350 per cent rise in drink- related deaths in the last 20 years.

In 1984, 597 Scots died from alcohol-related illnesses. By last year this had risen to 2,052: 1,515 men and 537 women.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:03 AM

ARE THE HOSPITAL MATTRESSES STUFFED WITH THE HAIR OF MURDERED JEWS?:

Chinese inmates' organs for sale to Britons (Richard Spencer, December 20, 2005, LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH)

A Chinese company has begun marketing kidneys, livers and other organs from executed prisoners to sick Britons in need of transplants.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:00 AM

ONE SMALL MILESTONE FOR ISLAM...:

Karzai praises Afghan rebirth (John Roland and Bill Sammon, December 20, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Police and soldiers sealed off blocks around the parliament building, where Vice President Dick Cheney; his wife, Lynne; and dozens of foreign dignitaries watched [President Hamid] Karzai speak to the 351 new members of the bicameral National Assembly.

"Today marks a new beginning for Afghanistan," declared Mr. Karzai, who broke down in tears toward the end of his more than one-hour oration.

"This immortal phoenix, this beloved Afghanistan, once again rose from the ashes of invasion and subjugation," he said. "We have the right to declare to all those who aspire the destruction of our soil that this country will never be vanquished."

Mr. Cheney described the ceremony as "another milestone" in the democratization of the Muslim world.

...one giant millstone for the Islamicists.

MORE:
Cheney and Afghan Milestone (CARLOTTA GALL, 12/20/05, NY Times)

The president and the lawmakers used the occasion to send a message that now that Afghanistan has its government and elected Parliament in place, no one, inside or outside, should try to undermine the country, as so often has happened in the past.

"We have the right to tell those who are after the destruction of this water and soil that this homeland will exist forever," Mr. Karzai said.

Sebaghatullah Mojadeddi, a member of the upper house and a religious leader, in his concluding prayers asked God to protect the country and said, "Those who want ill for this country, give them punishment."

Mr. Karzai and other speakers also called on the lawmakers, many of whom were involved in the civil war that consumed Afghanistan in the 1990's, to cooperate in the national interest.

Mr. Cheney, speaking later to American troops at Bagram air base, said the United States was "firmly committed" to nurturing Afghanistan's fledgling democracy.

"Once again, in free elections, the Afghan people have shown the world their determination to chart their own destiny," Mr. Cheney said. "In this journey of freedom and progress, they will continue to have the full support of America and our coalition."


Hey, look what I made....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:57 AM

LET THE ADULTS HANDLE IT:

Why Canada should deal with Abdullah Khadr (THOMAS WALKOM, 12/20/05, Toronto Star)

The U.S. request to extradite Abdullah Khadr on charges of aiding Al Qaeda raises troubling questions Ñ both about the Liberal government's willingness to protect unpopular Canadian citizens and the manner in which this country handles terror cases.

If there is evidence linking him to criminal activities by Osama bin Laden's terror group, why isn't he being charged in Canada?


Because you aren't a serious country anymore?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:55 AM

ME, EH?:

Sally Ann drive falls short (ASHLEY JOANNOU, Dec. 20, 2005, Toronto Sun)

Busy shoppers looking for the right gift appear to be walking past the Salvation Army's kettles this year, which could leave thousands of children without a gift at all.

With only five days left, the Salvation Army division that services most of central Ontario, including Toronto, is barely halfway to its goal of $1.65 million to help 16,000 Toronto families this holiday season — including 25,000 children.

"As far as anyone can remember, at least in the last five years, we have always met our target," Major Michele Percy, spokesperson for the central Ontario Salvation Army said last night.


Just give me my National Health and leave me alone.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:51 AM

YOU'VE FAILED THEM, NOW GIVE THEM VOUCHERS:

School choices with consequences (Steve Poftak, December 20, 2005, Boston Globe)

FEW NOTICED WHEN the Boston School Committee recently closed Grover Cleveland Middle School.

No parents attended a meeting called by the school to discuss the issue, and no one stood up to defend the school at the school committee's closure hearing.

When not one parent of the 350 children enrolled speaks up, that's a sure sign of parental apathy, right? Not really. Few wanted their children enrolled at the school in the first place.

Eighty percent of Cleveland students were assigned there by the Boston Public Schools system. The children attend Cleveland because that is where the system had empty seats, not because their parents chose the school.

Then, there's Cleveland's reputation for poor performance. With MCAS test results long among the worst in the city, parents have voted with their feet. Over the past five years, student enrollment plummeted from 750 to 350. Fewer than 75 students, in a facility that can accommodate 750, chose to be there.

The closure of Cleveland is a positive sign that the system finally acknowledges it was sustaining a school most parents did not want.

Students should not be forced to attend institutions with consistent records of failure simply to utilize capacity. However, the closure and parental apathy surrounding it are symptomatic of a much deeper and systemic problem in Boston.

Boston's school selection system and the statewide cap on charters schools compels parents to send their children to failing schools.


Yeah, but they aren't our kids, so who cares?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:48 AM

DID HE EVER EVEN MEET JOSHUA SON OF NONE?:

Photos cast new doubt on cloning: Questions envelop S. Korean team (Gareth Cook, December 20, 2005, Boston Globe)

A landmark 2004 paper in which South Korean scientists claimed to have cloned human stem cells for the first time contains photos that appeared in an unrelated paper, calling their claim into question and increasing the controversy that surrounds the team.

Two photos in the 2004 paper, published to great fanfare in the journal Science, claim to show batches of the world's first cloned human embryonic stem cells. Yet the same photos appear in the journal Molecules and Cells, in a research article by another Korean team, submitted before the Science paper, and in that paper both photos are labeled as cells created without cloning.


Without fraud there'd be no such thing as scientific breakthroughs.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:30 AM

NOT EITHER OF THEM ISN'T ENOUGH:

Kennedy is a busted flush, but there is no credible successor (Alice Thomson, 20/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

The Liberal Democrats so nearly made it. Their image of sandals, knitted jumpers, and lentils belied their potential. The Lib Dems understood the middle way while Tony Blair was still courting Cherie and David Cameron was smoking his first cigarette behind the fives courts. They were rational, reasonable, non-ideological: everything that Mr Blair and Mr Cameron have now taken to their hearts. They were astonishingly adept as constituency MPs and knew how to woo voters from Aberdeenshire to Yeovil.

Many of their ideas are only just being adopted by the other two parties. They have always talked about the environment, their position on the war in Iraq now looks far-sighted and they were the first to understand the power of localism.

But they have blown it - not once but twice. Fifteen years ago, they had their first chance, a once-in-a-century opportunity to overtake the Labour Party and become the real opposition. But they never capitalised on Labour s donkey jacket moment. Then, amazingly, they were given another chance when the Conservative Party started to disintegrate.


Except that the Third Way isn't about merely splitting the differences between Left and Right and to have genuine appeal it has to be combined with social conservatism/religiosity and, in Europe at least, more than a little nationalism.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THANKS, TOOK:

Prisons to Curtail Racial Segregation: State officials will phase in a new policy in which race will be considered along with gang ties and personal histories in assigning housing. (Jill Leovy, December 20, 2005, LA Times)

California state prisons will end long-standing policies of segregating prisoners solely along racial lines under the terms of a legal settlement announced Monday.

For 25 years, California prisons have segregated the tens of thousands of inmates who arrive each year at the system's reception centers. Prisoners are segregated for at least their initial 60 days in custody. No other state has a similar policy, state officials have conceded.

Under the new policy, race may still be used as a factor in separating prisoners — a white supremacist, for example, would probably not be housed with a black inmate — but it will no longer be the primary criterion, state prison officials said. [...]

Prison officials say that there will be no wholesale movement of prisoners to bring about desegregation. Instead, the mixing of prisoners by race will occur as new inmates enter the system and current ones are transferred, gradually blurring the racial lines within prisons.

Thornton said prison officials are not seeking to meet any particular integration goal. "Prison gangs are aligned along racial lines, and many confrontations among inmates are race-based," she said. But prison officials believe the new policy will bring more careful evaluation of the various factors that lead to prison violence.

In fact, Johnson's lawsuit was a direct challenge to the idea that prisoners were safer if housed with those of their own race, Deixler said.

Prison segregation policies are flawed because a great deal of underworld violence occurs between people of the same race, Deixler argued. Rivalries between the predominantly black Crips and Bloods, for example, claim numerous lives on the street, he said.

Deixler's client was a black man jailed for murder in 1987 who was not a member of any gang, court papers said. Being housed with other black men, most of whom belonged to gangs, left Johnson feeling defenseless — unable to form alliances with prisoners who, like himself, were unaffiliated with gangs.

"He was a lone wolf who did not have a prospect for having protection," Deixler said. He sought an integrated prison setting because he wanted peers who would back him against the black gang members he found so menacing, he added.


Eventually this will just lead to greater isolation (and the concomitant psychological devastation) for all prisoners, since they're segregated for their own protection. As Pete Earley says in his terrific book, The Hot House:
The Aryan Brotherhood was originally formed to protect white prisoners from being victimized by black and Hispanic prison gangs. The Black Guerilla Family, a militant, black revolutionary gang with ties to the Black Panther Party, was the first known prison gang, and was strong at San Quentin at the time. [...]

The politically motivated Black Guerilla Family was eventually replaced by the 1980s drug-dealing Crips and Bloods.


Race wars and segregation in prisons, just one more thing Tookie Willians achieved.


Posted by Matt Murphy at 12:00 AM

NEED FOUR MORE PEOPLE:

We have a total of six people signed up for the College Bowl Pick'em, and I'd like at least a ten-person field to make things interesting. If you don't mind registering with ESPN.com, why not join us? We'll have a great time and, like any good Juddite, I'll give away books to the winners. Just go here if you're not already registered:

http://games.espn.go.com/bowlmania/frontpage

Once you're registered with ESPN, you just follow the steps to create an entry and an entry-name, then click on a left-hand button that lets you "Create or join a group." If you type "brothersjudd" in the search engine and click on it when it comes up, all you have left to do is type the "ericjulia" password and you're officially part of the group.

The comments section is open for questions, concerns, or gratuitous amounts of uninformed trash-talk about how, say, Wolverines eat Cornhuskers for lunch. I expect nothing less from the unique folks who populate this blog. But whatever you do, sign up and join in the fun.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

LACK OF ACCESS IS A CULTURE OF LIFE:

Federal study shows unwanted births are up (Mike Stobbe, December 20, 2005, The Associated Press)

More American women are having babies they didn't want, a survey indicates, but federal researchers say they don't know if that means attitudes about abortion are changing.

U.S. women of childbearing age who were surveyed in 2002 revealed that 14 percent of their recent births were unwanted at the time of conception, federal researchers said yesterday.

In a similar 1995 survey, only 9 percent were unwanted at the time of conception.

At least one anti-abortion group said the numbers reflect a national "pro-life shift," while others who research reproductive health issues suggested it might mean less access to abortion.


Either suffices.


December 19, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:34 PM

SADR BUT WISER:

Racket of rebuilding fills Sadr City as gunfire quiets (Howard LaFranchi, 12/20/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

On the streets of Sadr City where a year ago locals battled US troops, Lt. Col. Jamie Gayton is today a welcome man.

It's not so much that the residents of the sprawling slum, home to more than 1 million mostly poor Shiite Iraqis, have suddenly lost their wariness and suspicions of the American presence. But Colonel Gayton is the man with the money that is being used to slowly bury the open sewers, bring clean water to homes, and illuminate dark streets with new lights.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:45 PM

YOU MEAN HE'S NOT 6 HAWLEYS UNDER?:

The Measure of This Man Is in the Smoot: MIT's Human Yardstick Honored for Work (David A. Fahrenthold, 12/07/05, Washington Post)

Oliver R. Smoot knows from measurement.

For one thing, he is on the brink of retiring from the board of the American National Standards Institute, a Washington-based association that helps set standard units and guidelines for everything from fire sprinklers to computer files.

For another: As every Massachusetts Institute of Technology student probably knows, the man is a measure himself.

Forty-seven years ago, Smoot's fellow MIT fraternity pledges used his body to measure a bridge near the campus, painting marks at every 10 Smoots. Somewhat miraculously, the markings have been repainted ever since -- meaning that while Smoot was pursuing a quiet career in the Washington association bureaucracy, he was also becoming a Boston area landmark and a nerd legend.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:58 PM

THE FARTHER WE FALL BEHIND THE FURTHER WE PULL AHEAD:

Does the US face an engineering gap?: A new study deflates claims that China and India have a vast advantage in graduates. (Mark Clayton, 12/20/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

By making more specific comparisons, US competitiveness, as measured by newly minted engineers, is not eroding as fast as many say - if it's eroding at all, according to a Duke University study released last week. "Inconsistent reporting of problematic engineering graduation data has been used to fuel fears that America is losing its technological edge," the study states. "A comparison of like-to-like data suggests that the US produces a highly significant number of engineers, computer scientists, and information technology specialists, and remains competitive in global markets." [...]

India provides the clearest example of how the numbers can be interpreted differently. The 350,000 engineers that it supposedly graduated last year is almost certainly false. After publishing that number in October, the National Academies revised it downward to 200,000 in a note issued last month. The Duke study pegs the number at 215,000, but it also points out that nearly half of those are three-year diplomas - not the four-year degrees counted in the US.
More four-year diplomas than India

Last year, the US awarded bachelor's degrees to 72,893 engineering students, according to the American Society for Engineering Education. But using India's more inclusive definition, the Duke study finds the US handed out 137,437 bachelor's degrees last year, more than India's 112,000. The US number is far more impressive in relative terms, since India has more than three times as many people.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:45 PM

WHEN THE TOUGHEST YEAR OF YOUR PRESIDENCY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BEST OF MOST OF YOUR PREDECESSORS... (via Gene Brown):

It's Time to Pin a Few Medals ... (Joe Klein, Dec. 16, 2005, TIME)

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again ... who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly ..."

Theodore Roosevelt said that in 1910. I named this column In the Arena out of admiration for T.R., but also as a constant reminder to myself not to be unduly cynical about the men and women who do our public work. And so I try to give credit where it's due. I try to avoid criticism that is crude or mocking. But there's no getting around the reality of column writing: I am "the critic," and it is all too easy to dwell on those who don't strive valiantly, spend themselves for a worthy cause or dare greatly. At year's end, however, and especially at the end of a year as horrible as this one, it is appropriate to pay homage to those who have taken risky stands on principle, even when I have disagreed with them.

I've disagreed plenty with our President, George W. Bush, but he was the first person who came to mind when I reread the Roosevelt quote. He has had a difficult year. And yet I can't forget Dr. Kamal Labwani, a Syrian dissident I met in Damascus last spring, just after he was released from prison. He told me how much Bush's words about the importance of freedom and democracy—and the mistake the U.S. had made by supporting repressive regimes in the region—had meant to him. Later in the year, as Labwani was about to be arrested again, he sent me, and others, an e-mail that began, "The security forces have surrounded our house ..." He was released once more and visited Washington, where he was greeted at the White House. When he returned home, he was arrested a third time. President Bush has mentioned the outrageous treatment of Labwani in several speeches and White House statements.


A difficult year in the press, not in reality.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:41 PM

OPPORTUNISM KNOCKS:

Exit polls: Netanyahu easily wins Likud primary, beating Shalom 47%-32% (Israelinsider, December 19, 2005)

A Channel One exit poll indicated that Benjamin Netanyahu would coast to a comfortable victory in the Likud chairmanship race. He was expected to win 47 percent of the votes, with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom a distant second place and Moshe Feiglin garnering a higher than expected 15 percent of the vote. Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz trailed in fourth place with 6 percent of the vote. The poll had an error margin of 4.5%.

The great thing about Bibi is that if he ever becomes PM again he'll follow exactly the path Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush have laid out.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:43 PM

YOU MEAN SADDAM WAS LYING?:

Partial Results of Parliamentary Elections Released in Iraq: Militant Group Posts Video of Alleged Killing of American (Doug Struck and Daniela Deane, December 19, 2005, Washington Post)

Initial results of Iraq's national election from more than half the country's provinces brought a strong showing by Shiite and Kurdish parties, Iraq's electoral commission announced Monday, underscoring the secular divisions of the country. [...]

The initial results showed the coalition of Shiites leading with 58 percent of the vote, followed by a Sunni-led coalition with 19 percent, in Baghdad province, the country's largest voting district. The secular party headed by former prime minister Ayad Allawi got 14 percent of the votes.

The Shiite coalition now has the largest party in the interim parliament. Its strength was expected to be diluted by a large turnout of Sunnis, who had mostly boycotted the January election of an interim government. But the initial results, which included almost complete results from 10 out of 18 provinces, showed a large turnout for the Shiite coalition.

The Kurds of the north also emerged largely unsplintered by smaller parties, to claim what is expected to be the second-largest bloc in the parliament.

Elections officials said they expected the unofficial tally to be completed "in two or three days."


This is the key moment for the Sunni, when they have to face the fact that even with strong turnout they are a rather small minority in greater Iraq.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:39 PM

SADDAMA:

Bush mixes Saddam, Osama (AFP, 12/19/05)

US President George W. Bush did for just one second what critics have accused him of doing for two years: Mixing up terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and ousted Iraq dictator Saddam Hussein.

The momentary slip of the tongue came as Bush defended his decision to order spying on US citizens without court warrants and assailed the leak that brought the controversial program to light as "shameful."

"In the late 1990s, our government was following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone. And then the fact that we were following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone made it into the press as the result of a leak," he said.

"And guess what happened? Saddam -- Osama bin Laden changed his behavior. He began to change how he communicated. We're at war. And we must protect America's secrets," Bush said during a year's end press conference.


He's gotten so good at that particular "slip," you have to wonder if he practices it beforehand.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:23 PM

EVEN THE CANADIANS?:

Terror suspect in Canada allegedly confesses: Affidavit: Police say man admitted buying weapons for al Qaeda (AP, 12/19/05)

A man accused of purchasing weapons for al Qaeda confessed to U.S. and Canadian authorities that he bought the firearms for use against U.S. forces in Afghanistan, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

In an affidavit submitted to the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto, where Abdullah Khadr appeared at a preliminary hearing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Sgt. Konrad Shourie said Khadr admitted his ties to senior al Qaeda members. Shourie said Khadr confessed to having purchased guns and rocket launchers and his role in a plot to assassinate the Pakistani prime minister. [...]

On Sunday his lawyer, Dennis Edney, accused the U.S. of participating in the "abuse of Mr. Khadr for the past 18 months in a Pakistani prison." He said the United States had pressed Khadr for "evidence against persons of interest to the U.S., people whom he didn't know."


If we're pressing admitted terrorists for information then who among us is safe?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:16 PM

IF YOU DON'T THINK THERE'S AN ENEMY....:

Press Conference of the President (George W. Bush, The East Room, 12/20/05)

THE PRESIDENT: The other question was?

Q Sir --

THE PRESIDENT: You asked a multiple-part question.

Q Yes, I did.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you for violating the multiple-part question rule.

Q I didn't know there was a law on that. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: There's not a law. It's an executive order. (Laughter.) In this case, not monitored by the Congress -- (laughter) -- nor is there any administrative oversight. (Laughter.)

Q Well, without breaking any laws, on to -- back on domestic spying. Making the case for that, can you give us some example --

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I got you. Yes, sorry. No, I'm not going to talk about that, because it would help give the enemy notification and/or, perhaps, signal to them methods and uses and sources. And we're not going to do that, which is -- it's really important for people to understand that the protection of sources and the protections of methods and how we use information to understand the nature of the enemy is secret. And the reason it's secret is because if it's not secret, the enemy knows about it, and if the enemy knows about it, adjusts.

And again, I want to repeat what I said about Osama bin Laden, the man who ordered the attack that killed 3,000 Americans. We were listening to him. He was using a type of cell phone, or a type of phone, and we put it in the newspaper -- somebody put it in the newspaper that this was the type of device he was using to communicate with his team, and he changed. I don't know how I can make the point more clear that any time we give up -- and this is before they attacked us, by the way -- revealing sources, methods, and what we use the information for simply says to the enemy: change.

Now, if you don't think there's an enemy out there, then I can understand why you ought to say, just tell us all you know. I happen to know there's an enemy there. And the enemy wants to attack us. That is why I hope you can feel my passion about the Patriot Act. It is inexcusable to say to the American people, we're going to be tough on terror, but take away the very tools necessary to help fight these people. And by the way, the tools exist still to fight medical fraud, in some cases, or other -- drug dealers. But with the expiration of the Patriot Act, it prevents us from using them to fight the terrorists. Now, that is just unbelievable. And I'm going to continue talking about this issue and reminding the American people about the importance of the Patriot Act and how necessary it is for us in Washington, D.C. to do our job to protect you.


Note how in the initial portion, jousting with the reporter, he makes fun of all the objections that have been raised to his actions and then in his actual answer he puts Democrats in the Senate on the spot.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:58 PM

LISTEN UP:

Why Bush Approved the Wiretaps: Not long ago, both parties agreed the FISA court was a problem. (Byron York, 12/20/05, National Review)

In 2002, when the president made his decision, there was widespread, bipartisan frustration with the slowness and inefficiency of the bureaucracy involved in seeking warrants from the special intelligence court, known as the FISA court. Even later, after the provisions of the Patriot Act had had time to take effect, there were still problems with the FISA court — problems examined by members of the September 11 Commission — and questions about whether the court can deal effectively with the fastest-changing cases in the war on terror.

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.

The Patriot Act included some provisions, supported by lawmakers of both parties, to make securing such warrants easier. But it did not fix the problem. In April 2004, when members of the September 11 Commission briefed the press on some of their preliminary findings, they reported that significant problems remained.


One example from today's reading and listening of why you'd circumvent the court: you find an al Qaeda laptop in a raid and it has a list of phone numbers in the United States. You'd obviously want to immediately start to listen in to the calls going into that number from overseas, or out to overseas, but you don't even know who's at the number.


MORE:
National Security Meltdown (David Martin, 6/19/02, CBS)

The CIA and FBI are drawing most of the criticism for failing to follow up on leads that might have prevented the attacks of September 11th. But another intelligence agency - bigger by far than either the CIA or FBI - was also on the case. David Martin reports.

The National Security Agency eavesdrops on communications all over the world. For a few years, the NSA was actually listening to Osama bin Laden's satellite phone calls. But even that wasn't enough to tip off U.S. intelligence to the 9/11 plot or to earlier attacks on the USS Cole and two American embassies in Africa. Bin Laden probably didn't realize it, but he was mounting these operations just as NSA was going through the worst crisis in its 50-year history. In fact, in the very same month two of the 9/11 hijackers entered the U.S., the supercomputers NSA relies on to sort through billions of phone calls, faxes, e-mails and radio transmissions crashed. [...]

On any given day, the majority of intelligence that shows up in the president's morning briefing comes from the NSA, considered by many to be the cornerstone of American intelligence.

Some might therefore be alarmed to read a report by a team of NSA insiders concluding that the "NSA is in great peril."

"We're behind the curve in keeping up with the global telecommunications revolution," Hayden said.

The NSA is now trying to play catch-up to Silicon Valley and the cell phones and computers that have proliferated throughout the world.

"In the previous world order, our primary adversary was the Soviet Union," Hayden said. "Technologicaly we had to keep pace with an oligarchic, resource-poor, technologically inferior, overbureaucratized, slow-moving nation-state."

"Our adversary communications are now based upon the developmental cycle of a global industry that is literally moving at the speed of light ... cell phones, encryption, fiber optic communications, digital communications," he added.

Documents introduced at the trial of the four men convicted of blowing up two American embassies in Africa indicate that the NSA was monitoring Osama bin Laden's satellite phone as he allegedly directed preparations for the attack from his hiding place in Afghanistan. Even so, the NSA was unable to collect enough intelligence to stop it.

"Osama bin Laden has at his disposal the wealth of a $3 trillion-a-year telecommunications industry," Hayden said.

From about 1996 to 1998, when bin Laden was beginning his operations out of Afghanistan, NSA knew his phone number and was able to listen in on phone calls he and his top lieutenants made to Al Qaida cells around the world. But the terrorists were so careful and cryptic about what they said over the phone that the U.S. was caught totally by surprise when in August of 1998 truck bombs detonated simultaneously outside the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people.

One of the terrorists arrested after those bombings gave NSA another phone number - this one belonging to a cell phone in Yemen. Listening in on that phone gave the NSA one of the first leads that might have uncovered the 9/11 plot - two men were headed to a meeting of terrorist operatives in Malaysia. NSA immediately passed the information to the CIA.

The meeting took place in a high-rise apartment building on January 6, 2000. The CIA didn't have time to plant any listening devices, but it was able to get pictures of the two men, who later turned out to be two of the hijackers who flew into the Pentagon. On January 15, 2000, the two hijackers entered the U.S. Nine days later NSA suffered its computer meltdown.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:44 PM

WHICH WOULD MAKE W CLYDE McPHATTER:

In the Mideast, Democratic Momentum (Jackson Diehl, December 19, 2005, Washington Post)

The most obvious element of the liberalizing drift has been the elections of 2005: in the Palestinian Authority, in Lebanon, in Egypt, even in Saudi Arabia. Flawed as many of the polls were, they produced some stunning results, from the formation of a government in Lebanon committed to independence from Syria, to the quintupling of seats held by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt's parliament, to the electoral victory of two women in the Saudi city of Jiddah. Last week the Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas presented its list of 62 candidates for scheduled legislative elections next month, including 10 women. The corrupt old guard of the ruling Fatah party meanwhile has been challenged by several new lists of secular reformers; elections may bring, at last, rejuvenation of the corrupt power structure created by Yasser Arafat.

Another revealing index is the number of the Arab world's authoritarian rulers who have felt obliged to spell out plans for a democratic transition. In the past two months Egypt's Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah have unveiled platforms to introduce a free press, an independent judiciary and liberalized election laws during the next several years. By some accounts, Saudi Arabia's then-Crown Prince Abdullah privately promised Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in June that democracy would reach his country in a decade. Whether or not they meant it, the autocrats' promises raised expectations in their countries, and gave their growing domestic reform movements a standard to hold them to.

For the first time, too, the Arab world is getting a peek at what political accountability looks like. Four senior Lebanese generals are in prison for their role in the car-bomb assassination last February of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, and Syrian President Bashar Assad is under growing pressure from a U.N. investigation; never before have the region's thugs been collared for their political killing. In Morocco, an official truth commission has spent the past 12 months listening, in public, to the accounts of citizens who were tortured or persecuted by the government; reparations are being paid to thousands.

Most intriguing of all has been the shift by Islamic movements during 2005 from terrorism to democratic participation. Despite some lapses, both Hamas and Lebanon's Hezbollah have mostly refrained from violence this year while focusing on elections. While neither has disarmed, both are under pressure from public opinion in their own countries to do so. Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, which swore off violence decades ago, has embraced the agenda of parliamentary democracy and free press put forward by the secular opposition coalition that appeared in Cairo this year. The most commonly cited obstacle to Arab democratization -- Islamic fundamentalism -- looks far less formidable than it did a year ago.


Drift?


MORE:
MIDDLE EAST PROGRESS AMID GLOBAL GAINS IN FREEDOM: Arab Middle East Shows Improvement, Despite Continued Repression
(Freedom House, December 19, 2005)

The people of the Arab Middle East experienced a modest but potentially significant increase in political rights and civil liberties in 2005, Freedom House announced in a major survey of global freedom released today.

The global survey, "Freedom in the World," shows that although the Middle East continues to lag behind other regions, a measurable improvement can be seen in freedom in several key Arab countries, as well as the Palestinian Authority. In another key finding, the number of countries rated by Freedom House as Not Free declined from 49 in 2004 to 45 for the year 2005, the lowest number of Not Free societies identified by the survey in over a decade. In noteworthy country developments, Ukraine and Indonesia saw their status improve from Partly Free to Free; Afghanistan moved from Not Free to Partly Free; and the Philippines saw its status decline from Free to Partly Free.

According to Thomas O. Melia, acting executive director of Freedom House, "The modest but heartening advances in the Arab Middle East result from activism by citizen groups and reforms by governments in about equal measures. This emerging trend reminds us that men and women in this region share the universal desire to live in free societies."

"As we welcome the stirrings of change in the Middle East," said Mr. Melia, "it is equally important that we focus on the follow-through in other regions and appreciate the importance of the continuing consolidation of democracy in Indonesia, Ukraine, and other nations."

Complete survey results, including a package of charts and graphs, and an explanatory essay are available online.


Iraq: Many Communities, One Democracy (Khaled Fouad Allam)
We are beginning, paradoxically, to grow accustomed to a certain “normalization” of the electoral process in Iraq. The December 15 elections consecrated a point of arrival for the democratization of Iraqi society.

The statistical data are clear: the first of these is the 70 percent participation in the voting. Then there is the stark reduction of the terrorist threat during the voting process, and – contrary to what one might have expected – an enormous turnout at the ballot boxes in the zone of Fallujah, symbol of the Sunni triangle. Even Iran’s Arabic television news outlet, al-Alam, which has a large audience among the Shiite Iraqis, emphasized the vast participation of all the components of Iraqi society. The definitive results on the composition of the new Iraqi parliament, whose members will remain in office for four years, will be made known in around two weeks.

All this is undoubtedly a success, both for the Iraqi people and for the United States, in the face of those who disputed, and still dispute, the exporting of democracy, a question that is feeding a philosophical debate that will mark all the geopolitical transformations of the twenty-first century.

In any case, the widespread participation in the electoral consultation and the success of the electoral process in spite of the dramatic lack of security in the country require a more profound interpretation.

What is the mechanism by which, in wartime, a people feels called so urgently to the polls? In reality, we have undervalued the fact that, even though the tanks entered into Iraq, the premise of this was a precise American plan for the reformulation of the Iraqi nation, which most Europeans probably did not realize.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:35 PM

& WE'VE ONLY BORROWED $8 TRILLION AGAINST THAT? (via Robert Schwartz):

The Intangible Wealth of Nations: Why you're worth more than you think (Ronald Bailey, 12/16/05, Reason)

For the average American living in the United States is like having more than half a million dollars in wealth. So says a new study from the World Bank, Where is the Wealth of Nations?: Measuring Capital for the 21st Century, which makes estimates of the contribution of natural, produced, and intangible capital to the aggregate wealth of 120 countries.

Why are Americans so well off? It's not just because of America's fruited plains and its alabaster cities. In fact, it turns out that such natural and man-made resources comprise a relatively small percentage of our wealth.

The World Bank study begins by defining natural capital as the sum of nonrenewable resources (including oil, natural gas, coal, and mineral resources), cropland, pastureland, forested areas, and protected areas. Produced capital is what many of us think of when we think of capital. It is the sum of machinery, equipment, and structures (including infrastructure) and urban land. The Bank then identifies intangible capital as the difference between total wealth and all produced and natural capital. Intangible capital encompasses raw labor; human capital, which includes the sum of the knowledge, skills, and know-how possessed by population; as well as the level of trust in a society and the quality of its formal and informal social institutions.

Once the analytical framework is set up, what the researchers at the World Bank find is fascinating. "The most striking aspect of the wealth estimates is the high values for intangible capital. Nearly 85 percent of the countries in our sample have an intangible capital share of total wealth greater than 50 percent," write the researchers. They further note that years of schooling and a rule-of-law index can account for 90 percent of the variation in intangible capital. In other words, the more highly educated a country's people are and the more honest and fair its legal system is, the wealthier it is.


Human capital doesn't even get factored into our already staggering $50+ trillion household net worth.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:55 PM

FORGET ESPN, THEY'LL HAVE CHESS ON SPIKE SOON:

Meet the pawn star babes (DAVE MASTERS, 12/19/05, Sun Online)

THESE are the sort of girls that will be impressed by your moves, lads - but only if they're of the Grand Master sort!

That's because these lovelies are some of the brainy babes battling it out in the World Chess Beauty Contest.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:04 AM

THEIR BELOVED MONSTER:

China's role in North Korea (Jason Qian and Anne Wu , December 19, 2005, Boston Globe)

THE SIX-PARTY TALKS created to resolve the North Korean nuclear problem have lost momentum again. All six parties agreed on a denuclearization statement in September, but when the United States started imposing sanctions on North Korean enterprises suspected of counterfeiting and money-laundering, Pyongyang declared that it would boycott future talks. With the two countries at odds again, the denuclearization agreement remains an empty promise, raising the question: Is this framework of six-party talks sustainable for achieving a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula?

The talks will be sustainable only if they create a negotiation model that can maximize the common denominator of regional security and stability. It is thus crucial for China to transform its role from a neutral mediator to a more assertive one that will be able to tame the two ''veto" parties -- Pyongyang and Washington -- and reorient the talks to the long-term interest of regional security and economic prosperity.

The merits and the shortfalls of being a mediator are all about neutrality.


Which is why we should walk away from the talks. China is as much an enemy as N. Korea. Let them struggle with the Kims on their own, not pretend they occupy a midpoint between us and the North.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:01 AM

OUR DIRTY LITTLE SECRET:

When self-immolation is a rational choice (Spengler, 12/20/05, Asia Times)

Apropos of Washington's triumphal response to the high voter turnout in last week's Iraqi elections, we should ask this simple question: why do political leaders believe that democracy fosters peace, despite innumerable examples to the contrary? [...]

Popular sovereignty in the Arab and Persian spheres favors the war party. The Iranian president grasps this elementary truth, which makes him a far more effective force in the Middle East than the Bush administration. As it is presently constituted, Iran has no future, and the Islamic world broadly faces a social crisis of lethal proportions (The demographics of radical Islam, August 23, 2005). Within the Islamic framework, war represents the sort of rational choice that popular majorities will embrace.

This is a very different argument from the "essentialist" claim that Islam, by virtue of the percept of jihad, must inevitably promote aggression. Without minimizing the dangers inherent in the notion of jihad, I believe the present war stems from the response of Islam to particular circumstances at a particular point in time.

Islam may harbor a predisposition towards conquest, but the closest parallels to Ahmadinejad's are to be found in Europe and the US. On December 6 (Iran's strength in weakness) I compared today's Iran to Adolf Hitler's Germany on the eve of World War II. Karl Marx observed that history tends to repeat itself, the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce - or Farsi, we might say in Ahmadinejad's case. But for Americans to promote the canard that democracy fosters peace must be the most extreme case of amnesia on record, for two democratically-elected governments fought the most destructive war in the history of the Western hemisphere.

The Confederate States of America arose through irreproachable democratic forms, with the overwhelming support of the populace of the southern states, who sent three-quarters of their military-age men to fight. [...]

Iranians elected Ahmadinejad and American Southerners elected Jefferson Davis for what might be termed rational reasons. The South was running out of land; Iran is running out of young people as well as oil (see Demographics of Iran's imperial design, September 13, 2005). Present-day Iran will cease to exist in a generation, as Ahmadinejad knows better than anyone. He has already proposed to relocate 30 million rural Iranians, half the country's population, as the majority of villages become unsustainable in the declining countryside.

The same aspirations put a field marshal's baton into the rucksack of Napoleon's soldiers, and made Hitler a hugely popular war leader until Stalingrad.


Not that we planned it this way, not that peoples and leaders are necessarily conscious of it as they make their democratic decisions, but part of the "genius" of our democratization project is that other states are becoming more peaceful precisely because they are demographically doomed, and most of them spiritually bankrupt. The idea that an Iran which faces a shortage of young people -- and therefore most Iranians face a shortage of those who will fund their dotage -- is an argument against Iran being willing to go to war, not in favor. Conflicts are declining as nations choose to die off quietly and as comfortably as possible.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:40 AM

GOT 51 VOTES?:

House, Senate agree on cuts (Stephen Dinan, December 19, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

House and Senate negotiators yesterday reached year-end deals on a $42 billion budget-cuts package and a $453 billion defense-spending bill that includes a provision allowing oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Now Republican leaders just have to find the votes to pass the bills.

Senate Democrats will try to filibuster the spending bill, arguing that adding the drilling provision at the last minute was a perversion of Senate rules.

"These rules mean nothing. It's like a game of monopoly with grade-school kids. But this is the United States Senate," said Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, before using a parliamentary technique to shut down floor action all night.

He also said he would not consent to passing any of President Bush's pending nominations this year, which in effect blocks seven district court judges and the president's picks to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

How do you filibuster a conference report?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:36 AM

DON'T THEY KNOW THEY'RE PUPPETS IN A QUAGMIRE?:

Afghan MPs hold landmark session (BBC, 12/19/05)
Afghanistan's first parliament for more than 30 years has held its inaugural session in the capital, Kabul.

President Hamid Karzai told 351 MPs the session was a "step toward democracy" and a display of national unity.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:33 AM

DID THEY PAY THE PROTESTORS?:

Wave of protests as deal done on trade (SOPHIE WALKER AND DOUG PALMER, 12/19/05, The Scotsman)

MINISTERS from 149 states saved global trade talks from collapse yesterday with an interim deal to end farm export subsidies by 2013 and make the markets of wealthy countries more accessible to the world's poorest nations.

Ministers expressed relief after the marathon negotiations that they had averted a repeat of failed conferences in Seattle in 1999 and in Cancun in 2003. [...]

Big-hitters among developing nations, led by Brazil, India and Argentina, gave their nod to the draft but voiced their frustration over the EU's refusal to agree on 2010 as the cut-off date for export support.

"I think the EU owes one to the developing countries. We showed a real will to negotiate and we didn't feel it was the same from the other side," said Alfredo Chiaradia, Argentina's trade minister.

In a victory for West African cotton-producing nations, rich countries agreed to eliminate all export subsidies on cotton in 2006. It also represents a concession by the United States, a major cotton exporter. Rob Portman, a US trade representative said American cotton growers would probably be unhappy about this aspect of the agreement.


The unrest makes the agreement look better than it is, but it does move the ball forward.


December 18, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:14 PM

NOW START BOOSTING BIRTHRATES:

'Praise the Lord': A tale of 2 Koreans (Norimitsu Onishi, DECEMBER 19, 2005, The New York Times)

As the two Koreas have moved closer in recent years, the complicated relationship between defector and missionary has come to symbolize, perhaps more than anything else, the yawning gap of a half-century division. While the North remains communist, the South has grown into the foothold for Christianity in Northeast Asia.

With a Christian population of nearly 30 percent, the South has the world's second largest missionary movement after the United States, with 14,000 people abroad. An estimated 1,500 are deployed in China, evangelizing secretly and illegally among Chinese and North Korean defectors. South Korean missionaries shelter North Koreans and have brought thousands to the South; others train them to return home to proselytize, as well as smuggle Bibles into the North.

For the South's missionaries, converting those of the North, where Christianity first spread before the peninsula's division, dovetails with their dream of a reunified peninsula. "Oh Lord, please send us, for our brethren up North," reads a verse in the most popular hymn among missionaries working with defectors, "Evangelical Song of Unification." It is also part of a larger dream of spreading the Gospel along the Silk Road back to its source.

Behind these movements, though, are personal ties between defector and missionary, complicated by a balance of power tipped in the South Korean's favor and the inevitable mix of religion, politics and money.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:15 PM

REACHING THE DARKEST CORNERS:

ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION (President George W. Bush, 12/18/05)

Good evening. Three days ago, in large numbers, Iraqis went to the polls to choose their own leaders – a landmark day in the history of liberty. In coming weeks, the ballots will be counted … a new government formed … and a people who suffered in tyranny for so long will become full members of the free world.

This election will not mean the end of violence. But it is the beginning of something new: constitutional democracy at the heart of the Middle East. And this vote – 6,000 miles away, in a vital region of the world – means that America has an ally of growing strength in the fight against terror.

All who had a part in this achievement – Iraqis, Americans, and Coalition partners – can be proud. Yet our work is not done. There is more testing and sacrifice before us. I know many Americans have questions about the cost and direction of this war. So tonight I want to talk to you about how far we have come in Iraq, and the path that lies ahead.

From this office, nearly three years ago, I announced the start of military operations in Iraq. Our Coalition confronted a regime that defied United Nations Security Council Resolutions … violated a cease-fire agreement … sponsored terrorism … and possessed, we believed, weapons of mass destruction. After the swift fall of Baghdad, we found mass graves filled by a dictator … we found some capacity to restart programs to produce weapons of mass destruction … but we did not find those weapons.

It is true that Saddam Hussein had a history of pursuing and using weapons of mass destruction. It is true that he systematically concealed those programs, and blocked the work of UN weapons inspectors. It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. And as your President, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq.

Yet it was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power. He was given an ultimatum – and he made his choice for war. And the result of that war was to rid the world of a murderous dictator who menaced his people, invaded his neighbors, and declared America to be his enemy. Saddam Hussein, captured and jailed, is still the same raging tyrant – only now without a throne. His power to harm a single man, woman, or child is gone forever. And the world is better for it.

Since the removal of Saddam, this war – like other wars in our history – has been difficult. The mission of American troops in urban raids and desert patrols – fighting Saddam loyalists and foreign terrorists – has brought danger and suffering and loss. This loss has caused sorrow for our whole Nation – and it has led some to ask if we are creating more problems than we are solving.

That is an important question, and the answer depends on your view of the war on terror. If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone.

This is not the threat I see. I see a global terrorist movement that exploits Islam in the service of radical political aims – a vision in which books are burned, and women are oppressed, and all dissent is crushed. Terrorist operatives conduct their campaign of murder with a set of declared and specific goals – to de-moralize free nations … to drive us out of the Middle East … to spread an empire of fear across that region … and to wage a perpetual war against America and our friends. These terrorists view the world as a giant battlefield – and they seek to attack us wherever they can. This has attracted al Qaida to Iraq, where they are attempting to frighten and intimidate America into a policy of retreat.

The terrorists do not merely object to American actions in Iraq and elsewhere – they object to our deepest values and our way of life. And if we were not fighting them in Iraq … in Afghanistan … in Southeast Asia … and in other places, the terrorists would not be peaceful citizens – they would be on the offense, and headed our way.

September 11th, 2001 required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously, and it shattered the illusion that terrorists attack us only after we provoke them. On that day, we were not in Iraq … we were not in Afghanistan … but the terrorists attacked us anyway – and killed nearly 3,000 men, women, and children in our own country. My conviction comes down to this: We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them. And we will defeat the terrorists by capturing and killing them abroad … removing their safe havens … and strengthening new allies like Iraq and Afghanistan in the fight we share.

This work has been especially difficult in Iraq – more difficult than we expected. Reconstruction efforts and the training of Iraqi Security Forces started more slowly than we hoped. We continue to see violence and suffering, caused by an enemy that is determined and brutal – unconstrained by conscience or the rules of war.

Some look at the challenges in Iraq, and conclude that the war is lost, and not worth another dime or another day. I don’t believe that. Our military commanders do not believe that. Our troops in the field, who bear the burden and make the sacrifice, do not believe that America has lost. And not even the terrorists believe it. We know from their own communications that they feel a tightening noose – and fear the rise of a democratic Iraq.

The terrorists will continue to have the coward’s power to plant roadside bombs and recruit suicide bombers. And you will continue to see the grim results on the evening news. This proves that the war is difficult – it does not mean that we are losing. Behind the images of chaos that terrorists create for the cameras, we are making steady gains with a clear objective in view.

America, our Coalition, and Iraqi leaders are working toward the same goal – a democratic Iraq that can defend itself … that will never again be a safe haven for terrorists … and that will serve as a model of freedom for the Middle East.

We have put in place a strategy to achieve this goal – a strategy I have been discussing in detail over the last few weeks. This plan has three critical elements.

First, our Coalition will remain on the offense – finding and clearing out the enemy … transferring control of more territory to Iraqi units … and building up the Iraqi Security Forces so they can increasingly lead the fight. At this time last year, there were only a handful of Iraqi army and police battalions ready for combat. Now, there are more than 125 Iraqi combat battalions fighting the enemy … more than 50 are taking the lead … and we have transferred more than a dozen military bases to Iraqi control.

Second, we are helping the Iraqi government establish the institutions of a unified and lasting democracy, in which all of Iraq’s peoples are included and represented. Here also, the news is encouraging. Three days ago, more than 10 million Iraqis went to the polls – including many Sunni Iraqis who had boycotted national elections last January. Iraqis of every background are recognizing that democracy is the future of the country they love – and they want their voices heard. One Iraqi, after dipping his finger in the purple ink as he cast his ballot, stuck his finger in the air and said: “This is a thorn in the eyes of the terrorists.” Another voter was asked, “Are you Sunni or Shia?” He responded, “I am Iraqi.”

Third, after a number of setbacks, our Coalition is moving forward with a reconstruction plan to revive Iraq’s economy and infrastructure – and to give Iraqis confidence that a free life will be a better life. Today in Iraq, seven in 10 Iraqis say their lives are going well – and nearly two-thirds expect things to improve even more in the year ahead. Despite the violence, Iraqis are optimistic – and that optimism is justified.

In all three aspects of our strategy – security, democracy, and reconstruction – we have learned from our experiences, and fixed what has not worked. We will continue to listen to honest criticism, and make every change that will help us complete the mission. Yet there is a difference between honest critics who recognize what is wrong, and defeatists who refuse to see that anything is right.

Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts. For every scene of destruction in Iraq, there are more scenes of rebuilding and hope. For every life lost, there are countless more lives reclaimed. And for every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq, there are many more Iraqis and Americans working to defeat them. My fellow citizens: Not only can we win the war in Iraq – we are winning the war in Iraq.

It is also important for every American to understand the consequences of pulling out of Iraq before our work is done. We would abandon our Iraqi friends – and signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word. We would undermine the morale of our troops – by betraying the cause for which they have sacrificed. We would cause tyrants in the Middle East to laugh at our failed resolve, and tighten their repressive grip. We would hand Iraq over to enemies who have pledged to attack us – and the global terrorist movement would be emboldened and more dangerous than ever before. To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor … and I will not allow it.

We are approaching a New Year, and there are certain things all Americans can expect to see. We will see more sacrifice – from our military … their families … and the Iraqi people. We will see a concerted effort to improve Iraqi police forces and fight corruption. We will see the Iraqi military gaining strength and confidence, and the democratic process moving forward. As these achievements come, it should require fewer American troops to accomplish our mission. I will make decisions on troop levels based on the progress we see on the ground and the advice of our military leaders – not based on artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington. Our forces in Iraq are on the road to victory – and that is the road that will take them home.

In the months ahead, all Americans will have a part in the success of this war. Members of Congress will need to provide resources for our military. Our men and women in uniform, who have done so much already, will continue their brave and urgent work. And tonight, I ask all of you listening to carefully consider the stakes of this war … to realize how far we have come and the good we are doing … and to have patience in this difficult, noble, and necessary cause.

I also want to speak to those of you who did not support my decision to send troops to Iraq: I have heard your disagreement, and I know how deeply it is felt. Yet now there are only two options before our country – victory or defeat. And the need for victory is larger than any president or political party, because the security of our people is in the balance. I do not expect you to support everything I do, but tonight I have a request: Do not give in to despair, and do not give up on this fight for freedom.

Americans can expect some things of me as well. My most solemn responsibility is to protect our Nation, and that requires me to make some tough decisions. I see the consequences of those decisions when I meet wounded servicemen and women who cannot leave their hospital beds, but summon the strength to look me in the eye and say they would do it all over again. I see the consequences when I talk to parents who miss a child so much – but tell me he loved being a soldier … he believed in his mission … and Mr. President, finish the job.

I know that some of my decisions have led to terrible loss – and not one of those decisions has been taken lightly. I know this war is controversial – yet being your President requires doing what I believe is right and accepting the consequences. And I have never been more certain that America’s actions in Iraq are essential to the security of our citizens, and will lay the foundation of peace for our children and grandchildren.

Next week, Americans will gather to celebrate Christmas and Hanukkah. Many families will be praying for loved ones spending this season far from home – in Iraq, Afghanistan, or other dangerous places. Our Nation joins in those prayers. We pray for the safety and strength of our troops. We trust, with them, in a love that conquers all fear, and a light that reaches the darkest corners of the Earth. And we remember the words of the Christmas carol, written during the Civil War: “God is not dead, nor [does] He sleep; the Wrong shall fail, the Right prevail, with peace on Earth, good-will to men.”

Thank you, and good night.


This was an especially tough line: "Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:08 PM

NO WONDER HE WON:

One is by rail; two is by sea: The United States must prepare for the inevitable day when fuel oil supplies run short. If the White House won't lead, the states should. (The Roanoke Times, 12/18/05)

Gov.-elect Tim Kaine's transportation listening tour has brought out the rail enthusiasts along the congested Interstate 81 corridor.

The need for massive improvements, including dedicated truck lanes and expensive tolls, could be avoided if only truck traffic were diverted off the highways and onto the railroads, chants the rising chorus of rail enthusiasts.

They have a point.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:04 PM

BUT DEMOCRATS HAVE A HAMMERLOCK ON THAT ONE THIRD:

Poll: 57% in U.S. oppose swift pullout, cite instability (Will Lester, Dec. 18, 2005, Associated Press)

A solid majority of Americans oppose immediately pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, citing as a main reason the desire to finish the job of stabilizing the country, an AP-Ipsos poll found.

About 57 percent of those surveyed said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized, while 36 percent favor an immediate troop withdrawal. [...]

Only one in 10 said they wanted to stay in Iraq to fight terrorism; just 3 percent said to protect U.S. national security.


So much for the war being about our own national security.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:59 PM

IT'S A TOY, NO?:

Barbarism begins with Barbie, the doll children love to hate (Alexandra Frean, 12/19/05, Times of London)

BARBIE, that plastic icon of girlhood fantasy play, is routinely tortured by children, research has found.

The methods of mutilation are varied and creative, ranging from scalping to decapitation, burning, breaking and even microwaving, according to academics from the University of Bath.

The findings were revealed as part of an in-depth look by psychologists and management academics into the role of brands among 7 to 11-year-old schoolchildren.

The researchers had not intended to focus on Barbie, but they were taken aback by the rejection, hatred and violence she provoked when they asked the children about their feelings for the doll.

Violence and torture against Barbie were repeatedly reported across age, school and gender. No other toy or brand name provoked such a negative response.


That can only be because they don't make real G.I. Joes anymore--that poor bastard has been tortured and killed more ways than an adult could dream of....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:56 PM

DICK CHENEY WAS JUST FARSIGHTED:

Iraqis in former rebel stronghold now cheer American soldiers (Oliver Poole, 19/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

In Tal Afar, according to the president, military success had been followed by the restoration of law and order and the implementation of reconstruction projects to give "hope" to its citizens.

Iraq factfile

Visiting the city, nestled near the Syrian border in the north-west of the country, there is no doubt that something has been achieved.

Unlike in Fallujah, another Sunni Arab insurgent stronghold, the storming of which by US marines was the defining campaign of 2004, there is actually large-scale rebuilding in progress.

While many of the citizens of Fallujah still eke out their existence in the ruins of their former homes, in Tal Afar the streets are full of building sites. New sewers have been dug and the fronts of shops, destroyed in the US assault, were replaced within weeks. Sunni police have been hired and 2,000 goats were even distributed to farmers.

More remarkably, the approach of an American military convoy brings people out to wave and even clap, something not seen since the invasion of spring 2003 that toppled Saddam Hussein.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:19 PM

TRANSCENDING TRANSNATIONALISM:

Time names Bono, Bill and Melinda Gates Persons of Year (CNN, 12/18/05)

The good deeds of an activist rock legend and one of the world's richest men and his wife carried the day in 2005, as Time magazine on Sunday named U2 frontman Bono and philanthropic couple Bill and Melinda Gates as its "Persons of the Year."

The Left has long dreamed of transnational institutions and rules running the world, yet here are individuals, nevermind states, that matter more.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:17 PM

ET TU, FLYBOY?:

John McCain: Bush Right to Use NSA (NewsMax, 12/18/05)

Sen. John McCain disappointed Democrats on Capitol Hill on Sunday by defending the Bush administration's decision to use the National Security Agency to monitor a limited number of domestic phone calls in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Saying that Sept. 11 "changed everything," McCain told ABC's "This Week": "The president, I think, has the right to do this."

"We all know that since Sept. 11 we have new challenges with enemies that exist within the United States of America - so the equation has changed."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:12 PM

THANKS, RON & PAUL:

Lessons of 25 Years (Michael Barone, 12/26/05, US News)

What are the lessons of the past 25 years?

First, that American military power can advance freedom and democracy to all corners of the world. Under Reagan and his three successors, America has played a lead role in extending freedom and democracy to most of Latin America, to the Philippines and Indonesia and almost all of East Asia, and, most recently, to Afghanistan and Iraq, with reverberations spreading through the Middle East. Area experts said, often plausibly, those countries' cultures were incompatible with democracy. Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and brave men and women in those nations proved them wrong.

Second, that markets work and that lower taxes and less onerous government produce more economic growth than the alternative. About 43 million jobs have been created in the United States since December 1980, while the number in the more statist nations of western Europe is on the order of 4 million. Markets are creating millions of jobs in nominally Communist China and once socialist India.

Third, that politics and effective government can, as Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, change the culture. The crime-control methods pioneered by New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and the welfare reforms pioneered by Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson, imitated around the country and followed up by federal legislation, resulted in huge decreases in crime and welfare dependency.

These lessons have been widely learned and widely applied by George W. Bush and also to a large extent by Bill Clinton. But not, curiously enough, by those who see themselves as the best and the brightest, our university and media elites.


It's been an awfully good quarter century to be an American.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:07 PM

PICKING THE UGLIEST ONE:

Iraq vote leaves Dems looking like the losers (MARK STEYN , 12/18/05, Chicago Sun-Times)

Well, that old Iraqi quagmire just keeps getting worse and worse, if only for the Democratic Party. What was the straw they were clutching at back in January? Oh, yeah, sure, gazillions of Kurds and Shiites might have gone to the polls, but where were the Sunni? As some of us said at the time, the Sunni'll come out tomorrow. And so they did. On Thursday, they voted in record numbers, leaving Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats frantically scrambling for another disaffected Iraqi minority group they could use as proof that the whole crazy neocon war-for-oil scam was a bust.

Unfortunately, there don't seem to be any disaffected Iraqi minority groups left. Oh, wait, there's Ahmed at 37 Sword of the Infidel Slayer Gardens in Ramadi. Apparently, he's still rejecting the new constitution. Maybe, if we're lucky, he's got a brother who's mildly irked. Whoops, sorry, they just went off to vote, too.

Heigh-ho. The Iraq election's over, the media did their best to ignore it, and, judging from the rippling torsos I saw every time I switched on the TV, the press seem to reckon that that gay cowboy movie was the big geopolitical event of the last week, if not of all time. Yes, yes, I know: They're not, technically, cowboys, they're gay shepherds, but even Hollywood isn't crazy enough to think it can sell gay shepherds to the world. And the point is, even if I was in the mood for a story about two rugged insecure men who find themselves strangely attracted to each other in a dark transgressive relationship that breaks all the rules, who needs Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger when you've got Howard Dean and Abu Musad al-Zarqawi? Yee-haw!


In all fairness, doesn't every vote leave them looking like losers?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:01 PM

THEY'D BE THE GM PARTY, IF THEY DIDN'T OPPOSE GM FOOD:...

New World Economy (MATT BAI, 12/18/05, NY Times Magazine)

Wal-Mart has now inherited G.M.'s mantle as the largest employer in the United States, which is why these snapshots of two corporations, taken in a single week, say more about America's economic trajectory than any truckload of spreadsheets ever could.

G.M., of course, was the very prototype of 20th-century bigness, the flagship company for a time when corporate power was vested in the hands of a small number of industrial-era institutions. There is no question that rising labor costs hurt G.M., but that obscures the larger point of the company's decline; caught in the last century's mind-set, it has often been unable or unwilling to let consumers drive its designs, as opposed to the other way around. Must the company keep making Buicks and Pontiacs until the end of days, even as they recede into American lore? Many of the workers G.M. decided to lay off last month were its best and most productive. Their bosses simply couldn't give them a car to build that Americans really wanted to buy.

As it happens, G.M.'s inability to adapt offers some perspective on our political process, too. Democrats in particular, architects of the finest legislation of the industrial age, have approached the global economy with the same inflexibility, at least since Bill Clinton left the scene. Just as G.M. has protected its outdated products at the expense of its larger mission, so, too, have Democrats become more attached to their programs than to the principles that made them vibrant in the first place. So what if Social Security and Medicaid functioned best in a world where most workers had company pensions and health insurance and spent their entire careers with one employer? The mere suggestion that these programs might be updated for a new, more consumer-driven economy sends Democratic leaders into fits of apoplexy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:56 PM

SAME OLD SAME OLD:

America’s Earliest Terrorists: Lessons from America’s first war against Islamic terror. (Joshua E. London, 12/16/05, National Review)

At the dawn of a new century, a newly elected United States president was forced to confront a grave threat to the nation — an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim terrorists. Worse still, these Islamic partisans operated under the protection and sponsorship of rogue Arab states ruled by ruthless and cunning dictators.

Sluggish in recognizing the full nature of the threat, America entered the war well after the enemy’s call to arms. Poorly planned and feebly executed, the American effort proceeded badly and at great expense — resulting in a hastily negotiated peace and an equally hasty declaration of victory.

As timely and familiar as these events may seem, they occurred more than two centuries ago. The president was Thomas Jefferson, and the terrorists were the Barbary pirates. Unfortunately, many of the easy lessons to be plucked from this experience have yet to be fully learned.


Mr. London's book on the topic was one of our picks for the best of 2005

MORE:
America's First War on Islamic Terror (Orrin Judd, 11/14/2005, Tech Central Station)

Joshua E. London's new book on America's Barbary Wars -- Victory in Tripoli : How America's War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation -- draws fascinating parallels to the current War on Terror. The following is an interview with the author, conducted in October 2005.


Posted by David Cohen at 12:59 PM

EVERY MAN THINKS MEANLY OF HIMSELF...

Injured soldier back to normal (Michael Rubinkam, AP, 12/17/05)

[Capt. Tamara Montgomery] oversaw more than 20 reconstruction and medical resupply projects, created a program at the University of Hillah to translate Western classics into Arabic, and won the prestigious General Douglas McArthur Award for her leadership.

She also survived three firefights. . . .

Insurgents peppered Montgomery’s convoy with automatic rifle fire on April 11, 2004, killing a Romanian security guard in her SUV. Montgomery, the rear gunner, was shot in the leg, and shrapnel severed the brachial artery in her arm. She managed to kill two insurgents, according to the military. . . .

Twenty months later, she is recovered from her wounds and back at her job as a biologist at Merck & Co.

She could retire from the military.

But she says she likes it too much.

“There is good being done, a lot of good being done. We want to see it finished. We want to see the Iraqi government (and the Iraqi military) be able to take over their country before we come home. Otherwise, all we’ve done is for naught.”


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:10 AM

FORGET THE HIDDEN IMAM, COUNT THE HIDDEN BENEFITS:

Opposition in Iran Showing Signs of Unity (ELI LAKE, December 8, 2005, NY Sun)

In the aftermath of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's ascendancy to the presidency of Iran, the country's opposition is beginning to show signs of unifying as the clerical regime wages a war against internal dissent.

Yesterday, the regime closed all schools in Tehran, citing poor air quality, after word leaked of the first major demonstrations since the summer. Nonetheless, a rally at Tehran University attracted 300 demonstrators amid a heavy police presence on campus. Of note is that before the rally against the new president, a coalition of Kurdish students also signed on to the call.

In Brussels on Monday, a meeting of 250 delegates for a new "World Congress of the Iran Referendum Movement," an outgrowth of efforts last year to find support for changing the charter of the Islamic Republic, agreed on a slate of principles and a plan to begin drafting a new constitution by the end of 2006.

The developments in Iran and abroad are significant after many activists became despondent after the hunger strike of dissident author Akbar Ganji did not end with his release from prison. Mr. Ganji, according to his wife, has been confined to a solitary cell for over 90 days at Evin prison. For a brief moment over the summer, his open letters against the supreme leader catapulted him to national attention as he subsisted on water for nearly three months. But as he has remained in jail and the former intelligence commander, Mr. Ahmadinejad, has placed hardliners loyal to the ruling clerics throughout the government, the space for political opposition has dwindled.

But, according to Iranian author and former political prisoner, Amir Abbas Fakhravar, the era of Mr. Ahmadinejad has also spurred previously warring factions among the opposition to come together.

"You cannot imagine to what extent the selection not the election of Ahmadinejad has had a hidden benefit," Mr. Fakhravar said in a telephone interview."All the sectors of the student and labor organizations and young people have become much closer than before, and became more united. There has been a hardened unity created."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:46 AM

THE GESTATION MIGHT TAKE JUST A BIT LONGER::

U.S. Ideals Meet Reality in Yemen (David Finkel, December 18, 2005, Washington Post)

On the first day, which would turn out to be the best day, the one day of all 180 days when everything actually seemed possible, the president of Yemen hadn't yet dismissively referred to an American named Robin Madrid as an old woman.

The president's foreign minister had yet to insist that a program of Madrid's -- funded by the U.S. government to bring democracy to Yemen's most lawless corners -- had to end immediately.

The president's interior minister had yet to restrict her from traveling to these corners.

The official newspaper of the president's political party had yet to publish a story suggesting that she was a spy.

On the first day, June 15, 2005, none of the 14 tribal sheiks who gathered in a conference room to meet with Madrid about her program had been followed by the internal police. None had been called by the police in the middle of the night. None had been summoned to the president's palace and told that Americans aren't to be trusted. And none had been hurt, killed or nearly killed, which would happen to one of the men on the 88th day of the program when he would be ambushed by three carloads of men with machine guns in an ongoing tribal war, the very thing that Madrid and the men hoped the program could end.

"So much of this work is done in the dark, or at least the dusk," Madrid would say wearily when that happened. But on the first day, she was so happy to have even reached the point of a first day that the very first words she said when she stood to address these 14 men weren't about war or death or terrorism, all of which would come up soon enough, but about the promise of the moment at hand.

"Let me congratulate you for the courage and the vision to start this," she said with an earnestness that would be painful in hindsight, and as she paused so her words could be translated into Arabic, there was a good, wide smile on her face.

Now the men were smiling, too.

Now they were clapping.

And that's how this began.

What happened over the next six months -- a period of time that ended three days ago -- was an experiment in the very meaning of democracy.

How it ended is this: Yemen, as of Dec. 15, was an embryonic democracy of 20 million people, 60 million guns, ongoing wars, active terrorists, extensive poverty, pervasive corruption, a high illiteracy rate, an infamous port where al Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in 2000, a notorious patch of valley that is the ancestral homeland of Osama bin Laden, and a widespread belief that the United States is the reason life here for so many is so miserable.

On June 15, when Robin Madrid's six-month program began, it was pretty much the same thing.


It takes a real embryo more than six months to develop, for goodness sakes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:44 AM

ALWAYS NICE WHEN THE UN DOES THE REGIME CHANGE GROUNDWORK:

U.N. Investigator Names Syria in Murder (The Associated Press, December 17, 2005)

The chief U.N. investigator into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri said in remarks published Saturday that he believed Syrian authorities were behind the killing.

It was the first time that Detlev Mehlis has unequivocally accused Syria of responsibility for Hariri's assassination since opening the U.N. probe in June.

Asked by the London-based Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat if he was firmly convinced that Syria was behind Hariri's killing, Mehlis replied, "Yes."

Asked whether he was directly accusing the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Mehlis said, "Let's say the Syrian authorities." He declined to elaborate.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:16 AM

STOP THE BEATIFICATION!:

White House 'never told' of WMD doubts (Sunday Herald Sun, 18dec05)

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.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:09 AM

YOU MEAN WE HAVE TO TAKE A POSITION?:

House votes against Iraq withdrawal timetables (Stephen Dinan, December 17, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The House yesterday voted against setting timetables for withdrawing troops from Iraq, marking the second time in recent weeks Republicans have forced a vote on U.S. policy in Iraq. [...]

The resolution passed 279-109 with 59 Democrats joining Republicans in favor, 108 Democrats and an independent voting against it and 32 Democrats and two Republicans voting present.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:50 AM

NO TURKEY?:

Cheney Makes Surprise Visit to Iraq (RICHARD W. STEVENSON, 12/18/05, NY Times)

Vice President Dick Cheney, taking a look for himself at the country he once predicted would greet Americans as liberators, made a surprise visit to Iraq on Sunday, and proclaimed that last week's election showed tangible progress toward a stable democracy.

After arriving in Baghdad amid great secrecy on Sunday morning, Mr. Cheney hopscotched around Iraq under intense security for nine hours. He got a briefing from the senior American officials in Baghdad, met with Iraq's leaders, got a firsthand look at newly trained Iraqi forces and spoke to United States military personnel.

It was Mr. Cheney's first trip to Iraq as vice president, and upon touching down here, he became the highest ranking American official to visit the country since President Bush's stop here on Thanksgiving 2003.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:03 AM

THEY AREN'T THE ENEMY:

Tensions Rise as More Flee Cuba for U.S. (ABBY GOODNOUGH, 12/18/05, NY Times)

The number of Cubans intercepted at sea while trying to reach the United States is at its highest level since tens of thousands took to the Florida Straits on makeshift rafts and in small boats in the 1994 exodus sanctioned by President Fidel Castro.

The sharp rise - and an increase in clashes between would-be immigrants and the Coast Guard - are inflaming tensions over a policy enacted in response to the 1994 migration that allows Cubans without visas to stay if they reach American soil but turns back those caught at sea.

The "wet foot, dry foot" policy, which does not apply to any other immigrant group, is being blamed by critics for at least 39 deaths this year in the Florida Straits and is testing the resolve of the Coast Guard, which the critics say has become too aggressive in enforcing the restrictions.

In offering a permanent escape to Cubans who make it here, they say, the policy encourages them to risk their lives.


If we're not going to change the regime we at least owe it to the Cuban people to accept anyone who wants to flee.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:00 AM

JUST WHEN JOHN MURTHA WAS READY TO SURRENDER TO THEM...:

Sunnis ready to cooperate with U.S. (Paul Martin, December 18, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Key Sunni Muslim leaders in Iraq's violent Anbar province have concluded that their interests lie in cooperating with the United States, and they are seeking to extend a temporary truce honored by most insurgent groups for last week's elections.

But at the same time, they are demanding specific steps by the U.S. military, including a reduction in military raids and an increase in development projects for their vast desert province that stretches from the edge of Baghdad to the Syrian and Jordanian borders.

Adnan al-Dulaimi, leader of a prominent Sunni bloc, confirmed yesterday that insurgent groups had prevented violence from interfering with Thursday's election for a 275-seat parliament.

His comments yesterday on a cease-fire deal -- first reported in The Washington Times on the day Iraqis voted -- provided the first public explanation for the sharp drop in violence last week. "


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:55 AM

JUST ANOTHER ENLIGHTENED MONARCHY:

Bhutan king announces abdication (BBC, 12/18/05)

The king of Bhutan says he will step down when the country will hold its first national democratic elections in 2008, state media reported.

King Jigme Singye Wangchuck said he would be succeeded as leader of the tiny and remote Himalayan kingdom by his son, the crown prince. [...]

Speaking in a remote village three days' drive from the capital, Thimpu, the king told thousands of yak herders, monks, farmers, and students that he would begin handing over responsibility to the crown prince immediately.

"I would like our people to know that the first national election to elect a government under a system of parliamentary democracy will take place in 2008," the 50-year-old told the crowd gathered in Trashiyangtse.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:40 AM

DID HE KISS TIPPER FIRST?:

Blair isolated as loyalist Prescott attacks reforms (EDDIE BARNES AND BRIAN BRADY, 12/18/05, Times of London)

TONY Blair suffered a crushing blow to his authority last night after his loyal deputy, John Prescott, broke ranks for the first time to issue a devastating attack on the Prime Minister's education reforms.

In what could prove a decisive moment in Blair's premiership, Prescott declared that the Prime Minister's plans to reform secondary schools in England would condemn working class children to a second class education. [...]

Blair and his Education Secretary Ruth Kelly are proposing a massive shake-up of secondary schools in England, which propose a new breed of self-governing 'trust' schools. New 'City Academies', part-funded by private cash, would also enjoy greater freedom over their admissions policies.

But Prescott last night became the first Cabinet minister to openly voice dissent, declaring: "I'm not totally convinced major reform is necessary."


The Clinton era, during which Democrats might have staked a permanent claim to the Third Way in America, ended when Al Gore gave his convention speech and returned the party to the 1970s. You can feel the Labour hardliners chomping at the same bit. Even the Tories may not be so incompetent as to blow the opportunity they're about to be handed.

MORE (via Mike Daley):
Betrayed by Blair (Daily Telegraph, 18/12/2005)

Join us in a little thought experiment. Suppose that Tony Blair had stuck to his guns in Brussels.

Imagine that he had argued, as he did six months ago, that since Britain was already a disproportionate net contributor to the EU, it was unreasonable for our bill to be increased yet further.

Hypothesise that, when his fellow heads of Government called his proposals "unacceptable", he had replied: "Fine: don't accept them, then", and that the talks had concluded without issue. Conjecture that, in consequence, the EU budget had dried up altogether. Who would have been the big losers?

The main victims would, of course, have been EU officials.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:18 AM

SCALING UP:

To feed a lifestyle, some are taking second jobs: More in middle class finding seasonal work (Jenn Abelson, December 18, 2005, Boston Globe)

Kevin Kipler spends his days managing corporate flights and military jets at Bangor International Airport. At night, the 41-year-old father listens to gift orders in a cubicle at L.L. Bean, where he recently took on a seasonal job as a quality control coach.

Sometimes, during his 15-hour days, he forgets which job he's at, mistakenly calling people passengers instead of customers.

''It's a lot of work. You sacrifice a lot," Kipler said. ''But you have to look at the bottom line. I've got a mortgage to pay and other bills. My kids are young, and I'm used to buying them a certain amount of gifts. I don't want to scale back."

Given the choice between cutting back or living well, a growing number of people are choosing to take on a second job. The number of Americans with full-time jobs taking on part-time work during the holiday season jumped nearly 9 percent to 12.2 million people over the past three years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.


The Europeans have unemployment as high as 10% while we can all find second jobs and not a few are willing to work them to improve their own economic standing. We just aren't anything like them anymore.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:08 AM

WHAT WERE THEY WAITING FOR?:

RCMP arrest Khadr brother (MICHELLE SHEPHARD, Dec. 18, 2005, TORONTO STAR)

Abdullah Khadr, the eldest son of a reputed Canadian Al Qaeda financier, was arrested by the RCMP yesterday on terrorism-related charges at the request of American authorities. [...]

According to Western intelligence services, Khadr ran an Al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan in the late 1990s. But in an interview with the Star he claimed he's not a terrorist.

"I just want everybody to know I have nothing to do with anything," he said earlier this month.

The RCMP confirmed the arrest. "We arrested Mr. Khadr on the grounds of a provisional warrant issued by the department of justice, after the U.S. government petitioned the Canadian courts to allow for his arrest," said RCMP Corporal Michele Paradis. "The process had nothing to do with the RCMP. We received it today and acted on it."


Odd how much they sound like him.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:06 AM

WHY DOES GEORGE BUSH HATE RICH WHITE PEOPLE?:

Katrina Killed Across Class Lines: The well-to-do died along with the poor, an analysis of data shows. The findings counter common beliefs that disadvantaged blacks bore the brunt. (Nicholas Riccardi, Doug Smith and David Zucchino, December 18, 2005, LA Times)

The bodies of New Orleans residents killed by Hurricane Katrina were almost as likely to be recovered from middle-class neighborhoods as from the city's poorer districts, such as the Lower 9th Ward, according to a Times analysis of data released by the state of Louisiana.

The analysis contradicts what swiftly became conventional wisdom in the days after the storm hit — that it was the city's poorest African American residents who bore the brunt of the hurricane. Slightly more than half of the bodies were found in the city's poorer neighborhoods, with the remainder scattered throughout middle-class and even some richer districts.

"The fascinating thing is that it's so spread out," said Joachim Singelmann, director of the Louisiana Population Data Center at Louisiana State University. "It's not just the Lower 9th Ward or New Orleans East, which everybody has heard about. It's across the board, including some well-to-do neighborhoods."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:56 AM

MARX OR JESUS?:

Islamists Ride Wave of Freedom: Religious parties in the Middle East are using democracy to gain power and legitimacy (Megan K. Stack and Tyler Marshall, December 18, 2005, LA Times)

In recent elections across Iraq and other countries in the region, Islamist parties have capitalized skillfully on new political freedoms to gain clout and legitimacy unprecedented in the modern Middle East. The growing strength of the religion-based parties is the single most unpredictable element in the Bush administration's grand vision to replace despots with democracy.

Whether it's the Shiite Muslim-dominated United Iraqi Alliance, Lebanon's Hezbollah, the Palestinian group Hamas or Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, Islamist parties have benefited from the administration's promotion of democracy in the Arab world.


This is the moment of maximum danger for Islam. If Islamists parties try to run their economies and politics along strictly Islamic lines they're destined not only to fail but to discredit Islam itself as thoroughly as Marxism was descredited by its failures. If, on the other hand, they have foresight enough to adopt rather liberal, Anglo-American, economic policies and combine them with Islamic moral/social policies, they stand to get credit for the rise in living standards that would follow. They may hate America, but it offers the template that those who wish to retain a strong religious base in a modern nation should obviously follow.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:53 AM

FIRST BITE AT THE APPLE:

'Modest' deal struck in Hong Kong (BBC, 12/18/05)

A limited trade deal has been reached in Hong Kong after developing countries approved a European Union offer to end farm export subsidies by 2013. [...]

The US is resisting pressure to rapidly reduce the subsidies it gives to domestic cotton farmers, a source of great concern for African countries.

BBC economics editor Evan Davis said the toughest trade issues remained unresolved at the end of the meeting.

Sunday's deal on farm export subsidies - which has to be formally agreed by the World Trade Organization's near 150 members - followed round-the-clock negotiations between the US, European Union and developing countries.

Poorer countries pushed hard for an end-date of 2010, so the agreement, which will see some but not all subsidies eliminated by then, represents a compromise.


Get everyone used to the notion and then at the next round push the date forward. We ought to lead though.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:12 AM

A PRODUCT OF HIS APPLIED DARWINIST TIMES:

THE STAIN ON AMERICAN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY: A Review Of By Order Of The President: FDR And The Internment Of Japanese Americans By Greg Robinson (DAVID C. LUNDSGAARD, Oct. 26, 2001, Writ Law)

Robinson’s evaluation of FDR’s motivation is complex, referencing a variety of critical factors that affected FDR’s decision-making. These factors included public pressure from politically powerful anti-Japanese interest groups, bad advice from senior staffers, FDR’s free-wheeling administrative style, and outright dishonesty on the part of key administration officials. Ultimately, however, there are two factors that seem to bear most of the weight of Robinson’s answer to his fundamental question of how FDR could have sponsored his administration’s evacuation and internment policy.

The first is the impact on the young FDR of then-common views of "scientific racism." Today, we are prone to ascribe such Social Darwinist thinking to the losers in World War II (Nazis and Fascists), rather than to the winners. Yet Robinson correctly points out how prevalent those views were throughout the Western world during FDR’s life.

Most importantly (and most effectively for his thesis), Robinson goes beyond simply identifying and quoting from the popular Social Darwinist texts of the time, he connects those texts specifically to FDR’s own early writings and speeches. We read FDR echoing enthusiastically the conclusions of American militarists that the Japanese were genetically predisposed to oppose "Western" values and thought; that Japanese American citizens were essentially "inassimilable" into American society; and that Anglo-Saxon racial purity should be maintained through preventing intermarriage between the races.

According to Robinson, this view conditioned FDR to think of the Japanese as fundamentally alien. Thus, when the military suggested that all Japanese be evacuated from the West Coast on the grounds that it was impossible to distinguish between loyal and disloyal Japanese, FDR was prepared to believe that the military view was correct.

Later, FDR was insensitive to the constitutional fact that the government was indefinitely imprisoning American citizens without charge, and Robinson persuasively explains why. It was because, at some level, FDR did not appreciate that Japanese Americans could be true American citizens in the first place.


Oh, well, as long as it was scientific....



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

"THE DRAMA OF THE SOUL'S CHOICE":

Dorothy Sayers: "The Dogma Is the Drama": An interview with Barbara Reynolds. (Chris Armstrong, 12/16/2005, Christianity Today)

CH&B senior editor Chris Armstrong talked recently with Sayers's friend, biographer, and collaborator in Dante translation, Dr. Barbara Reynolds, from her home in England. [...] Dr. Reynolds's 1989 book, The Passionate Intellect: Dorothy L. Sayers' Encounter with Dante, is one of this interviewer's favorite works of intellectual biography. [...]

One of the best-known creative products that flowed from this "tidal wave" of intellectual energy was her mystery stories, which have never been out of print. What is it about these that still compels and speaks to us today?

Certainly, she told stories masterfully—plotting with care and insisting on the "fair play" rule, by which readers are given enough evidence to solve the mystery by the end of the book. And her main characters, Lord Peter Wimsey and Harriet Vane, are both attractive and interesting figures. They develop and deepen—especially in that later sequence of novels which includes Strong Poison, Have His Carcase, and Gaudy Night. This is partly because Sayers wove the threads of her own experience, thoughts, and feelings into the fabric of their characters. This depth dimension in the characters fascinates readers, and they seek out other stories in the series.

But more important for Sayers than bare story were a number of recurring ethical themes that she wove into her tales. A good example of this is Gaudy Night—one of her best novels. The story involves the dawning awareness on the part of Harriet Vane, an Oxford-trained scholar like Sayers herself, that no relationship can ever be sound that is not founded on the integrity of each party.

Harriet has continued to serve as a recognizable, living example of the modern, creative, independent woman, battling to reconcile the conflicting claims of the personal and the impersonal. [...]

When she began writing her plays, Sayers was not yet doing any of the lay theological writing for which she later became renowned. How did this happen?

In April 1938, following the success of her radio play He That Should Come, the editor of the Sunday Times invited Sayers to contribute an article for Passion Sunday. She wrote "The Greatest Drama Ever Staged is the Official Creed of Christendom." This and a companion article, "The Dogma Is the Drama," also published in April 1938 in St Martin's Review, launched her into yet another career as a public apologist and theological writer.

A sentence from a letter Sayers wrote at the time gives you a flavor of these essays: "The dogma of the Incarnation is the most dramatic thing about Christianity, and indeed, the most dramatic thing that ever entered the mind of man; but if you tell people so, they stare at you in bewilderment."

How did her role as a public Christian writer expand in wartime?

As soon as the Second World War was declared, her publisher Victor Gollancz invited his most marketable author to write what he called "a wartime essay." She responded with a book of 152 pages titled Begin Here. This book and a related series of books on national reconstruction that Sayers conceived and edited—Bridgeheads, she called it—laid out four themes.

First, Sayers emphasized the irrevocable nature of time and the need for redemptive human activity: The future is here and now; the past is irretrievably gone; what has gone wrong cannot be undone, it can only be redeemed. Second, she placed creativity at the core of what it means to be human beings made in the image of the Triune God. Third, she grieved over how a mechanistic, capitalist society had devalued work from God-given vocation to a mere means of sustenance. She believed that a mechanized society has diminished the essential nature of human beings by imposing on them repetitive, numbing work. Fourth, she also believed that the prevalently economic structure of society had degraded education by directing it to commercial ends.

Underlying all these themes is a concern for individual freedom and responsibility, or what she called, in reference to Dante, "the drama of the soul's choice." Both the genre of the mystery novel and the peculiar powers of theater allowed her to portray people's moral choices in powerful ways.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

OBLIGATORY WINDRIPISM REFERENCE:

Public enemy: Sinclair Lewis's 1935 novel 'It Can't Happen Here' envisioned an America in thrall to a homespun facist dictator. Newly reissued, it's as unsettling a read as ever (Joe Keohane, December 18, 2005, Boston Globe)

PICTURE THIS: A folksy, self-consciously plainspoken Southern politician rises to power during a period of profound unrest in America. The nation is facing one of the half-dozen or so of its worst existential crises to date, and the people, once sunny, confident, and striving, are now scared, angry, and disillusioned.

This politician, a ''Professional Common Man,'' executes his rise by relentlessly attacking the liberal media, fancy-talking intellectuals, shiftless progressives, pinkos, promiscuity, and welfare hangers-on, all the while clamoring for a return to traditional values, to love of country, to the pie-scented days of old when things made sense and Americans were indisputably American. He speaks almost entirely in ''noble but slippery abstractions''-Liberty, Freedom, Equality-and people love him, even if they can't fully articulate why without resorting to abstractions themselves.

Through a combination of factors-his easy bearing chief among them (along with massive cash donations from Big Business; disorganization in the liberal opposition; a stuffy, aloof opponent; and support from religious fanatics who feel they've been unfairly marginalized)-he wins the presidential election.

Once in, he appoints his friends and political advisers to high-level positions, stocks the Supreme Court with ''surprisingly unknown lawyers who called [him] by his first name,'' declaws Congress, allows Big Business to dictate policy, consolidates the media, and fills newspapers with ''syndicated gossip from Hollywood.'' Carping newspapermen worry that America is moving backward to a time when anti-German politicians renamed sauerkraut ''Liberty Cabbage'' and ''hick legislators...set up shop as scientific experts and made the world laugh itself sick by forbidding the teaching of evolution,'' but newspaper readers, wary of excessive negativity, pay no mind.

Given the nature of ''powerful and secret enemies'' of America-who are ''planning their last charge'' to take away our freedom-an indefinite state of crisis is declared, and that freedom is stowed away for safekeeping. When the threat passes, we can have it back, but in the meantime, citizens are asked to ''bear with'' the president.

Sure, some say these methods are extreme, but the plain folks are tired of wishy-washy leaders, and feel the president's decisiveness is its own excuse. Besides, as one man says, a fascist dictatorship ''couldn't happen here in America...we're a country of freemen!''

While more paranoid readers might be tempted to draw parallels between this scenario and sundry predicaments we may or may not be in right now....


We're with Babbitt.


December 17, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:08 PM

YOUR INDIFFERENCE CAN'T BIND HIM:

Last of the true believers (John Lloyd, December 16 2005, Financial Times)

When the former foreign secretary Robin Cook died, he was given a service in St Giles Cathedral, in his native Edinburgh, one of the historic worshipping places of the Church of Scotland. The former Episcopalian Primate of Scotland and Bishop of Edinburgh, Richard Holloway, took the service. He smiled broadly as he described it - “Here was I, an agnostic Anglican, taking the service in a Presbyterian church, for a dead atheist politician. And I thought that was just marvellous.” He added: “Of course, he was a Presbyterian atheist, which means he distrusted authority - even that of atheism” (one could add of Cook, as of many Presbyterians, that he distrusted an authority that was not his own).

Holloway had long been seen as a man living and ministering at the very edge of where religion meets benign disbelief. He publishes a slim volume of reflections most years; the latest is an effort at reconciliation of the human with what he calls “the massive indifference of the universe”. He addresses himself to, and puts himself among, those “who are living Out There, in the place where God is absent”. In an earlier, less bleak book he writes that if the “truth” of Christianity (and of other great religions) can never be proven, still its moral challenge should not be renounced - an abandonment of the form to save the core. In another he writes that many thinkers “admire the way religions at their best produce people who are benefactors of humanity, servants of the poor and champions of the weak. While they may no longer practise religion themselves, they like the way it continues to challenge human folly and cruelty.”

Holloway’s vision is what Christianity in Britain tends to become: a repository of presumed goodness and wisdom which has no, or at best a very distant, God, but owes a lot to Him. [...]

This decline is significant for Britain, even if most of its citizens don’t actively care, for two reasons. First, there has never been an organised, non-Christian challenge to the established Churches on their own territory before. Judaism, itself declining in the UK, was never much interested in converts and is determinedly patriotic: no synagogue service is complete without wishes for the health of the monarch and the government. Now, however, the established Churches face in Islam a faith that is militant, self-confident, fundamentalist (even where it is, by its own lights, moderate) and linked to communities of largely recent immigrants that are growing while the older established communities of the UK are shrinking. On one estimate, there will be more Muslims in mosques than Christians in churches by 2013. It is presently the faith of the future: it grows through rising birth rates and through conversion, including among the young urban poor to whom Christianity still ministers and does much to assist, but does not appeal. Yet unlike the other faiths, it has little interest in dialogue or even understanding, has many adherents who are militantly anti-Semitic or anti-Hindu and it links Christianity to the oppression of the Muslim and, above all, the Arab world.

Second, care or not, the thought that the Christian religion will actually dwindle into real insignificance is a sobering one. What then becomes the standard for morality? Politics? But political parties are themselves declining and their ideologies are no longer convincing as moral poles, even to themselves. Civic duty might sustain a working morality; so too might feelings of charity, or pity, or remorse. But these latter emotions have come to us through Christianity, even if we have secularised and bureaucratised them. If what sustained them is, or becomes, too weak to continue the tradition, what happens to them?


The second reason is why the first is promising, not threatening.

MORE (via Ed Driscoll):
O come, all ye faithless (Mark Steyn, 12/17/05, The Spectator)

Peter Watson, the author of a new book called Ideas: a History of Thought and Invention, from Fire to Freud, was interviewed by the New York Times the other day, and was asked to name ‘the single worst idea in history’. He replied:

‘Without question, ethical monotheism. The idea of one true god. The idea that our life and ethical conduct on Earth determines how we will go into the next world. This has been responsible for most of the wars and bigotry in history.’

And a Merry Christmas to you, too. For a big-ideas guy, Watson is missing the bigger question: something has to be ‘responsible for most of the wars and bigotry’, and if it wasn’t religion, it would surely be something else. In fact, in the 20th century, it was. Europe’s post-Christian pathogens of communism and Nazism unleashed horrors on a scale inconceivable even to the most ambitious Pope. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot: you’d look in vain for any of them in the pews each Sunday. Marx has a lot more blood on his hands than Christ — other people’s blood, I mean — but the hyper-rationalists are noticeably less keen to stick him with the tab for the party. [...]

It’s hard to persuade an atheist to believe in God. But unless he’s the proverbial ‘militant atheist’ — or, more accurately, fundamentalist atheist — the so-called rationalist ought to be capable of a rational assessment of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of different societies. If he is, he’ll find it hard to conclude other than that the most secular societies have the worst prospects. Rationalism is killing poor childless Europe. But instead of rethinking the irrationalism of rationalism, the rationalists are the ones clinging to blind faith, ever more hysterically.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:04 PM

NOT SAINT COLIN TOO?:

Powell raps Europe on CIA flights (BBC, 12/17/05)

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has indicated that Europeans are being disingenuous when they deny knowledge of the rendition of terror suspects.

Mr Powell said the recently highlighted practice of moving people to places where they are not covered by US law was neither "new or unknown" to Europe.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:52 PM

THERE CAN'T BE ANY HUNT LEFT IN THAT OLD DOG:

Class war: Prescott attacks Blair's education reforms and Cameron's 'Eton Mafia' (Patrick Hennessy and Melissa Kite, 18/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

John Prescott reignites the "class war" today in an outspoken attack on the Eton "Mafia" running the Conservative Party and an assault on Tony Blair's planned education reforms.

The Deputy Prime Minister pulled no punches in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, asserting that Labour were "always better fighting class" and that the battle against the Tories of Eton-educated David Cameron would rejuvenate his party.

It is, however, his decision to break cover and warn that Mr Blair's White Paper on school reform could lead to a two-tier, class-ridden education system, that will electrify Westminster.


Cameron Derangement Syndrome already?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:48 PM

WORTH MORE MOLTEN (via Bryan Francoeur):

Heist of hefty Henry Moore sculpture (Reuters, 12/17/05)

British police hunted for three men on Saturday who stole a huge bronze Henry Moore sculpture worth up to 3 million pounds ($5.3 million) and a spokesman said they feared the piece would be destroyed for scrap.

Whic pretty much sums up modern art.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:31 PM

DOOM PATROL:

Can America keep it up? (The Economist, Dec 14th 2005)

FOR several years now, economists have been watching American consumers with the same mixture of astonishment and anticipation that wide-eyed fans bring to endurance sports: amazing that they’ve made it so far, but how much longer can they go on like this? Strong consumer spending has underpinned America’s robust economic expansion, even as most other industrialised countries have struggled to get their economies back on track. But consumers have been running down savings to sustain this level of spending; the personal savings rate has actually been negative since June. Booming house prices and low interest rates have enabled consumers to take on more debt without suffering much, but with interest rates now climbing, Americans have begun to feel the pinch. Data from the Federal Reserve show that the percentage of household disposable income devoted to servicing debt was a record 16.6% in the third quarter.

Yet the consumers soldier on. Figures released by the Census Bureau on Tuesday December 13th show that retail sales in November, when the Christmas shopping season starts, were up by 0.3% from October, and 6.3% higher than a year earlier. And on Wednesday, the Department of Commerce announced that imports of oil, cars and consumer goods caused the already gaping trade deficit to balloon even further in October, to a record $68.9 billion. This surprised economists, who had been expecting the deficit to fall slightly as oil prices subsided from their September highs.

It seems unlikely that consumers will have the stamina to keep this up much longer.


I just know this is the year the USSR surpasses our GDP...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:09 PM

FASCIST IS AS FASCIST DOES:

Reflections in the Evening Land: The celebrated critic Harold Bloom, despairing of contemporary America, turns to his bookshelves to understand the trajectory of his country (Harold Bloom, December 17, 2005, The Guardian)

Huey Long, known as "the Kingfish," dominated the state of Louisiana from 1928 until his assassination in 1935, at the age of 42. Simultaneously governor and a United States senator, the canny Kingfish uttered a prophecy that haunts me in this late summer of 2005, 70 years after his violent end: "Of course we will have fascism in America but we will call it democracy!"

I reflected on Huey Long (always mediated for me by his portrait as Willie Stark in Robert Penn Warren's novel, All the King's Men) recently, when I listened to President George W Bush addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Salt Lake City, Utah. I was thus benefited by Rupert Murdoch's Fox TV channel, which is the voice of Bushian crusading democracy, very much of the Kingfish's variety. Even as Bush extolled his Iraq adventure, his regime daily fuses more tightly together elements of oligarchy, plutocracy, and theocracy.

At the age of 75, I wonder if the Democratic party ever again will hold the presidency or control the Congress in my lifetime.


You don't have to approve of Huey Long to find it amusing that it was instead FDR who set up the American concentration camps.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:46 PM

JUDGED BY HIS OWN TERMS, A CATSTROPHE:

Election Day on the Euphrates: Democracy vs. Zarqawi (Bill Roggio, 12/26/2005, Weekly Standard)

In the Sunni-dominated province of Anbar, the cities of Barwana, Haqlaniya, and Haditha are collectively known as the Triad. Over the summer, before the joint U.S. military and Iraqi forces established a security presence in the Triad, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's commander in Iraq, was said to have run up the black flag and declared the region an "Islamic Republic." Beheadings, hangings, and execution-style killings were routinely carried out against those who were believed to have cooperated with U.S. forces or the Iraqi government.

On Election Day last week, the atmosphere in the Triad was quite different. In the city of Barwana, with a population of approximately 20,000, voters showed up in droves. The process was more or less orderly, and no one was harassed for participating. I observed all this as an embed with Lima Company of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, the unit assigned to ensure the security of the city in conjunction with the Iraqi Army.

The polling site in Barwana was on the Euphrates River, between hills and a teeming palm grove, a welcome site in the land of deserts. The voting center was easy to secure as well as accessible to the residents. But there seemed to be a hidden meaning behind its placement. The voting center sat directly beneath the recently destroyed Barwana bridge, where Zarqawi terrorists had routinely executed residents. And the building itself used to be the headquarters of the local Baath party. If there was a message here, it was this: The old order is dead, and a new government has replaced the repressive regimes that once dominated the Triad and Iraq.


As in the wars against Nazism and Communism, folks underestimate the advantage we have thanks to our enemy being delusional.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:44 PM

GETTING TO MCCAIN'S RIGHT:

Taking Liberties With the Nation's Security (RUDOLPH W. GIULIANI, 12/17/05, NY Times)

YESTERDAY the Senate failed to reauthorize the USA Patriot Act, as a Democratic-led filibuster prevented a vote. This action - which leaves the act, key elements of which are due to expire on Dec. 31, in limbo - represents a grave potential threat to the nation's security. I support the extension of the Patriot Act for one simple reason: Americans must use every legal and constitutional tool in their arsenal to fight terrorism and protect their lives and liberties.

Smart politics.

MORE:
Radio Address by the President to the Nation (George W. Bush, The Roosevelt Room, 12/17/05)

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning.

As President, I took an oath to defend the Constitution, and I have no greater responsibility than to protect our people, our freedom, and our way of life. On September the 11th, 2001, our freedom and way of life came under attack by brutal enemies who killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans. We're fighting these enemies across the world. Yet in this first war of the 21st century, one of the most critical battlefronts is the home front. And since September the 11th, we've been on the offensive against the terrorists plotting within our borders.

One of the first actions we took to protect America after our nation was attacked was to ask Congress to pass the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act tore down the legal and bureaucratic wall that kept law enforcement and intelligence authorities from sharing vital information about terrorist threats. And the Patriot Act allowed federal investigators to pursue terrorists with tools they already used against other criminals. Congress passed this law with a large, bipartisan majority, including a vote of 98-1 in the United States Senate.

Since then, America's law enforcement personnel have used this critical law to prosecute terrorist operatives and supporters, and to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia, California, Texas and Ohio. The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do: it has protected American liberty and saved American lives.

Yet key provisions of this law are set to expire in two weeks. The terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks. The terrorists want to attack America again, and inflict even greater damage than they did on September the 11th. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that law enforcement and intelligence officials have the tools they need to protect the American people.

The House of Representatives passed reauthorization of the Patriot Act. Yet a minority of senators filibustered to block the renewal of the Patriot Act when it came up for a vote yesterday. That decision is irresponsible, and it endangers the lives of our citizens. The senators who are filibustering must stop their delaying tactics, and the Senate must vote to reauthorize the Patriot Act. In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment.

To fight the war on terror, I am using authority vested in me by Congress, including the Joint Authorization for Use of Military Force, which passed overwhelmingly in the first week after September the 11th. I'm also using constitutional authority vested in me as Commander-in-Chief.

In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks.

This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country.

As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks, and the commission criticized our nation's inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad. Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf al Hamzi and Khalid al Mihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn't know they were here, until it was too late.

The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after September the 11th helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities. The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time. And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.

The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland. During each assessment, previous activities under the authorization are reviewed. The review includes approval by our nation's top legal officials, including the Attorney General and the Counsel to the President. I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups.

The NSA's activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA's top legal officials, including NSA's general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Intelligence officials involved in this activity also receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization.

This authorization is a vital tool in our war against the terrorists. It is critical to saving American lives. The American people expect me to do everything in my power under our laws and Constitution to protect them and their civil liberties. And that is exactly what I will continue to do, so long as I'm the President of the United States.

Thank you.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:41 AM

WHAT SADDAM BOUGHT....US:

Annan tells Bush that Iraqi vote went well (Associated Press, Dec. 17, 2005)

UN Secretary-General Kofi ] Annan told Bush that violence in Iraq was low, voter turnout was high and that the Iraqi people had cleared another hurdle "on the road to democracy," said Federick Jones, spokesman for the National Security Council.

Sure the Oil-for-Food scandal was a disgrace, but the beauty is we got our war anyway and now we own the Secretary-General.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:16 AM

NUMBERED DAYS:

Iran President's Bodyguard Dies in Ambush (Iran Focus, December 17, 2005)

One of the bodyguards of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was killed and another wounded when an attempt to ambush the presidential motorcade was thwarted in the southeastern province of Sistan and Baluchestan, according to a semi-official newspaper and local residents.

“At 6:50 pm on Thursday, the lead car in the presidential motorcade confronted armed bandits and trouble-makers on the Zabol-Saravan highway”, the semi-official Jomhouri Islami reported on Saturday.

“In the ensuing armed clash, the driver of the vehicle, who was an indigenous member of the security services, and one of the president’s bodyguards died, while another bodyguard was wounded”, the newspaper, which was founded by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, wrote.

Ahmadinejad traveled to the restive province, where ethnic Baluchis have been fighting for years for autonomy, on Wednesday and returned to Tehran on Friday afternoon. Tehran often refers to anti-government activists and political opponents of the Islamist regime as “bandits” and “trouble-makers”.

The newspaper report made no mention of Ahmadinejad’s whereabouts during the attack on his bodyguards’ vehicle, but Zabol residents reached by telephone said there were rumors in the town that the hard-line president himself was the target of the attack, which took place near Zabol.


He has more to fear from Ayatollah Khameini than from the Baluchi.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:12 AM

HOW ABOUT AT LEAST NOT A FOE?:

A friend at the Fed? (Larry Kudlow, Dec 17, 2005, Townhall)

I still can't forgive the central bank for decimating and deflating the bullish stock market economy five years ago, a move that temporarily ended the great productivity surge of the Internet revolution. But perhaps they have learned a thing or two, and perhaps the arrival of the brilliant Ben Bernanke as Fed chair will be an occasion for real change.

In shorthand, the Fed's policy statement last week strongly suggested that the recent 18-month tightening cycle soon will come to an end. It raised its target rate from 4 percent to 4.25 percent, and perhaps there's another small move or two left. But bond-market indicators have for quite some time been signaling an absence of inflationary pressures -- a matter confirmed by the actual data, where the basic inflation rate continues under 2 percent.

Not only has the 10-year Treasury bond been hovering at a half-century low of 4.5 percent for many years, but the difference between this cash bond and its inflation-indexed cousin suggests that low inflation is here to stay for another decade.


There's no excuse for real interest rates as high as they are in globalized economy with demographics trending towards the aged.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:52 AM

THE LESSON THE GRAY LADY TAKES AWAY:

The Collapsing Claims on Cloning (NY Times, 12/17/05)

The Korean fiasco should serve as a stimulus to get American scientists cracking on their own plans for therapeutic cloning research, and on doing it right.

While they're at it, why not redo the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment with non-blacks?


MORE:
The Long Road of Eugenics: From Rockefeller to Roe v. Wade (Rebecca Messall, 10/11/05, Human Life Review )

The infamous Roe v. Wade decision relies directly and indirectly on the work of members of the British and American eugenic societies and of eugenics- related groups and initiatives. The evidence that eugenics was a basis for Roe helps explain the seemingly irreconcilable contradiction between constitutional theory and current constitutional practice. The inscription on the U.S. Supreme Court building proclaims, “Equal Justice Under Law”— but eugenics is based on the premise that people are not equal, that some are lesser than others: particularly people who are disabled, but also people who are not white, or who are not well educated, or who are weakened by age or illness. In 1999, a Time magazine article described the 20th century as “cursed by eugenics”; in 2004, the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., sponsored an exhibit about the Darwin-based eugenic theory behind the Nazis’ plans to breed a race of human thoroughbreds.

More than 30 years after Roe and 60 years after the Holocaust, the fact that eugenic theory has been an important basis for U.S. policy on reproductive rights continues to have global implications. American foreign policy today legitimizes groups that advocate abortion and other forms of population control in non-white countries. At the domestic level, abortion has had a disparate effect on African-Americans: The reduction in the number of black voters from the number that would have existed absent Roe has diluted their political voice. In 1996, U.S. News & World Report reported that “blacks, who make up 14 percent of all childbearing women, have 31 percent of all abortions, and whites, who account for 81 percent of women of childbearing age, have 61 percent.” In December 2003, the Centers for Disease Control reported that between 1980 and 2002 the African-American fertility rate per one thousand women had been cut from 84.9 to 65.8, while the fertility rate for whites moved down only slightly from 65.6 to 64.8 per one thousand women.

The Nazi Connection

U.S. abortion policy is visible in the American Eugenics Society’s 1956 membership records, which reveal that its members included a Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, and at least two of its presidents, William Vogt and Alan Guttmacher. This fact alone ought to give abortionrights advocates second thoughts about their pro-choice politics: The AES had an ugly history of multiple ties to prominent Nazis in Germany, and its members even assisted Hitler in crafting the 1933 German sterilization laws. The group retained, while Hitler was in power, top Nazi scientists—Drs. Rudin, Fischer, and Ruttke—as advisers and journal contributors. Among the AES members—after the Holocaust—was Dr. Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, a co-director of the Rockefeller-funded Kaiser Wilhelm Eugenics Institute in Germany. Before 1940, Verschuer had founded the Institute for Hereditary Biology and Racial Research at Frankfurt University, and retained Dr. Josef Mengele as his assistant. Verschuer had written a widely circulated paper in which he described the need for a “complete solution to the Jewish question.” At one point, he provided Mengele with a recommendation letter, which praised Mengele’s “reliability, combined background in anthropology and medicine, and capacity for clear verbal presentation of difficult intellectual problems.” It was Verschuer who made the fateful recommendation to Mengele that he request a transfer to Auschwitz, which offered a “unique possibility” for biological research. At Auschwitz, Mengele dissected people after they were tortured and killed, and sent his “research” to Verschuer. Before the Holocaust, the AES had lobbied successfully for the Johnson Act, the restrictive 1924 immigration law that— among other things—caused the steamship St. Louis to be refused entry to the U.S. in 1939; the ship returned to Europe, where many of the Jews aboard were killed.

The AES lobbied, with equal success, for involuntary-sterilization laws in the U.S., which were to claim an estimated 63,000 victims. The laws were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1927 case of Buck v. Bell, which was cited in Roe. Some states—Oregon, Virginia, South Carolina, and California—have recently extended official regrets and/or apologies for those laws.

Blackmun, the Rockefellers, and Eugenics

Justice Harry A. Blackmun’s 1973 opinion in Roe is traceable to eugenics through his direct and indirect citations of works by members of the British and American eugenics societies. Among the other authorities he cited were lower federal court cases that expressly invoked overpopulation as a basis for legalizing abortion; projects and organizations tinged with eugenics, including the Rockefellers’ Kinsey-based Model Penal Code and the American Public Health Association, which was on record in favor of abortion as a form of population control; Justice Holmes’s Buck v. Bell decision; and Roe’s companion decision, Doe v. Bolton, which effectively swept away the Model Penal Code’s state-by-state effort to liberalize abortion, thus realizing one of the stated aims of radical eugenic activists.

To interpret Roe, Buck v. Bell, and other Supreme Court cases as benchmarks in an organized political effort to establish a eugenic social vision for America may seem counterintuitive, considering current popular rhetoric emphasizing individual rights. But contemporary documents demonstrate the persistent popularity of eugenics among influential social figures and policymakers, which makes its incorporation into constitutional law less surprising.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:50 AM

HE WANTS ME, BUT ONLY PART OF THE TIME:

Chinese Pressing to Keep Village Silent on Clash (HOWARD W. FRENCH, 12/17/05, NY Times)

Residents of Dongzhou, a small town now cordoned off by heavy police roadblocks and patrols, said in scores of interviews on the telephone and with visitors that they had endured beatings, bribes and threats at the hands of security forces in the week and a half after their protest against the construction of a power plant was violently put down. Others said that the corpses of the dead had been withheld, apparently because they were so riddled with bullets that they would contradict the government's version of events. And residents have been warned that if they must explain the deaths of loved ones - many of whom were shot dead during a tense standoff with the police in which fireworks, blasting caps and crude gasoline bombs were thrown by the villagers - they should simply say their relatives were blown up by their own explosives.

"Local officials are talking to families that had relatives killed in the incident, telling them that if they tell higher officials and outsiders that they died by accident, by explosives, while confronting the police, they must make it sound convincing," said one resident of the besieged town in an interview. "If the family members speak this way they are being promised 50,000 yuan ($6,193), and if not, they will be beaten and get nothing out of it."

Another villager, who, like other residents, spoke on condition of anonymity for fear or reprisals, said families of the dead who agreed to invoke accidental explosion as the cause of death had been offered $15,000 each.

"The story is being spread around the village that people were not killed by bullets, but by bombs," said one man interviewed Friday by telephone. "That's rubbish. Everybody knows they were killed by gunfire."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:47 AM

NOTHING EVER GETS MORE EXPENSIVE:

Late shoppers get benefit of bargains (Jen Haberkorn, December 17, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

If you've put off your holiday shopping, you might be in luck.

Retailers have cut prices to spur last-minute spending during the final full shopping weekend of the season. Eight days are left before Christmas and the start of Hanukkah.

Stores such as Sears, Macy's and Filene's Basement are holding hours-long sales today, as they did on the day after Thanksgiving, the traditional start of the holiday shopping season.

Department stores are opening early -- most at 7 a.m., not quite as early as they did to start the season, when some opened at 5 a.m. -- and advertising sales of 10 percent to 70 percent off.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:43 AM

2% HERE WE COME:

Key factors bode well for troop cuts in Iraq (Rowan Scarborough, December 17, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Iraq's nearly violence-free elections and the improved performance of its security forces sets the stage for the top U.S. commander there to soon recommend reducing American troop levels to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Army Gen. George Casey, the top commander, yesterday remained guarded about withdrawing troops, although he said this past summer that "substantial" troop drawdowns may occur.

But defense sources say the so-called base force that was increased to around 150,000 to provide extra security for Thursday's parliamentary election could drop to below 100,000. The public plan already calls for shrinking levels to 138,000 and administration officials have signaled thousands more troops will come home in 2006.

So after a couple years of worry-warts fretting about our breaking the armed forces, we arrive at the more realistic question of why we need a military big enough to occupy one of the most militarized and heavily-armed nations on Earth anymore?


MORE:
2 Top Americans in Baghdad Urge Unity (JOHN F. BURNS, 12/17/05, NY Times)

"The people, particularly the Sunni folks that I talk to, want a government that is seen as broadly representative of all the different ethnic and sectarian groups of Iraq," Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the American commander in Iraq, told a Pentagon news conference by video link from Baghdad. "That is the one thing I think that will help pull this country together in relatively short order."

A similar statement was issued by the American ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, an Afghan-born Muslim who has been an energetic conciliator here. He is expected to help broker the compromises necessary before Iraqis get their first full-term government since the toppling of Saddam Hussein.

The public statements by the two most powerful Americans in Iraq - the general who will guide military strategy and the ambassador who will coach and nudge Iraqi politicians - were a rare, and apparently coordinated, display of American influence at a key juncture in the Iraq war. With the election over, the last major milestone in the American-sponsored political process here has been passed, and Iraq's future course will depend increasingly on the four-year government that will emerge from the results.

General Casey and Mr. Khalilzad appeared concerned that the momentum gained through a largely peaceful election with wide participation from all Iraqi groups, crucially including large numbers of Sunni Arabs who had previously boycotted the political process, could be lost amid a new round of political squabbling.


Sunni Leader Open to Coalition Government (ROBERT H. REID, 12/17/05, Associated Press)
A leading Sunni politician said Friday his party would be open to an alliance with secular Shiites and Kurds to form a coalition government to run the country once the results are in from this week's parliamentary elections.

"We will not accept the exclusion of any segment of the Iraqi people unless they themselves don't want to participate," said Adan al-Dulaimi, a former Islamic studies professor who heads a Sunni Arab bloc that is now expected to have power in parliament.

U.S. officials view al-Dulaimi, who heads an alliance called the Iraqi Accordance Front, as a possible intermediary who could persuade some Sunni-led insurgent groups in restive Anbar province to join the political process after boycotting previous votes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:39 AM

OUR BUSINESS:

UN stages rare Burma discussion (Susannah Price, 12/17/05, BBC)

Denmark's ambassador to the UN, Ellen Margrethe Loj, said the briefing was a clear signal that the world had not forgotten the suffering of Burma.

The United States and the United Kingdom, among others, have argued that Burma should be taken up by the Security Council because drugs trafficking and refugees make it a threat to international peace and security.

But other countries say its record is an internal issue.


As long as there's an America, denial of God-given rights will never be an internal issue.


MORE:
Myanmar Back on U.N. Agenda: The Security Council discusses problems in the military-run Southeast Asian country after being prodded by the U.S. and Britain. (Maggie Farley, December 17, 2005, LA Times)

[D]iplomats said the United States and Britain argued in the closed-door meeting that conditions within the country destabilized the region, as refugees, drugs and slave labor flowed across its borders.

British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said that despite disagreement about whether those problems constitute an international threat, the meeting was an important first step. [...]

Additional pressure to address Myanmar came from a September report commissioned by Desmond Tutu, another Nobel peace laureate, and former Czech President Vaclav Havel. [...]

President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pressed Asian leaders for action during a recent trip to an economic summit in South Korea.

This week, the Assn. of Southeast Asian Nations authorized Malaysia's foreign minister to visit Myanmar to push for "tangible results" in the country's democratic reforms.

Myanmar has produced a seven-stage road map toward free elections and held a constitutional convention earlier this month, but without Suu Kyi's opposition party.

One of the conditions imposed by China and like-minded countries was that the Security Council discussion of Myanmar be a one-time event.

Discussions regarding politically sensitive situations in Sudan and Zimbabwe faced similar resistance by China and Russia, which generally object to interference in a country's internal affairs, as well as African countries.

But Britain and the U.S. slipped them onto the agenda, and now problems in both African countries are being addressed by the council.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:35 AM

TONY THE TIRED:

EU leaders agree new budget plan (BBC, 12/17/05)

UK PM Tony Blair announces the budget deal, flanked by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw (L) and European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso

Tony Blair statement
European leaders have agreed the next seven-year EU budget after two days of tense talks ended in the early hours.

The UK gives up 10.5bn euros (£7bn) of its rebate, some 20%, while the budget grows to 862.4bn euros, helping to fund the development of new member states.

In return, France has agreed to a budget review in 2008-2009, which could lead to cuts in farm subsidies.

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said the deal allowed Europe to move forward, avoiding a serious crisis.


Budget cuts that aren't up-front never happen. It's a terrible loss for Mr. Blair and the Tories ought to make hay of it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

"DEEP-SEATED" BEING AN UNFORTUNATE TERM:

The Psychology Behind Homosexual Tendencies (Richard Fitzgibbons, December 2005, Zenit

The new Vatican document on the priesthood and homosexual tendencies mentions a range of conditions, from deep-seated homosexual tendencies to transitory same-sex attractions. To learn more about the nuances of the range of homosexual tendencies and their treatment, ZENIT turned to Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist, author and contributor to the Catholic Medical Association's document "Homosexuality and Hope."

Q: How would you distinguish between someone with same-sex attractions and someone with deep-seated homosexual tendencies?

Fitzgibbons: Those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies identify themselves as
homosexual persons and are usually unwilling to examine their emotional conflicts that caused this tendency. Strong physical attraction is present to other men's bodies and to the masculinity of others due to profound weakness in male confidence.

These individuals in the priesthood have a significant affective immaturity with excessive anger and jealousy toward males who are not homosexual, insecurity that leads them to avoid close friendships with such males and an inordinate need for attention.

Most of these men had painful adolescent experiences of significant loneliness and sadness, felt insecure in their masculinity, and had a poor body image. Well-designed research studies have demonstrated a much higher prevalence of psychiatric illness in those who identify themselves as homosexual.

Under severe stress they may even experience strong physical and sexual attraction to adolescent males, as has occurred in the crisis in the Church. Frequently, they may have difficulty working in a collegial and comfortable way with heterosexual males.

Unresolved paternal anger is regularly misdirected as rebellion against the magisterium and the Church's teaching on sexual morality. Unfortunately, their denial, defensiveness and anger block their openness to seek the Lord's help with their emotional and behavioral weaknesses.

Those with mild homosexual tendencies do not identify themselves as homosexuals. Such men are motivated to understand and to overcome their emotional conflicts. They regularly seek psychotherapy and spiritual direction.

The goal of counseling is to uncover early conflicts, forgive those who hurt them and increase their male confidence — which in time may lead to the resolution of same-sex attractions.

Such men accept and want to live and teach the fullness of the Church's teaching on sexual morality. They do not support the homosexual culture but see it as antithetical to the universal call to holiness.


Bitch.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

CAN'T SAY THEY WEREN'T WARNED:

The Background of Modern Feminism: a review of Woman and Society by Meyrick Booth (Christopher Dawson, October 1930, The Criterion)

Dr. Booth argues, as I think, rightly, that the root of the problem lies in the fundamental maladaptation of modern civilization to feminine needs. "Woman," he writes, "is so deeply rooted in the soil of personal relationships and racial instincts, that she can never permanently thrive in the arid soil of a dehumanized and technical type of life." And the more successful is the feminist movement, and the further women penetrate into economic and professional life, the deeper becomes her disillusionment and the more intense her discontent and sex-hostility. It is precisely in those societies and classes in which the feminist programme has been most completely realized that women are most dissatisfied. It is true that modern civilization presses hardly on the male personality also; but as D. H. Lawrence pointed out in one of his last essays, a man can live by will alone, he can find satisfaction in personal ambition and in a purely external activity, whereas woman seeks her fulfillment in a deeper and more instinctive contact with life and can find no rest in the dry and empty places of modern mechanistic civilization.

Thus Feminism marks the disintegration of the traditional social order in its most fundamental aspects, but it does not offer any prospect of reintegration or social construction. It may be argued that modern civilization requires the levelling down of sex distinctions, and that the society of the future will be a human hive of almost sexless workers in which the function of reproduction will be delegated to a specialized minority. But such a solution would demand such fundamental changes in human nature that it is hardly conceivable. It is much easier to suppose that the present situation is due to the temporary failure of an artificial civilization to adjust itself to the permanent needs of human nature and that we shall have to retrace our steps.


Always remarkable to read the great conservatives of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries and see how clearly they understood the imposibility of the Left experiment, then consider that the experiment would run for two hundred years anyway.


December 16, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:59 PM

BEST BOOKS OF 2005:

These weren't necessarily published this year, but I finally got to them this year. [Included are links to our reviews and to purchase the books at Amazon.] Please feel free to add your own.

Sea of Glory: America's Voyage of Discovery, the U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842 (2003) - Nathaniel Philbrick

Victory in Tripoli : How America's War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation (2005) - Joshua E. London

Divided by God: America's Church-State Problem--and What We Should Do About It (2005) - Noah Feldman

Our Culture, What's Left of It: The Mandarins and the Masses,/a> (2005) - Theodore Dalrymple

Living It Up At National Review: A Memoir (2005) - Priscilla L. Buckley

Treehouse Chronicles: One Man's Dream of Life Aloft (2005) - S. Peter Lewis

Satchmo: The Genius of Louis Armstrong (1988) - Gary Giddins

Notes from Underground (1864) - Fyodor Dostoevsky

The Aquariums of Pyongyang: Ten Years in the North Korean Gulag (2000) - Kang Chol-Hwan

Loving Soren (2005) - Caroline Coleman O'Neill

Dissolution (2004) - C. J. Sansom

Dr. Sam Johnson: Detector (1946) - Lillian de la Torre

Boswell's Presumptous Task: The Making of the Life of Dr. Johnson (2001) - Adam Sisman

No god but God : The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam (2005) - Reza Aslan

The Battle of Salamis : The Naval Encounter That Saved Greece -- and Western Civilization (2004) - Barry Strauss

South Park Conservatives : The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias (2005) - Brian C. Anderson

The Children of Men (1992) - P.D. James

River Season (There's a River Down in Texas) (2003) - Jim Black


Of Moths and Men: An Evolutionary Tale: The Untold Story of Science and the Peppered Moth (2002) - Judith Hooper


Posted by Matt Murphy at 7:15 PM

A QUICK QUESTION:

Anybody here want to enter a College Bowl Pick'em run by ESPN? It'll be fun and I'll give away books. The catch: You have to register with ESPN.com in order to do this. If you're okay with this (or you're already registered and want in), please comment below.

If ten or more people say they're willing to join by tomorrow, we'll do this thing -- otherwise, we'll move on to more pressing matters, like invading Canada and abolishing soccer.

The website for the Bowl Pick'em is as follows:

http://games.espn.go.com/bowlmania/frontpage.

I'm game if you are.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:35 PM

THAT WOULD BE THE SMALLER QUESTION:

Oh, no, Canada (Douglas MacKinnon, December 16, 2005 , Washington Times)

In what some in Canada are saying is a desperate bid to win reelection, Mr. Martin has decided that slandering the United States will win him the most votes among the millions in his country who have a strong dislike of our nation, George W. Bush, the war in Iraq, sensible immigration policies and the rule of law. Having grown weary of the prime minister's insults, as well as the vile and juvenile insults thrown at our country by other liberal Canadian politicians, Mr. Wilkins decided enough was enough.

After the prime minister said the United States lacked a "global conscience" for not ratifying the seriously flawed Kyoto accord, Mr. Wilkins decided it was time to speak up. If that had been the first insult, he more than likely would have let it go. [...]

Insulting and verbally attacking the United States has become such a national sport among liberal Canadian politicians that one conservative member of parliament said they displayed "a consistent attitude of anti-Americanism." As Mr. Wilkins stressed, "It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your number one trading partner. But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship."

The ambassador's point raises a larger question: Can Canada really be considered our "friend" anymore?

When were they? They took our traitors in during Vietnam; were no help in Nicaragua; and aren't helping in Iraq.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:40 PM

CHOICES HAVE COSTS:

The Economy of Desire (STEPHEN J. DUBNER and STEVEN D. LEVITT, 12/11/05, NY Times Magazine)

In recent decades, we have witnessed the most exorbitant new price associated with sex: the H.I.V. virus. Because AIDS is potentially deadly and because it can be spread relatively easily by sex between two men, the onset of AIDS in the early 1980's caused a significant increase in the price of gay sex. Andrew Francis, a graduate student in economics at the University of Chicago, has tried to affix a dollar figure to this change. [...]

Francis, in a draft paper titled "The Economics of Sexuality," tries to go well beyond dollar figures. He puts forth an empirical argument that may fundamentally challenge how people think about sex.

As with any number of behaviors that social scientists try to measure, sex is a tricky subject. But Francis discovered a data set that offered some intriguing possibilities. The National Health and Social Life Survey, sponsored by the U.S. government and a handful of foundations, asked almost 3,500 people a rather astonishing variety of questions about sex: the different sexual acts received and performed and with whom and when; questions about sexual preference and identity; whether they knew anyone with AIDS. As with any self-reported data, there was the chance that the survey wasn't reliable, but it had been designed to ensure anonymity and generate honest replies.

The survey was conducted in 1992, when the disease was much less treatable than it is today. Francis first looked to see if there was a positive correlation between having a friend with AIDS and expressing a preference for homosexual sex. As he expected, there was. "After all, people pick their friends," he says, "and homosexuals are more likely to have other homosexuals as friends."

But you don't get to pick your family. So Francis next looked for a correlation between having a relative with AIDS and expressing a homosexual preference. This time, for men, the correlation was negative. This didn't seem to make sense. Many scientists believe that a person's sexual orientation is determined before birth, a function of genetic fate. If anything, people in the same family should be more likely to share the same orientation. "Then I realized, Oh, my God, they were scared of AIDS," Francis says.

Francis zeroed in on this subset of about 150 survey respondents who had a relative with AIDS. Because the survey compiled these respondents' sexual histories as well as their current answers about sex, it allowed Francis to measure, albeit crudely, how their lives may have changed as a result of having seen up close the costly horrors of AIDS.

Here's what he found: Not a single man in the survey who had a relative with AIDS said he had had sex with a man in the previous five years; not a single man in that group declared himself to be attracted to men or to consider himself homosexual. Women in that group also shunned sex with men. For them, rates of recent sex with women and of declaring homosexual identity and attraction were more than twice as high as those who did not have a relative with AIDS.

Because the sample size was so small - simple chance suggests that no more than a handful of men in a group that size would be attracted to men - it is hard to reach definitive conclusions from the survey data. (Obviously, not every single man changes his sexual behavior or identity when a relative contracts AIDS.) But taken as a whole, the numbers in Francis's study suggest that there may be a causal effect here - that having a relative with AIDS may change not just sexual behavior but also self-reported identity and desire.

In other words, sexual preference, while perhaps largely predetermined, may also be subject to the forces more typically associated with economics than biology.


Which is why we should retain social pressure that disincentivizes it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:26 PM

IT TAKES DEATHS:

Expert says Midway plane crash was avoidable (Jon Hilkevitch, December 15, 2005, Baltimore Sun)

The city of Chicago and Southwest Airlines have "carelessly ignored" for years the risks of short runways and insufficient over-run areas at Midway Airport, an expert on transportation disasters said yesterday in a report on last week's fatal accident.

The crash was avoidable, and the outcome would have been much worse if fuel tanks on the plane ruptured and caught fire, said Gunnar Kuepper, chief of operations at Emergency & Disaster Management Inc., a Los Angeles-based company that advises government agencies and private businesses on emergency-planning strategy.

"This was not a surprising risk for anyone in the aviation industry," Kuepper said. "Surely it was a surprise for the people on the street outside Midway Airport who collided with a Boeing 737."

For a fraction of the financial losses that Chicago and Southwest will pay out from the accident, he said, the city and its major airlines at Midway should have invested in safety systems to minimize the damage of a plane skidding off a runway. [...]

The report noted similarities to a 2000 accident in which a Southwest plane overran a runway in Burbank, Calif., in rainy weather and crashed into two cars on a street. After the accident, the Burbank Airport improved its safety areas at the ends of runways by installing pits of soft concrete that crushes under heavy weight of planes to arrest momentum. "Eighty percent of this expense was covered by an FAA grant," Kuepper said.


Terri Gross had Scott McCartney --"who follows the airline industry, [and] writes the weekly column "The Middle Seat" for the Wall Street Journal" -- on Fresh Air yesterday and he said this soft concrete stuff is relatively cheap and very effective.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:17 AM

TOO BAD NO ONE AT THE FED SHOPS LIKE MOST AMERICANS DO:

Wal-Mart Throws an Undercut at Target: Chain-Store Strategy Changes for the Christmas Blitz (Ylan Q. Mui, December 16, 2005, Washington Post)

Sales tags touting deep price cuts were flying like battle flags this week in the electronics department of Wal-Mart in Manassas. Twice each week, about a dozen employees sneak into enemy territory -- Target is just two miles away -- to scope out prices. When they return, the store starts discounting, undercutting the competition by 5 percent or more, manager Beth Melson said.

"We can stay the lowest price in the market to draw shoppers into our store," she said. "They know they can come here and get the lowest price."


So The Wife was detailed to buy the gift certificates for her department staff this year, which means I got sent to Borders to get them. With each one they gave a certificate for 20% off the purchase, plus a 10% discount card for the purchaser. Not only does nothing cost more than it used to, it doesn't even cost what you just spent.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:00 AM

MAKING THE SUNNIS FEDERALISTS:

Climate Change: IN IRAQ, REASON FOR HOPE--FINALLY (Lawrence F. Kaplan, 12.16.05, New Republic)

Contrary to prevailing wisdom, Washington's political strategy in Iraq has always made more sense than its military strategy. In its essentials, the logic of the former was straightforward: Induce the Sunnis to surrender violence in favor of political participation and create a broad-based, cross-sectarian coalition that can govern Iraq effectively. Although yesterday's elections hardly guarantee that outcome, they do amount to its necessary precondition. Whether the aim can actually be achieved is up to the Iraqis.

In this regard, yesterday offered reason to hope. Having now moved beyond the mechanics of democracy--that is, the process of choosing leaders--Iraqis may also begin to move beyond a zero-sum brand of politics and toward the sort of compromises essential to a broader conception of democracy. The election offered this glimmer for a simple reason: Sunnis actually participated in it. Unlike January's election for a transitional assembly, which they boycotted, and June's referendum on the constitution, in which few Sunnis participated and then only to vote against it, millions of Sunnis turned out yesterday to vote for legislators who will serve a four-year term and approve a prime minister and president. That fact itself suggests an acknowledgment among Sunnis that either they join the political process or get left behind. Hence, the bitter and recalcitrant Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars encouraged its constituents to vote. Hence, too, Sunni insurgent groups like the Baathist Army of Iraq broke from past practice and declared they wouldn't target polling stations. With Sunnis voting by district and electing their own representatives, Sunni leaders will necessarily emerge within the political arena. This, in turn, should weaken the political appeal of the insurgency, or at the very least create cleavages between the community's politicians and its bombers.

There is, to be sure, a powerful and not entirely unpersuasive school of thought that argues the Sunni political community has completely lost its mind, consumed by nihilism or a desire to recapture its past glory. Which is where the electoral stick comes in. As Shia coalition leader Adil Abdul Mahdi delicately makes the point, after the election the Sunnis "will know their political weight. And ours." In other words, Iraq's Shia, who even today fear the Sunnis more than the other way around, will once and for all recognize their newfound power. By contrast, the election will surely compel the Sunnis, many of whom cling to the delusion that they can once again dominate the majority Shia, to confront their diminished role in Iraq's political life. With no political program of their own and with Shia-dominated army units patrolling their towns and villages, even the most nostalgic Sunnis have to recognize that the country will never be theirs again. That recognition, in turn, offers the key to political progress in Iraq.


The important thing is that either their willingness to live under a Shi'ite dominated regime or their recognition that they can do better by cutting loose the Kurdish north and Shi'a south would both be progress.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:52 AM

HERE'S WHAT JOE WILSON FINDS MOST GALLING...:

Why Novak Called Rove (Murray Waas, Dec. 16, 2005, National Journal)

On July 9, 2003, senior presidential adviser Karl Rove was well prepared as he returned a telephone call from columnist Robert Novak. On his desk were talking points and other briefing materials that then-White House Political Director Matt Schlapp and other staffers had compiled for Rove in anticipation of the conversation. [...]

Ironically, the materials prepared for Rove in advance of the conversation had nothing to do with Valerie Plame, the CIA officer whom Novak would identify -- using Rove as one of his sources -- as an "agency operative" in a July 14, 2003, column.

Instead, the voluminous material on Rove's desk -- including talking points, related briefing materials, and information culled from confidential government personnel files -- involved a different woman: Frances Fragos Townsend, a former senior attorney in the Clinton administration's Justice Department whom President Bush had recently named to be his deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism.

Bush had personally assigned Rove to help counter what the president believed to be a "rearguard" effort within his own administration, by persons unknown, to discredit Townsend and derail her appointment, according to White House documents and accounts given by former and current officials.

Just before his July 9 conversation with Rove, Novak had been relentlessly calling around the White House asking questions about Townsend. [...]

According to the accounts of their conversations that Rove and Novak gave to federal investigators, the subject of Valerie Plame came up only after they had finished talking about Townsend. [...]

Both Novak and Rove have told federal prosecutors that it was Novak who raised Plame's name, with the columnist saying he had heard that "Wilson's wife" had worked for the CIA and had been responsible for having her husband sent on the Niger mission.

"I heard that too," Rove responded, according to published accounts of what Rove told federal investigators of the conversations.


...the Plames were merely an afterthought.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:46 AM

BUT BIDEN GOT A PURPLE FINGER:

BUSH TO FILL HILL IN TODAY (Ian Bishop, December 16, 2005, NY Post)

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will meet face-to-face with President Bush and military commanders today at the White House for a top-level briefing on the future of Iraq.

"I'm old-fashioned enough to believe that when the president invites you to the White House to discuss an issue of grave importance, you go. I hope to get some answers to the questions I have about what the way ahead might be," she told The Post.


The scramble to be linked to victory continues.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:05 AM

JibJab has released its Year End Round-Up.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:48 AM

DIRTY NUMBERS:

Bush Secretly Lifted Some Limits on Spying in U.S. After 9/11, Officials Say (JAMES RISEN and ERIC LICHTBLAU, 12/15/05, NY Times)

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval represents a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.

"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches." [...]

Several officials said the eavesdropping program had helped uncover a plot by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker and naturalized citizen who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting Al Qaeda by planning to bring down the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches. What appeared to be another Qaeda plot, involving fertilizer bomb attacks on British pubs and train stations, was exposed last year in part through the program, the officials said. But they said most people targeted for N.S.A. monitoring have never been charged with a crime, including an Iranian-American doctor in the South who came under suspicion because of what one official described as dubious ties to Osama bin Laden.

The eavesdropping program grew out of concerns after the Sept. 11 attacks that the nation's intelligence agencies were not poised to deal effectively with the new threat of Al Qaeda and that they were handcuffed by legal and bureaucratic restrictions better suited to peacetime than war, according to officials. In response, President Bush significantly eased limits on American intelligence and law enforcement agencies and the military.


Bush Authorized Domestic Spying: Post-9/11 Order Bypassed Special Court (Dan Eggen, December 16, 2005, Washington Post)
President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night.

The super-secretive NSA, which has generally been barred from domestic spying except in narrow circumstances involving foreign nationals, has monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program, the New York Times disclosed last night.

The aim of the program was to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas, according to two former senior administration officials.


Don't know about you, but I don't call al Qaeda much.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

TWO PARTIES IS PLENTY:

Cameron urges Lib Dems to defect (BBC, 12/16/05)

Tory leader David Cameron is to make an appeal to Liberal Democrat MPs and councillors to defect to his party.

In a speech on Friday he will say Conservatives stand for "liberal values", including a commitment to green policies and localism.

Mr Cameron will call for "a modern, progressive, liberal, mainstream opposition to Labour".


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:04 AM

THE FIRE THIS TIME:

Dozens die in China hospital fire (BBC, 12/16/05)

A fire at a large hospital in China's north-eastern city of Liaoyuan has killed at least 39 people, the official Xinhua news agency has reported.

At least 33 of the victims were patients, the agency said.

Witnesses quoted by Xinhua said they saw people leaping from windows to escape the blazing buildings.

China has had several industrial accidents in the last month, including a toxic river spillage and a coal mine fire that killed more than 140 people.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:58 AM

WHERE ARE ALL THE ANTI-POVERTY CAMPAIGNERS WHEN WE NEED THEM?:

Poorest nations join forces for trade deal
RAJESH MAHAPATRA IN HONG KONG


DEVELOPING countries closed ranks yesterday to push their agenda at the World Trade Organisation talks, as the United States and the European Union exchanged accusations of intransigence - with time running out for a global deal that could lift millions out of poverty.

Trade officials from more than 110 poor countries plan to meet today to forge a common negotiating stance on some their vital concerns, said Madun Dulloo, the trade minister from the tiny African nation of Mauritius. He said poor countries needed to work more closely to make sure the development agenda of the so-called Doha round of trade talks remains in focus. [...]

Developing nations decided to join forces after the United States and Japan backtracked on a proposal to allow duty-free and quota-free imports from the 32 least developed countries. The countries, which have an annual per-capita income of less than £425, want duty-free access for all products, but the US and Japan say they want to be able to limit the list of products and countries. For instance, the US is reluctant to give duty-free access to textile products from Bangladesh. Japan has problems with putting rice on the list.

A US trade representative, Rob Portman, said that it would be difficult for him to defend duty-free access for Bangladeshi textiles because those exports "are incredibly competitive".


If you were cynical, you might think the folks who claim to want to help poor nations actually want to keep them dependent on aid and prevent their developing.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:53 AM

AND THEY WONDER WHY THEY'RE THE MOST VIOLENT SOCIETY IN THE WEST?:

Scotland gives in to quickie divorce (HAMISH MACDONELL, 12/16/05, The Scotsman)

MINISTERS were accused last night of "dismantling marriage" after moves to make divorce easier and quicker were passed by the Scottish Parliament.

The Roman Catholic Church warned the Executive it was "attacking the family" after Holyrood's decision to reduce the time needed for a divorce.

Proposals for "quickie divorces" were included in the Family Law Bill, which completed its passage through parliament. They will cut the time needed for an uncontested divorce from two years to one, and for a contested divorce from five years to two.


Maybe they just want to see how high they can stack pathologies before the whole thing collapses?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:45 AM

FIRST AND FOREMOST:

Kurds vote, first and foremost, for Kurdistan (Edward Wong, 12/16/05, The New York Times)

By all appearances here, the elections Thursday for national parliamentary seats may as well have been about Kurdistan and Kurdish dreams. Iraq, or the idea of Iraq, seemed as distant as the moon.

"I will vote for 730," said Fakhri Muhammad, 32, referring to the ballot number of the main Kurdish coalition, as he stood in line outside the village's primary school. "The list is Kurdish, and it represents the Kurdish people."

So went the refrain throughout much of the north, with Kurdish voters shying away from Arab candidates and siding only with Kurdish groups, particularly the Kurdistan Alliance, the coalition made up of the two main Kurdish parties. It was a stark illustration of how much the vote across Iraq had split along ethnic and sectarian lines. For many Kurds, a vote for the Kurdistan Alliance was first and foremost a bid to secure autonomy for the mountainous Kurdish homeland in the north, and only secondarily a vote for the general welfare of Iraq.

Political fervor was especially rampant here in dry, windswept Tamim Province, whose capital is Kirkuk, about 25 kilometers, or 15 miles, south of Altun Kopri. Under Saddam Hussein's rule, the government deported Kurds and Turkmens and moved in Arabs to better control the oil fields.

Kurdish leaders have made no secret of their desire to incorporate Kirkuk and other parts of the province into Kurdistan, rather than allowing the central government to administrate it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:35 AM

ISN'T THERE SOME GHETTO THEY COULD PUT IT IN?:

An Ill Wind Off Cape Cod (ROBERT F. KENNEDY Jr., 12/16/05, NY Times)

AS an environmentalist, I support wind power, including wind power on the high seas. I am also involved in siting wind farms in appropriate landscapes, of which there are many. But I do believe that some places should be off limits to any sort of industrial development. I wouldn't build a wind farm in Yosemite National Park. Nor would I build one on Nantucket Sound, which is exactly what the company Energy Management is trying to do with its Cape Wind project.

Ted's next date might be cut to ribbons instead of drowned.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:32 AM

THE NUEVO LAREDO FULL EMPLOYMENT PLAN:

House Votes for 698 Miles of Fences on Mexico Border (RACHEL L. SWARNS, 12/16/05, NY Times)

House Republicans voted on Thursday night to toughen a border security bill by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to build five fences along 698 miles of the United States border with Mexico to block the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs into this country.

The amendment to the bill would require the construction of the fences along stretches of land in California, New Mexico, Texas and Arizona that have been deemed among the most porous corridors of the border.


The fence is a fine idea because it creastes the illusion they're doing something. It should also provide quite a few jobs for Mexicans.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:28 AM

CRANK UP THE RENDITIONS:

President Backs McCain Measure on Inmate Abuse (ERIC SCHMITT, 12/16/05, NY Times)

Under intense bipartisan Congressional pressure, President Bush reversed course on Thursday and reluctantly backed Senator John McCain's call for a law banning cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners in American custody. [...]

"We've sent a message to the world that the United States is not like the terrorists," Mr. McCain, an Arizona Republican, said as he sat next to Mr. Bush in the Oval Office. "What we are is a nation that upholds values and standards of behavior and treatment of all people no matter how evil or bad they are."


Isn't the message more that we don't have the honor and decency to do the torture ourselves so we'll outsource it?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:25 AM

TWO WORLD WARS JUST SO THE GERMANS COULD DICTATE TERMS?:

Germany holds key to EU budget deal, conservatives say (Mark Beunderman, 12/16/05, EUOBSERVER)

European conservative party leaders said Germany holds the key to unlocking a budget deal at Thursday (15 December) and Friday's EU summit in Brussels. [...]

For her part, Ms Merkel continued to play her cards close to her chest, commenting she does "not want an agreement at any price" and that she expects "tough negotiations" tonight.

German MEP Hans Gert Pottering, the leader of the conservative group in the European Parliament, gave the summit a 50/50 chance of success.

He said talks will revolve around the UK rebate which "should be substantially cut down."

Mr Pottering sketched out a potential scenario where France and the UK agree to scrap completely the UK rebate in 2008 or 2009 "in the context" of changes to the common agricultural policy.

Commenting on the importance of a positive summit outcome, Austrian chancellor and incoming EU president Wolfgang Schussel said the talks will lead to "a united Europe or a divided Europe."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THE EASTERNMOST U.S.:

For Liberia's 'Iron Lady,' Toughness Part of Territory (Wil Haygood, December 16, 2005, Washington Post)

The West African country has deep links to America. Black Americans -- both free and former slaves -- began making pilgrimages to the country in the mid-1800s. Their descendants referred to themselves as Americo-Liberians.

The capital, Monrovia, was named after American president James Monroe, and the country's currency has long resembled America's.

In the 1960s, many black Americans ventured to Liberia, believing it a kind of oasis. But its wars have shocked much of the world, and in recent years there have been scenes of U.S. Marines rescuing citizens from Monrovia.

Many credit Sirleaf's victory to shrewd politicking: Before the runoff, she dispatched buses throughout the country to ferry voters to polling places. Weah's supporters grew complacent, says Riva Levinson, who was accompanying Sirleaf on her rounds and who served as an adviser to Sirleaf when she ran against Taylor in 1997.

"She's a very strong lady," says Elwood Dunn, who served in the administration of Liberian president William Tolbert along with Sirleaf, and who now teaches political science at the University of the South in Sewanee, Tenn. "She's always been focused and politically ambitious since the 1970s."

Dunn does not envy the task ahead of Sirleaf. "She will, without hesitation, walk into a political firestorm," he says. Her background -- including stints with the World Bank and United Nations -- will serve her well, he says. "The attentive part of Africa knows her well."

Liberia has flirted before with bouts of peace, only to have the country plunge into chaos. "There is one big difference this time," Sirleaf says. "These elections represent the first time Liberians voted in an atmosphere of freedom."

She credits her victory to a campaign that talked about education, which appealed to the women in the marketplace. "I owe them my victory," she says. "These were poor women who work in the markets, picking and selling vegetables. And they care about education for their children."

Sirleaf has four sons (two live in Liberia, two in the United States). Her husband died years ago of natural causes. (She notes that the widespread hyphenation of their last names is incorrect. She doesn't use a hyphen.)

High on her agenda will be tackling corruption, which has bedeviled many an African nation. "I will submit to a code of conduct, and will make sure that everyone who works for me, in a position of public service, accepts that code," she says. "For anyone who violates it, there will be a penalty."

She is delighted about a tougher rape law recently passed in her country. "I have teenage granddaughters, and when I think of the rapes inside my country, well, it makes me angry," she says. "We also want to take preventive action. Get the girls off the street into skills training programs. It would reduce their vulnerability."

She made stops up and down the East Coast during her visit. It left her feeling inspired. "There is a lot of goodwill for Liberia here," she says. "I think the administration and Congress is prepared to give us support to mount a major economic effort" at reconstruction in the country.



December 15, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:45 PM

TORA BORA BORA, HUSH, OBL, DON'T YOU CRY:

Day the ballot beat the bombers (Oliver Poole in Tal Afar and Anton La Guardia, 16/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

For the first time since the fall of Saddam, Sunnis turned out to vote in large numbers, alongside the Shia and the Kurds. Even in the Sunni stronghold of Tal Afar, the scene of fierce fighting three months ago, queues formed outside polling stations despite four mortar attacks that killed two people.

Saadallah, 37, an unemployed man voting for the first time, said: "I must vote because it is not up to the Americans to determine the future. This is our country."

Anwar Fathi, 26, a teacher, said: "What you see here is hope - the hope that Iraq will become safer and fairer. I feel very confident when I see so many people voting."

The electoral commission's preliminary estimates showed that 80 per cent of the electorate voted in some Kurdish areas; in the Shia towns of Hilla and Najaf the figure was 70 per cent; in Anbar province, which has been at the heart of the rebellion, a strong turnout was reported.

Demand was so high in Fallujah, the first city to rise against the Americans, that the supply of ballot papers ran out. Election officials extended the voting period by an hour to cope with the numbers.


And Zarqawi offers them what, instead?


MORE:
Freedom From Fear Lifts Sunnis (JOHN F. BURNS, 2/16/05, NY Times)

Ali is only 9 years old. But when he and his buddies broke away from a street soccer game to drop into a polling station in Baghdad's Adhamiya district at noon on Thursday, Ali, a chirpy, tousle-haired youngster, seemed to catch the mood of the district's Sunni Arab population as well as anybody.

"We don't want car bombs, we want security," he said. Yards away, Sunni grown-ups were casting ballots in classrooms where the boys would have been studying Arabic or arithmetic or geography - "Boring, boring!" said Ali - had the school not been drafted for use as one of 6,000 polling stations across Iraq.

On a day when the high voter turnout among Sunni Arabs was the main surprise, Ali and his posse of friends, unguarded as boys can be, acted like a chorus for the scene unfolding about them. A new willingness to distance themselves from the insurgency, an absence of hostility for Americans, a casual contempt for Saddam Hussein, a yearning for Sunnis to find a place for themselves in the post-Hussein Iraq - the boys' themes were their parents', too, only more boldly expressed.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:39 PM

WHO'S GOING TO CARE ABOUT THIS GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN:

Blair threatens Chirac with veto on Europe budget (David Rennie and Toby Helm in Brussels, 16/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Tony Blair threatened last night to veto a deal over the European Union budget unless Jacques Chirac leaves the door open to early reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

The move followed a tense, 20-minute meeting between Mr Blair and Mr Chirac at which the French president gave no ground in the dispute over farm subsidies. [...]

[M]r Blair's relations with Poland and other new members soured this month when Britain, the current holder of the rotating EU presidency, unveiled a plan for future spending that cut almost £10 billion from aid money intended for east and central Europe.

Outrage increased when it became clear that the British rebate was going to grow substantially during the next budget period, which runs from 2007 to 2013, even with a British offer to give up some £5.5 billion.

The anger drowned out Britain's arguments for the need to find a "fair" deal in which it would pay roughly the same into the EU coffers as France.

Angela Merkel, the new German chancellor, has emerged as a pivotal figure at the summit.

As an east German who has sought close links to ex-communist neighbours, she is seen as perhaps the only leader who can persuade Poland and other eastern nations to take a deal now, and heed Mr Blair's warnings that Britain's position will only harden next year, once the presidency passes to Austria.

French officials said they were asking Britain to surrender all rebate money related to non-farm spending on the new member states. French ministers said this would cost Britain £9.5 billion.


The choice seems simple enough no rebate for Britain/no aid for the East/no subsidies for farms, on the one hand, or no EU on the other.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:30 PM

WHY ROCK A SINKING SHIP?:

Steady as she sinks (David Warren, 12/14/05, Ottawa Citizen)

We have reasons not to vote Liberal in this election. I mean, not just me. At least 57 percent of the electorate, according to polls, would like to see them crucified. And not all the remaining 43 percent can be on the take. It is hard to imagine, under the present circumstances, how the Liberals could be ahead in any province.

But here is the rub. In addition to wanting one party out, the people must want another party in. That is where the Conservatives persist in letting us down. They will not give us a reason to vote for them. They have nothing to offer that is distinguishable in principle from what the Liberals offer. This leaves inexperience as their “unique selling point”. I am truly unexcited.

Westerners blame Ontario for refusing to accept any party that has a Western base. There is something in that, but not what appears. The truth is that Ontario has been demographically altered so rapidly and to such a degree, that it is no longer the same province that elected Mike Harris, as recently as 1999. And yet a huge, still basically WASP, semi-rural Ontario continues to exist out there, and continues to share precisely the same ethos and outlook as Alberta -- minus the will to live.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:13 PM

DID IT EVER OCCUR TO MR. COHEN THAT THE JUSTICE IS THE ONE PANDERING, NOT HILLARY?:

Star-Spangled Pandering (Richard Cohen, December 15, 2005, Washington Post)

Last month Justice Antonin Scalia was politely quizzed by Norman Pearlstine, the outgoing Time Inc. editor in chief. The event, held in Time Warner's New York headquarters, was supposedly off the record, but so much of it has already been reported that it will not hurt to add Scalia's views on flag burning. He explained why it was constitutionally protected speech. It's a pity Hillary Clinton was not there to hear him.

The argument that this famously conservative member of the Supreme Court advanced -- actually, reiterated -- was that while he may or may not approve of flag burning, it was clear to him that it was a form of speech, a way of making a political statement, and that the First Amendment protected it.


But, even if the right answer, that's only the threshhold question. Next you have to ask what that speech is intended to convey and then demonstrate that it is consistent with the ends of the Constitution: "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." Since we can say, at a minimum, that flag-burning expresses opposition to our constitutional order and that the laws against it accord with norms of republican liberty, there's no basis for protecting said "speech."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:04 PM

THE BIG CHANGE IS WHO'S ENGAGING IN HATE SPEECH:

Jews feel threatened by religious right (Michael Conlon, 12/15/05, Reuters)

"There is a feeling on all sides that something is changing," said Abraham Foxman, director of the New York-based Anti-Defamation League.

"The polls indicate a very serious thing -- that over 60 percent of the American people feel that religion and Christianity are under attack," he said on Thursday in an interview.

"Some are saying we are attacking (Christianity). " [...]

"Every room (from bedroom to classroom) in the American mansion is under assault to impose either de facto or de jure a Christian theocracy -- I call them Christocrats," said Rabbi James Rudin, former head of interreligious activities for the American Jewish Committee.


Well, Christocrats is better than Rabby Yoffie calling us Nazis anyway.

MORE:
Jewish useful idiots (Mona Charen, 12/16/05, JewishWorldReview.com)

Apparently eager to disprove the Jewish reputation for intelligence, the Union for Reform Judaism recently adopted a resolution condemning the Iraq War and demanding that President Bush provide "a clear exit strategy," including a plan for troop withdrawals.

In a letter to President Bush alerting him to the URJ's action, Robert Heller and Rabbi Eric Yoffe lost no opportunity to flaunt their supposed moral sensitivity. Calling the war a "major tragedy" that has "discredited … America in the international community" and "contributed to the growth of terrorism," the two Reform leaders informed the president: "We also call on Congress to provide more effective oversight of the war and to ensure that the financial burden of the war falls not just on the poor and on future generations but is shared equitably. … We condemn, in the strongest possible terms, violations of the Geneva Conventions and other applicable laws, including torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody … " And so on.

The Reform movement is the largest Jewish denomination in America and the most liberal (politically and religiously). There is nothing new about Reform Jews adopting leftist positions. But this one is particularly galling. Consider the irony: Throughout the Muslim world, from Indonesia to Egypt to Pakistan, huge numbers are convinced that the United States is engaged in Iraq only because a powerful cabal of Jews lured the nation into it. Millions are certain that Jews did not show up for work at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, because they were in on the sinister plan by the Israeli Mossad or the CIA to hijack planes, fly them into the buildings and then blame Al Qaeda. There is only one group that our Islamist enemy hates more than Americans, and that is — guess who?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:42 PM

IT WAS OKAY UNTIL THEY STARTED STEALING:

France seizes military arsenal in Zarqawi-tied probe (Reuters, 12/15/05)

French police have seized large quantities of military weapons and explosives as part of a probe into an Islamic militant group said to have indirect links to al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, officials said on Thursday.

Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters the arsenal was discovered on Wednesday in a lock-up attached to a block of flats in the Clichy-sous-Bois suburb north of Paris.

Judicial sources said the haul included assault rifles, dynamite and TNT. [...]

Investigators believe the gang financed Islamic militancy by staging armed robberies and judicial sources said one suspect had admitted planning one such robbery in Beauvais, north of Paris, in October.


So Frenchmen, who tried to keep Saddam in power, have done more to help Zarqawi than Iraqi democracy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:29 PM

HOW'D IT GO, ZARQO?:

Iraqis vote for first full-term parliament amid tight security (Bassem Mroue, December 15, 2005, Associated Press)

Iraqis voted Thursday in one of the largest and freest elections in the Arab world, with strong turnout reported in Sunni areas and even a shortage of ballots in some precincts. Several explosions rocked Baghdad throughout the day, but the level of violence was low. [...]


Officials were forced to extend voting for one hour, until 6 p.m. (10 a.m. EST) as long lines were reported in some precincts, which election commission spokesman Farid Ayar called a sign that the balloting "was successful and turnout was good.'' Results will be announced within two weeks.

Police guarding a polling place in eastern Baghdad's Zayouna neighborhood fired shots in the air to celebrate the end of voting there. [...]

[V]iolence was light overall and did not appear to discourage Iraqis, some of whom turned out wrapped in their flag on a bright, sunny day, and afterward displayed a purple ink-stained index finger — a mark to guard against multiple voting. One jubilant Shiite voter in Baghdad proudly displayed all 10 of his fingers stained with ink.


Katherine Harris supervised that polling place....


MORE:
Turnout Strong in Iraqi Elections: Reports of Violence Isolated as Insurgents Suspend Attacks, Encourage Voting (Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Finer, 12/15/05, Washington Post )

Iraqi voters turned out in force countrywide Thursday to elect a parliament to remake their troubled nation, with Sunni-led Iraqi insurgent movements suspending attacks for a day so that Sunni Arabs could vote en masse for the first time.

The voting appeared to split along sectarian lines as expected, with many Sunni voters in the Sunni-dominated far west saying they were voting for Sunni candidates. Long lines were reported among Sunnis, most of whom boycotted elections earlier this year or were frightened away by threats.

There were no boycotts this time and insurgents were providing security at some polling places. In Ramadi, for example, guerrillas of the Iraqi Islamic Army movement took up positions in some neighborhoods, promising to protect voters from any attacks by foreign fighters.

For today's voting, Sunni clerics not only lifted a boycott call that had suppressed Sunni turnout in January's national elections but actively encouraged voting.

"Right now the city is experiencing a democratic celebration," Mayor Dari Abdul Hadi Zubaie said in Fallujah, where voters streamed to the polls. "It's an election wedding."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:26 PM

IT COULD ONLY BE A WORSE IDEA IF LESLIE NIELSEN FLEW IT:

Flying High: How Boeing cut short Airbus's rule as king of the skies. (James Thayer, 12/15/2005, Weekly Standard)

EUROPE WAS CROWING, and it could be heard all the way across the ocean.

Airbus called Boeing's new 787 Dreamliner "dreaming in Seattle," and Airbus's then-CEO Noel Forgard dismissed the 787 as a "Chinese copy of [Airbus's] A330." The BBC said Airbus had stolen the march on its arc-rival Boeing, and the Economist predicted Airbus's A380 super-jumbo would "break the 747's longstanding monopoly on the big-jet market." Airbus's sales chief John J. Leahy said Boeing was ''just flailing around looking for something to compete with us.''

Indeed, 12 months ago Airbus seemed about to permanently replace the Boeing Company as the world's dominant airplane producer. It never happened. Instead, Airbus's ambitions have suddenly skidded off the runway.


Who'd have dreamt that a French plane that can't land anywhere wouldn't succeed?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:22 PM

THE HONORABLE THING TO DO:

St. John's campus ministry director quits over Vatican teaching on homosexuality (Warren Wolfe, December 16, 2005, Minneapolis Star Tribune)

The chaplain and director of campus ministry at St. John's University, a Catholic school in Collegeville, Minn., said today that he has resigned because, "as a celibate gay priest, I cannot understand, much less support, the church's teaching about homosexuality."

The Rev. Bob Pierson, 49, said his decision came in response to a new teaching from the Vatican two weeks ago that said most gay men should be barred from the priesthood and from seminaries. He will leave his position Jan. 15.

"For quite some time I have wrestled with conflicting teaching by the church -- that gays and lesbians are to be respected, but that somehow we are not fit for work in the church," said Pierson, who announced his decision in an e-mail message Wednesday to staff and students.

"But with the new teaching, which says gay men are 'objectively disordered' and cannot relate properly to men and women, it became clear to me that I cannot continue in campus ministry," Pierson said. "I have chosen not be dishonest about my thoughts and feelings."


Not all will have a taste for the mustard seed.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:21 PM

IS IT EVEN ILLEGAL IN FRANCE?:

MAN DATES GAL ON INTERNET FOR SIX MONTHS (Grace Green, 12/09/05, Weekly World News)

Skirt-chasing playboy Daniel Anceneaux spent weeks talking with a sensual woman on the Internet before arranging a romantic rendezvous at a remote beach -- and discovering that his on-line sweetie of six months was his own mother!

"I walked out on that dark beach thinking I was going to hook up with the girl of my dreams," the rattled bachelor later admitted. "And there she was, wearing white shorts and a pink tank top, just like she'd said she would.

"But when I got close, she turned around -- and we both got the shock of our lives. I mean, I didn't know what to say. All I could think was, 'Oh my God! it's Mama!' "

But the worst was yet to come. Just as the mortified mother and son realized the error of their ways, a patrolman passed by and cited them for visiting a restricted beach after dark.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:25 PM

NOW IF HE WERE FATHER TAYLOR...:

Law and Disorder: Special Victims Unit: Investigators say the city's independent schools watchdog has often failed to bark (Tom Robbins, December 13th, 2005, Village Voice)

Back in 1997 police arrested a man named Ronald Taylor, who worked as an assistant public school principal in Harlem. Taylor, 50 years old at the time, easily ranked as a parent's worst nightmare. His arrest came after the mother of a student walked into a local police precinct and reported that Taylor had lured her 15-year-old son to his apartment with an offer to play with his video game collection. He then proceeded to sexually molest him. When cops went to investigate they found Taylor had tricked up his West Harlem apartment as a kids' game room. They also found some 400 X-rated videos.

Unlike a score of school-personnel sex-abuse cases from that era, Taylor's arrest got little news play. The Times ran a short item on an inside page and the Daily News carried one as well, on page 79. The lack of attention was partly because the arrest did not emanate from the efficient publicity machine of Edward Stancik, the late special commissioner for investigation for city schools.

For 12 years until his death in 2002, Stancik's gaunt features were a staple on TV newscasts as he told of corrupt bureaucrats and twisted sex abusers nailed by his office. Such cases made Stancik wildly unpopular in the teachers' union offices and the old Board of Education headquarters on Livingston Street in Brooklyn, where he was viewed as a merciless inquisitor, a publicity hound whose investigations were measured mainly for their TV and news-ink potential.

On the other hand, many politicians, journalists, prosecutors, and parents adored him, viewing Stancik as a valiant warrior against an intractable bureaucracy. So what if he knew how to use the media? What better way to send a message to the public and bad guys alike that wrongdoing won't be tolerated? When Stancik died at age 47 of heart failure in March 2002, there were some misgivings expressed about his occasional overzealousness. But the editorial call was to make sure the watchdog office he'd led didn't lose its fangs.

But a few months after Stancik's death, something unusual in the world of law enforcement happened. A former top investigator in his office, an ex-detective who had been a supervisor there for five years, sat down and wrote two lengthy letters to city officials alleging that a top Stancik deputy named Regina Loughran had dropped the ball in several important cases, either delaying arrests or letting the bad guys get away altogether. In some instances, it was alleged, Loughran had changed cases from being "substantiated" to "unsubstantiated."

The complaints were investigated by city attorneys, and several were confirmed. Yet Loughran today remains as powerful as ever, serving as the $151,000 number two official in the special investigators' office. Former and current investigators, both men and women, who spoke under condition of anonymity, told the Voice they were puzzled by the inaction. "If we had caught someone in the education system behaving this way, they'd be long gone," said one former investigator.

Among the cases the investigators cited was that of Ronald Taylor.


Of course, the MSM also has a vested interest in publicizing pedophilia among priests, not among teachers


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:07 PM

THE OTHER JOE:

U.S. ambassador: Iraq turnout appears high (AP, 12/15/05)

U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said first indications were of a very high turnout in Thursday's parliamentary elections, which he hoped would result in a broad-based government that could address the "legitimate" concerns of Iraq's Sunni Arab minority.

"The number of people participating is very, very high and we have had very few irregularities," Khalilzad told The Associated Press. "It is a good day so far, good for us, good for Iraq. This is a first step for integrating the Sunni Arabs and bringing them into the political process and integrating them into the government."

Khalilzad accompanied Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del.; Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.; and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., to the city of Hillah, about 60 miles south of Baghdad.


Nevermind the high turnout, just having Joe Biden, who's notoriously sensitive to every shift in the political winds, show up suggests that Zarqawi and Murtha are losing.

MORE:
Bush's New Arab World: The president's Mideast-democracy project is faring better than you might think. (Duncan Currie, 12/15/2005, Weekly Standard)

The Iraqi political process continues apace. For those keen on "timetables," America has yet to miss a single deadline in managing Iraq's post-Saddam transition. The Sunni Arabs, who now realize how foolish their election boycott proved last winter, turned out in droves to vote in the October 15th constitutional referendum (albeit, in most cases, to cast a "no" ballot) and are expected to vote in even greater numbers in this week's parliamentary poll. After a recent visit to Iraq, Sen. Joe Lieberman wrote in the Wall Street Journal that he "was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it."

Elsewhere in the Mideast, Egypt held its first multi-candidate presidential election this past September, which, though tainted by the ruling party's shenanigans, nevertheless marked a watershed. "The country's old authoritarian system has broken apart," reported Washington Post columnist David Ignatius from Cairo. Absent the Bush administration's "nagging," opined the Economist, "Mr. Mubarak would never have considered for a second that he should let himself be challenged at the polls for the top job. However clumsy in its promotion and debatable its motives, America's campaign for democracy in the Middle East is making progress."

Indeed, we've also had parliamentary elections in Lebanon, baby steps toward reform in Saudi Arabia, amplified pressure on Syria, and liberal sproutings in Morocco, Palestine, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar. On the hearts-and-minds front, a July 2005 survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found that "large and growing majorities" of Moroccans (83 percent), Jordanians (80 percent), and Lebanese (83 percent) "say democracy can work well and is not just for the West." Meanwhile, more than 200,000 irate Jordanians responded to last month's Amman hotel bombings by pouring into the streets to protest. Chants of "Burn in hell, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi!" and "Death to al Qaeda!" could reportedly be heard. [...]

"To venture into the Arab world," observes Johns Hopkins professor Fouad Ajami, "is to travel into Bush Country." Ajami--who earlier this year spent several weeks in Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, and Iraq--reports encountering "people from practically all Arab lands" engaged in "a great debate about the possibility of freedom and liberty." He also "met Syrians in the know who admitted that the fear of American power, and the example of American forces flushing Saddam Hussein out of his spider hole, now drive Syrian policy. They hang on George Bush's words in Damascus, I was told: the rulers wondering if Iraq was a crystal ball in which they could glimpse their future."

So what explains all the pessimism stateside? It could be that many Americans expected ballots, purple fingers, and Muslim people power to summarily quell the Iraqi insurgency. If so, they were disappointed. Car explosions, suicide bombers, mortar blasts, and kidnappings remain a pervasive reality in the Sunni Triangle. And more than 2,000 U.S. servicemen have now made the ultimate sacrifice. That this number is comparatively low by the standards of prior American wars offers no comfort to families who've lost a relative or friend.

But what if U.S. intervention did create "a new Arab world," as Walid Jumblatt claimed? What if it did vanquish the Middle Eastern "Berlin Wall"? And what if it saved untold Americans--and Arabs--from far deadlier wars in the future? While we mourn each and every U.S. casualty, we must never lose sight of what the American military has accomplished. Despite all the setbacks, Iraq's budding democracy continues to move ahead. So does the training of Iraq's fledgling security forces, a prerequisite for any significant withdrawal of U.S. troops.

As for the Bush Doctrine's loftier goal--to reform Arab politics and drain the swamp from which Islamic terrorism draws its chief ideological firepower--that no longer seems a fool's errand. Even the most determined naysayer must acknowledge what American policy--coupled with felicitous circumstances--has wrought. George W. Bush deposed Saddam to remove a dangerous tyranny and promote U.S. interests in a vital region. He may wind up creating the first Arab democracy and changing the political culture of the Middle East--which would deal a severe blow to the forces of militant Islam.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:58 PM

SOME MISTAKES ARE MORE TOLERABLE THAN OTHERS:

Dead Man Tells No Tales: Media docility and another no-cost federal killing (James Bovard, 12/15/05, Reason)

Two air marshals gunned down an American citizen last week in Miami, and most of the establishment media seemingly couldn't care less.

It's not that folks don't care, but that we're all reassured by it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:52 PM

WHEREAS, WE EUROPEANS WOULD BE MOOING:

Twenty-Seven Million Iraqis against 10,000 Terrorists: Once again, it is time for the Iraqis to cast their ballots. This time, however, more Sunnis than ever before are likely to vote. Violence has been mounting in recent weeks in anticipation of the vote, but the people of Iraq refuse to be cowed. (Vera Kämper and Alexander Schwabe, 12/15/05, Der Spiegel)

The line winds through the enormous atrium of the old post office on Luckenwalder Straße in the Berlin neighborhood of Kreuzberg; waiting time is some two hours. Old men, pregnant women, and little kids stand around, some keeping warm by wrapping Iraqi flags around their shoulders. They don't mind waiting. These exiled Iraqi citizens in Berlin are taking part in the second democratic election since the fall of Saddam.

Sarmand Dashti is one of them. "Being allowed to vote here only strengthens the optimism that's been spreading since the war," he says. "The fact that Iraqis in exile can vote proves the democracy movement is coming along." Instead of voting by mail, the 56,000 Iraqis in Germany have the option -- in Berlin, Mannheim, Munich, and Cologne -- of casting their votes at polling stations, on a four-page ballot with more than 230 parties and party alliances. The idea of guiding Iraq's future from abroad makes the community buzz with excitement, and buses full of voters from Poland and Chechnya have come to Berlin, which is home to about 3,000 Iraqis. Abdullah Seuki came here from Kiel to vote in person. "I feel as though I've been reborn," he says. [...]

This time, over 1,000 Sunni leaders have signed a fatwa to urge the faithful to vote. And Sunni participation is essential if the democratic process is to have any chance at all. Sunni regions still see the worst resistance to the newly forming state, and only a high turnout among the Sunni minority -- which held the most powerful positions under Saddam Hussein -- can bring about a government recognized by all the factions in Iraq.

The signs are good. Like Iraqis in Germany and in a further 14 countries worldwide, those at home in Iraq are today heading for the ballot box. Six insurgence groups, including al-Qaida, have announced that they will not attack polling stations on election day. Rather, only the war against the foreign occupation forces will be continued during the elections.

In other words, it may be that US President George W. Bush was right earlier this week when, during a speech in Philadelphia, he said the Iraqi people were choosing freedom over terror.


Again?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:40 PM

JUST DON'T BLOW THE SEVEN:

Dean still gives Dems heartburn (Peter Savodnik, 12/15/05, The Hill)

An aide close to the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill said, “There were serious concerns when Gov. Dean took over that he understand what his role was and what it wasn’t. There were meetings with the congressional leadership and Mr. Dean where it was discussed and the governor implied that he understood what his role was and was not, that he was the mechanical part of the party, not the standard bearer or message person. Subsequently, there have been episodes that have been concerning.”

Earlier this year, Dean startled some Democratic lawmakers by calling for the lifting of the cap on Social Security taxes which shields income above $90,000 a year from being taxed.

Doug Schoen, also a pollster, who worked for President Clinton and now works for Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), added: “I don’t think it helps the Democrats to have a party chairman who is involved in controversy. There’s so much work to be done organizationally, so much work to be done in terms of fundraising, that I think he would serve the Democratic Party best by focusing on the grass roots.”

Pollster David Beattie, whose clients include Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), said that he had worked in 31 states in the past five years, only seven of which were won by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential race.

“In the other 24, Dean is more of a hindrance than a help,” Beattie said.


You can't blame Howard Dean though for the fact that the party is rightly terrified of having its ideas enunciated and is just trying to cling to as much of the minority as it has left. Making Mr. Dean party chair was about preserving the rump, not winning elections.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:36 PM

IF THEY'D SUSPECTED THE RESULTS THEY'D GET WOULD THEY HAVE DONE THE POLL?:

In war-torn Iraq, unlike here, there’s optimism (Byron York, 12/15/05, The Hill)

Presumably without access to The New York Times, The Washington Post and television news, millions of Iraqis say their lives are better than they were last year, better than they were before the United States invasion, and will likely be better a year from now than today.

The news is in a new poll of Iraqis conducted by ABC News, Time magazine, the BBC, the Japanese television network NHK and the German magazine Der Spiegel.

When it came out, it seemed that one of its sponsors, ABC, could hardly believe its results.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 PM

OKAY, SO MAYBE CHRISTOPHER REEVE WON'T WALK THIS YEAR....:

Collaborator says Korean cloning pioneer admitted faking stem cell results (Burt Herman, 12/15/05, ASSOCIATED PRESS)

A doctor who provided human eggs for research by cloning pioneer Hwang Woo-suk said in a broadcast Thursday that the South Korean scientist agreed to withdraw a key research paper because most of the stem cells produced for the article were faked.

Roh Sung-il, chairman of the board at Mizmedi Hospital, told KBS television that Hwang had agreed to ask the journal Science to withdraw the paper, published in June to international acclaim. Roh was one of the co-authors of the article that detailed how individual stem cell colonies were created for 11 patients through cloning.


In a separate report, a former researcher told MBC that Hwang ordered him to fabricate photos to make it appear there were 11 separate colonies from only three.

"This is something I shouldn't have done," said the researcher, who was identified only by his last name, Kim, and whose face was not shown. "I had no choice but to do it."

Nine of the embryonic stem cell lines Hwang claimed were cloned in the paper were faked, Roh said, and the authenticity of the other two was unknown.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:47 AM

RED EUROPE (via Matthew Cohen):

Latvia cements gay marriage ban (Laura Sheeter, 12/15/05, BBC News)

MPs in the Baltic state of Latvia have passed a constitutional amendment ensuring that gay couples cannot marry.

The change was supported by a majority of parliament - despite criticism of it by the country's president, prime minister and foreign minister.

Members of the European Parliament said the move was homophobic and backward.


American even.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:33 AM

ME. ME, ME ISN'T A WINNING PLATFORM:

Mass. Gov. Romney to Skip Re-Election Bid (GLEN JOHNSON, 12/15/05, The Associated Press)

After earning two Harvard degrees, making millions as a businessman and turning around a scandal-plagued Winter Olympics, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has created quite a list of accomplishments, some political analysts say. Those analysts believe the Republican announced Wednesday he will not to seek re-election next year because he did not want to risk tarnishing his resume if he decides to run for president in 2008.

By forgoing a second term, he will allow himself to campaign unimpeded for the presidency should he so choose, and not subject himself to the political whims of the heavily Democratic state in the run-up to the next presidential election.

"I don't think he had a choice if he was serious about running for the nomination in '07 or '08," said Scott Reed, who managed Bob Dole's 1996 GOP presidential campaign.

Stuart Rothenberg, an independent political analyst in Washington, had a similar assessment.

"He doesn't want to run for re-election because he could possibly get beat," Rothenberg said.


Okay, we get the part where that's good for Miutt Romney. Where's the part where it's good for Republicans, MA, and the country?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:01 AM

WHILE GREENSPAN FIDDLES (via AWW):

Prices Drop by Largest Amount in 56 Years (Martin Crutsinger, 12/15/05, AP )

A record plunge in the cost of gasoline pushed consumer prices down by the largest amount in 56 years in November while industrial production posted a solid gain.

The new government reports Thursday provided further evidence that the economy is shaking off the blows delivered by a string of devastating hurricanes.

The Labor Department reported that its closely watched Consumer Price Index dropped by 0.6 percent last month, the biggest decline since a 0.9 percent fall in July 1949. [...]

Outside of the volatile food and energy categories, prices were up 0.2 percent, a modest gain that should help relieve fears that this year's surge in energy costs could evolve into more widespread inflation problems.


Mr. Bernanke can't take over fast enough.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:40 AM

MARKET PSYCHOLOGY:

Dow Index Giving a Distorted View of '05: The blue chips are badly lagging for a second year. Some pros see bargains in the sector. (Tom Petruno, December 15, 2005, LA Times)

[T]he market is doing a lot better than the Dow suggests.

To some investment pros, the Dow's continuing misery is an invitation to pick up what they believe are tremendous bargains in the blue-chip bin.

The 30-stock Dow index, which consists of some of the nation's biggest companies — General Electric Co., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Boeing Co. among them — rose 59.79 points, or 0.6%, to 10,883.51 on Wednesday. That lifted its year-to-date price gain to a measly 0.9%.

That is the worst performance of any major market gauge. By contrast, the Standard & Poor's 500 index, which gained 5.31 points, or 0.4%, to a 4 1/2 -year high of 1,272.74 on Wednesday, is up 5% this year.

Many indexes that track stocks of smaller companies are doing far better than the Dow or the S&P 500. An S&P barometer of small stocks, for example, has surged nearly 10% this year.

Even including dividend income, the Dow's year-to-date return is just 3.2%.

The Dow's woes in part reflect the disdain many investors have shown in this decade for big-name companies in general — a complete turnabout from how the stocks were perceived in the 1990s.

The reversal of fortune for blue chips "is one more example of how the market takes things to extremes," said Michael Holland, head of money manager Holland & Co. in New York.


A surge in the Dow though would be another boost for the President's poll numbers, which are a function of atmospherics, not reality these days..


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:37 AM

HEALTHY RAGE:

Anti-Syria Rage Rises in Beirut: Emotions spill over as Lebanese turn out to bury Gibran Tueni, a publisher and legislator known for outspoken criticism of Damascus. (Megan K. Stack, December 15, 2005, LA Times)

Weeping, and cursing Syria, tens of thousands of Lebanese spilled into the streets of Beirut on Wednesday as a funeral march for publisher and politician Gibran Tueni turned into a livid political protest.

Tueni, 48, was assassinated Monday morning in a bombing as he was being driven to work. In his columns, the newspaper magnate and lawmaker served up scathing criticisms of Syrian involvement in Lebanese affairs back in the days when many here tiptoed around the taboo of speaking out against Damascus. Tueni is the fourth major anti-Syria figure to be killed this year.

"I call on this occasion not for revenge or hatred but for us to bury with Gibran all our hatreds," Ghassan Tueni, the slain man's father and also a journalist, told reporters at the Greek Orthodox church where his son was buried. "To call on all Lebanese, Muslims and Christians, to unite in the service of the great Lebanon."

Tueni's death provoked a fresh wave of revulsion and despair in Lebanon, along with a growing sense of helplessness against the killings and bombings.


Easy enough to help them feel powerful again--do Assad.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:34 AM

CHOOSING SIDES:

Democrats plan to filibuster Patriot Act (Charles Hurt and Jerry Seper, December 15, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Senate Democrats say they will filibuster the extension of the USA Patriot Act, which passed the House yesterday on a bipartisan vote, despite some concerns that provisions of the bill trample civil liberties by giving law enforcement too much power.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said he will not demand that his entire caucus support a filibuster but said that he certainly would.

No use complaining about wedge issues when you're always so eager to grab the narrow end.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:24 AM

CUT TO THE CHASE:

Fatah split as rebels defy Abbas old guard (Daily Telegraph, 15/12/2005)

The ruling Palestinian faction, Fatah, split last night when activists led by the jailed intifada leader Marwan Barghouti announced they would field candidates in elections next month as a new party.

Barghouti's wife arrived at election headquarters in Ramallah and presented a separate list of candidates to the one registered by the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, severing ties with the generation of Fatah leaders who came to power under Yasser Arafat.

Saeb Nimr, Barghouti's spokesman, said: "We have registered an independent list under the name, The Future, headed by Marwan Barghouti."


Israel will release him sooner or later because reformist leadership serves their interests.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 AM

REASON TO BELIEVE:

How Christianity (and Capitalism) Led to Science (Rodney Stark, 12/02/05, The Chronicle Review)

When Europeans first began to explore the globe, their greatest surprise was not the existence of the Western Hemisphere, but the extent of their own technological superiority over the rest of the world. Not only were the proud Maya, Aztec, and Inca nations helpless in the face of European intruders, so were the fabled civilizations of the East: China, India, and Islamic nations were "backward" by comparison with 15th-century Europe. How had that happened? Why was it that, although many civilizations had pursued alchemy, the study led to chemistry only in Europe? Why was it that, for centuries, Europeans were the only ones possessed of eyeglasses, chimneys, reliable clocks, heavy cavalry, or a system of music notation? How had the nations that had arisen from the rubble of Rome so greatly surpassed the rest of the world?

Several recent authors have discovered the secret to Western success in geography. But that same geography long also sustained European cultures that were well behind those of Asia. Other commentators have traced the rise of the West to steel, or to guns and sailing ships, and still others have credited a more productive agriculture. The trouble is that those answers are part of what needs to be explained: Why did Europeans excel at metallurgy, shipbuilding, or farming?

The most convincing answer to those questions attributes Western dominance to the rise of capitalism, which took place only in Europe. Even the most militant enemies of capitalism credit it with creating previously undreamed of productivity and progress. In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels proposed that before the rise of capitalism, humans engaged "in the most slothful indolence"; the capitalist system was "the first to show what man's activity can bring about." Capitalism achieved that miracle through regular reinvestment to increase productivity, either to create greater capacity or improve technology, and by motivating both management and labor through ever-rising payoffs.

Supposing that capitalism did produce Europe's own "great leap forward," it remains to be explained why capitalism developed only in Europe. Some writers have found the roots of capitalism in the Protestant Reformation; others have traced it back to various political circumstances. But, if one digs deeper, it becomes clear that the truly fundamental basis not only for capitalism, but for the rise of the West, was an extraordinary faith in reason.

A series of developments, in which reason won the day, gave unique shape to Western culture and institutions. And the most important of those victories occurred within Christianity. While the other world religions emphasized mystery and intuition, Christianity alone embraced reason and logic as the primary guides to religious truth. Christian faith in reason was influenced by Greek philosophy. But the more important fact is that Greek philosophy had little impact on Greek religions. Those remained typical mystery cults, in which ambiguity and logical contradictions were taken as hallmarks of sacred origins. Similar assumptions concerning the fundamental inexplicability of the gods and the intellectual superiority of introspection dominated all of the other major world religions.

But, from early days, the church fathers taught that reason was the supreme gift from God and the means to progressively increase understanding of Scripture and revelation. Consequently Christianity was oriented to the future, while the other major religions asserted the superiority of the past. At least in principle, if not always in fact, Christian doctrines could always be modified in the name of progress, as demonstrated by reason. Encouraged by the scholastics and embodied in the great medieval universities founded by the church, faith in the power of reason infused Western culture, stimulating the pursuit of science and the evolution of democratic theory and practice. The rise of capitalism also was a victory for church-inspired reason, since capitalism is, in essence, the systematic and sustained application of reason to commerce — something that first took place within the great monastic estates.


The risk is that folk can come to worship the tool.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

A FAIR ENOUGH TEST:

Baghdad falls quiet as Zarqawi threatens poll (Anton La Guardia Diplomatic Editor and Oliver Poole in Baghdad, 15/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

The terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi vowed to disrupt today's general election in Iraq as a nationwide travel ban was imposed to reduce the threat of car bombings.

With Iraqi exiles starting to cast their ballots, including in Zarqawi's home town of Zarqa in Jordan, a statement issued by his branch of al-Qa'eda announced "a blessed conquest to shake up the bastions of non-believers and apostates and to ruin the 'democratic' wedding of heresy and immorality".


Nice of him to put down a marker by which whether we can determine quite easily whether he's prevaili8ng and John Murtha is right, or whether democracy is prevailing and the President right.

MORE:
Challenge of governing falls to Iraqis (Thanassis Cambanis, December 15, 2005, Boston Globe)

Once it takes office, the government will decide whether to demand a timetable for the withdrawal of US forces, how to fight the insurgency that is plaguing huge swathes of the country, and how best to woo disenfranchised such groups as Sunni Arabs into the political process.

How it resolves these issues will determine whether Iraq charts a course of steady if incremental progress, or whether groups straddling the fence decide to reject the entire political process and act as spoilers.

''We are taking it much more seriously" than the January vote that installed Iraq's first freely elected government, said Adil Abdel Mahdi, a Shi'ite Islamist politician who is one of Iraq's vice presidents and represents the dominant Shi'ite Alliance in the current government.

The prospect of a four-year government, which will have the power to revisit the constitution approved in October, has even lured Sunni Arabs who boycotted the vote nearly a year ago back to the polls.

''This election will decide the future of the country," Abdel Mahdi said in an interview.

While this election eventually will have dramatic results for Iraq, they won't come soon.

Results of the vote won't be announced for two weeks, and it could take up to four months for the political parties to agree on who should form a new government. Until the new government takes office, the current coalition would stay in power as a caretaker.

Even when a permanent government emerges, it probably will spend its first few months revisiting the constitution; all amendments to alter the document must be proposed four months after the 275-seat assembly is sworn in.

Only after the new government deals with these procedural issues and debates dry-sounding questions like federalism will it turn to the major issues that have driven rifts into Iraqi society.

It will have to negotiate with the insurgency, distribute Iraq's oil wealth, and decide whether to allow former members of the Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party to join the government.

Voter turnout will go a long way to determining the election's credibility among Sunni Arabs.


One of the many salutary effects of our troop withdrawals will be to hasten that timetable.


December 14, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:17 PM

FINALLY LEADING THE PARTY HE BELONGS IN:

Blair rejects alternative white paper (Polly Curtis and Matthew Taylor, December 14, 2005, The Guardian)

The prime minister, Tony Blair, today refused to give ground to a powerful coalition of ex-ministers, Labour loyalists and rebel backbenchers that is calling on him to soften his controversial education reforms.

Mr Blair told the House of Commons he will not change his plans to make every school an independent "trust" school despite the fact that up to 50 of his MPs were simultaneously spelling out their alternative plans for education. [...]

Mr Cameron said Mr Blair faced a choice. "With our support, you can have the reforms that our schools need or you can give in to the Labour party. Which is it to be - white paper or white flag?"

Mr Cameron added: "Reports suggest this [alternative white paper] will call for a delay in the introduction of trust schools. Will you specifically rule this out?"

Mr Blair replied: "Yes, I will."


The Tories are in an ideal position: they help Tony Blair govern Third Way now and inherit his mantle when Labour implodes, as the GOP did here.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:12 PM

IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTEXT:

The sickness bequeathed by the west to the Muslim world: The Iranian president's support for Holocaust denial is a measure of how far the infection of Jew-hatred has spread (Jonathan Freedland, December 14, 2005, The Guardian)

[E]veryone has their limits and last week I reached mine. On Thursday the president of Iran chose to stand with the cranks, neo-fascists and racists who deny the factual truth of the Holocaust.

"Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces," said Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "Although we don't accept this claim..."

Suddenly, the usual apologetics won't work. No one can say Iran's president was really complaining about Israel or Zionism, rather than Jews. No one can say he was talking about the west's colonial crimes.


Imagine not being embarrassed to write that about yourself, that you'd excuse him if his motives were only better?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:01 PM

HOW HIGH A PRICE ARE DEMOCRATS WILLING TO PAY FOR RUSS FEINGOLD'S AMBITIONS?:

House Approves Extension of Patriot Act (JESSE J. HOLLAND, 12/14/05, Associated Press)

The House easily approved renewing a modified USA Patriot Act on Wednesday, but with the bill facing a Senate filibuster, its Republican leader began talks with the White House on instead extending the current law unchanged for a year.

The House voted 251-174 to approve a House-Senate compromise that would modify and make permanent most of the Patriot Act's 16 expiring provisions.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:55 PM

HOLY CRIPES! ADULTS:

'Ashamed' protest leaders sorry (Tracy Ong, December 15, 2005, The Australian)

THE ringleaders of Sunday's protest at Cronulla Beach delivered written apologies to Sydney's Lebanese community yesterday, saying it was meant to be a peaceful protest but spiralled out of control due to alcohol and a lack of leadership.

Troy Denenhy formally apologised to the Lebanese community, police, ambulance officers and the Sutherland Shire for his behaviour, which featured prominently in media coverage of Sunday's riot.

Mr Denenhy, who has a Japanese wife, emphasised he was "not racist".

"It was supposed to be a peaceful protest but turned into a racial war," his letter says.

Glenn "Steely" Steele, who was another vocal local early on in Sunday's protest, now says he is "deeply embarrassed and ashamed".


But they can be enormously proud of accepting responsibility.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:36 PM

BADLY KEPT SECRET:

Romney to announce he won't seek re-election: Governor is expected to seek GOP presidential nomination in 2008 (Frank Phillips, December 14, 2005, Boston Globe)

Governor Mitt Romney will announce at 6 p.m. that he will not seek re-election to a second term, setting the stage for an expected campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, a senior aide to the governor said today.

Personally, I'd be inclined to vote for Governor Romney in the 2008 primary, but not if he's not willing to hold the gubernatorial seat for the GOP. If you want people in the party to support you, you owe certain things to the party.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:18 PM

HAPPY THE HARE IN THE BRIAR PATCH:

Bush accepts responsibility for decision to go to war based on faulty intelligence (Nedra Pickler, December 14, 2005, Associated Press)

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq,'' the president told a foreign policy forum on the eve of elections to establish Iraq's first permanent, democratically elected government. "And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that.''

"We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of brutal dictator,'' Bush said. "It is to leave a free and democratic Iraq in his place.

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision. Saddam was a threat and the American people and the world is better off because he is no longer in power,'' the president told the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.


They did the same in the Cold War, but it's still inexplicable that Democrats are bailing on a war they'd supported at the exact moment it's being won and leaving it to a Republican president to reap all the credit. Ronald Reagan didn't singlehandedly fight and defeat the Soviets while Democrats spent seventy years propping up Lenin's corpse, but Ted Kennedy, Tom Harkin, Tip O'Neill, etc. did their best to make it seem that way.

MORE:
Iraqi Beacon (Michael Rubin, December 14, 2005, Wall Street Journal)

Iraqis will go to the polls tomorrow for the third time this year. Their actions mark both a triumph for the Iraqi people and a warning for Arab autocrats. Not only has the Iraqi march toward democracy proved naysayers wrong, but Iraqis' growing embrace of democracy demonstrates the wisdom of staying the course. Iraqis are changing political culture. Howard Dean and John Murtha may believe that the U.S. military has lost. Brent Scowcroft may think Arab democracy a pipe dream. They are mistaken.

The greatest impediment to progress in the Arab world is not terrorism or Islamism; both are recent phenomena. Rather, it is lack of accountability. [...]

The coalition's ouster of Saddam may have created a template for change, but it is Iraqis who have pressed forward to hold not only Saddam, but also subsequent politicians, to account. On June 28, 2004, Coalition Provisional Authority administrator L. Paul Bremer appointed Iyad Allawi as interim prime minister. Mr. Allawi, a former Baathist, was a favorite of the U.S., British and Jordanian intelligence services. He projected an image of strong leadership to an Iraqi audience craving security. He promised to jumpstart reconstruction. But he failed. Corruption exploded. Iraqis blamed his empowerment of senior Baathists for the spread of insurgency and decline in security. Furthermore, he treated U.S. diplomats, not Iraqis, as his most important constituency. He campaigned surrounded by American security agents. Iraqis had enough. On Jan. 30, millions braved bombs to bounce him from office. Even with the trappings of incumbency--media coverage and a bully pulpit for his campaign--he barely mustered 14%. As Egyptians, Libyans, Tunisians and Syrians watched with envy, Iraqis held a failed incumbent to account.

They will do it again tomorrow. Like Mr. Allawi, current Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari has failed. Local humor is telling. A popular Baghdad joke tells of how he walks into his office to find a rooster, dog and donkey. "I'm here to wake you up so you can do your job," the rooster crows. "I'm here to provide security," the dog barks. "Why are you here?" Jaafari asks the donkey. "I don't know. I'm no different from you," the donkey brays.

Under Saddam, and in other Arab autocracies, such jokes were dangerous. But in the new Iraq, the public translates its mood into action. Mr. Jaafari may try to blame his failings on others, but hundreds of newspapers, and a proliferating network of radio stations and TV networks, will not allow him. Ash-Sharqiya has won wide audiences with its political satire. Iraqi editorial cartoonists are merciless. Those surrounding Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani may give a lukewarm endorsement to the United Iraqi Alliance religious slate, but the clerical leadership realizes that they cannot push too hard. Iraqis may respect religion, but they are not willing to forgive militia abuse, even in the name of religion. The Shiite slate may still win a plurality, but its returns will decline. So too will that of the Kurdish list, as disgust with Masud Barzani's conflation of business and politics is escalating.

Even some insurgents have come to realize the power of democracy. I traveled to Jordan last month to meet a senior insurgent leader and unrepentant Baathist. He conceded that "resistance" activities had hurt too many Iraqis and turned many in the hotbed Sunni province of al-Anbar against them. Sunni Arab groups that last year placed their hope for empowerment on U.S. or Arab League intercession recognize that their best hope for empowerment is through the ballot box, not boycotts and bombs.

The process of democratization may be messy--but it is working.


President Discusses Iraqi Elections, Victory in the War on Terror (President George W. Bush, The Woodrow Wilson Center, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Washington, D.C., 12/14/05)
In the war on terror, Iraq is now the central front -- and over the last few weeks, I've been discussing our political, economic, and military strategy for victory in that country. A historic election will take place tomorrow in Iraq. And as millions of Iraqis prepare to cast their ballots, I want to talk today about why we went into Iraq, why we stayed in Iraq, and why we cannot -- and will not -- leave Iraq until victory is achieved. [...]

We are living through a watershed moment in the story of freedom. Most of the focus now is on this week's elections -- and rightly so. Iraqis will go to the polls to choose a government that will be the only constitutional democracy in the Arab world. Yet we need to remember that these elections are also a vital part of a broader strategy for protecting the American people against the threat of terrorism.

We saw the future the terrorists intend for our nation on that fateful morning of September the 11th, 2001. That day we learned that vast oceans and friendly neighbors are no longer enough to protect us. September the 11th changed our country; it changed the policy of our government. We adopted a new strategy to protect the American people: We would hunt down the terrorists wherever they hide; we would make no distinction between the terrorists and those who harbor them; and we would advance our security at home by advancing freedom in the Middle East.

September the 11th also changed the way I viewed threats like Saddam Hussein. We saw the destruction terrorists could cause with airplanes loaded with jet fuel -- and we imagined the destruction they could cause with even more powerful weapons. At the time, the leaders of both political parties recognized this new reality: We cannot allow the world's most dangerous men to get their hands on the world's most dangerous weapons. In an age of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long. (Applause.)

We removed Saddam Hussein from power because he was a threat to our security. He had pursued and used weapons of mass destruction. He sponsored terrorists. He ordered his military to shoot at American and British pilots patrolling the no-fly zones. He invaded his neighbors. He fought a war against the United States and a broad coalition. He had declared that the United States of America was his enemy.

Over the course of a decade, Saddam Hussein refused to comply with more than a dozen United Nations resolutions -- including demands that he respect the rights of the Iraqi people, disclose his weapons, and abide by the terms of a 1991 cease-fire. He deceived international inspectors, and he denied them the unconditional access they needed to do their jobs. When a unanimous Security Council gave him one final chance to disclose and disarm, or face serious consequences, he refused to comply with that final opportunity. At any point along the way, Saddam Hussein could have avoided war by complying with the just demands of the international community. The United States did not choose war -- the choice was Saddam Hussein's.

When we made the decision to go into Iraq, many intelligence agencies around the world judged that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. This judgment was shared by the intelligence agencies of governments who did not support my decision to remove Saddam. And it is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As President, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq -- and I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that. At the same time, we must remember that an investigation after the war by chief weapons inspector Charles Duelfer found that Saddam was using the U.N. oil-for-food program to influence countries and companies in an effort to undermine sanctions, with the intent of restarting his weapons programs once the sanctions collapsed and the world looked the other way. Given Saddam's history and the lessons of September the 11th, my decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision. Saddam was a threat -- and the American people and the world is better off because he is no longer in power. (Applause.) We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of a brutal dictator; it is to leave a free and democratic Iraq in its place.

As I stated in a speech in the lead-up to the war, a liberated Iraq could show the power of freedom to transform the Middle East by bringing hope and progress to the lives of millions. So we're helping the Iraqi -- Iraqi people build a lasting democracy that is peaceful and prosperous and an example for the broader Middle East. The terrorists understand this, and that is why they have now made Iraq the central front in the war on terror.

The enemy of freedom in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists and Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein. We believe that, over time, most of this group will be persuaded to support the democratic Iraq led by a federal government that is strong enough to protect minority rights. We're encouraged by the indications that many Sunnis intend to participate in tomorrow's elections.

The Saddamists are former regime loyalists who harbor dreams of returning to power, and they're trying to foment anti-democratic sentiment amongst the larger Sunni community. Yet they lack popular support, and over time, they can be marginalized and defeated by the security forces of a free Iraq.

The terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda are the smallest, but most lethal group. They are led by a brutal terrorist named Zarqawi. He's al Qaeda's chief operations officer in Iraq. He has stated his allegiance to Osama bin Laden. The terrorists have ambitions; they have goals. They want to stop the advance of freedom in Iraq. They want to make Iraq what Afghanistan was under the Taliban -- a safe haven from which they can plot attacks against our people. There is no limit to their brutality. They kill the innocent to achieve their aims. This is an enemy without conscience -- and against such enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, we will never give in, and we will never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

Last month, my administration released a document called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." In recent weeks, I've been discussing our strategy with the American people. At the U.S. Naval Academy, I spoke about how we changed our approach to training Iraqi security forces, so they can take the fight to the enemy and eventually take responsibility for the security of their citizens without major foreign assistance. Iraqi forces are becoming more and more capable.

This time last year, there was only a handful of Iraqi battalions ready for combat. Now there are more than 125 Iraqi army and police combat battalions in the fight against the terrorists. Of these, more than 70 Iraqi battalions are fighting side-by-side with coalition forces, and more than 50 others are taking the lead in the fight. So far, in December, there have been more than 900 combat operations in Iraq at the company level or above, and 75 percent of these involved Iraqi security forces either in the lead or fighting side-by-side with our coalition. As these Iraqi forces grow in size and strength, American and coalition forces can concentrate on training Iraqis, and hunting down high-value targets like Zarqawi and his associates.

Last week before the Council on Foreign Relations, I explained how we changed our approach to help Iraqis hold and rebuild cities taken from the enemy, and how to help them revitalize Iraq's infrastructure and economy. Today, many cities like Mosul and Najaf are coming back to life, and Iraq's economy is growing. Thousands of new businesses have opened in Iraq, personal income is up, and according to one survey, seven in 10 Iraqis say their own lives are going well, and nearly two-thirds expect things to improve in the next year.

Earlier this week at the Philadelphia World Affairs Council, I spoke in depth about how we changed our approach to helping the Iraqis build their democracy. At the request of Iraqi leaders, we accelerated the transition to Iraqi self-government. We set four major milestones to guide Iraq's transition to constitutional democracy: the transfer of sovereignty, elections for a transitional government, the adoption of a democratic constitution, and elections for a new government under that constitution. In spite of the violence, Iraqis have met every milestone -- and this is changing the political landscape in Iraq.

Sunni Arabs who failed to participate in the January elections are now campaigning vigorously in this week's elections -- and we can expect a higher turnout of Sunni voters. As Sunnis join the political process, Iraqi democracy becomes more inclusive -- and the terrorists and Saddamists are becoming marginalized.

Each of the changes we have made in our approach in Iraq is helping us meet the hard realities and the facts on the ground. We've adapted our tactics; we have fixed what was not working, and we have listened to those who know best: our military commanders -- and the Iraqi people.

Our tactics continue to change, but our goal in Iraq has not changed: a free and democratic Iraq. I strongly believe a democratic Iraq is a crucial part of our strategy to defeat the terrorists, because only democracy can bring freedom and reconciliation to Iraq, and peace to this troubled part of the world. Our efforts to advance freedom in Iraq are driven by our vital interests and our deepest beliefs. America was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and we believe that the people of the Middle East desire freedom as much as we do. History has shown that free nations are peaceful nations. And as Iraqi democracy takes hold, Iraqi citizens will have a stake in a common and peaceful future.

As we advance the cause of freedom in Iraq, our nation can proceed with confidence because we have done this kind of work before. After World War II, President Harry Truman believed that the way to help bring peace and prosperity to Asia was to plant the seeds of freedom and democracy in Japan. Like today, there were many skeptics and pessimists who said that the Japanese were not ready for democracy. Fortunately, President Harry Truman stuck to his guns. He believed, as I do, in freedom's power to transform an adversary into an ally. And because he stayed true to his convictions, today Japan is one of the world's freest and most prosperous nations, and one of America's closest allies in keeping the peace. The spread of freedom to Iraq and the Middle East requires the same confidence and persistence, and it will lead to the same results. (Applause.)

The people of Iraq are now seeing some of the tangible benefits of their new democracy. They see that as freedom advances, their lives are improving. Iraqis have approved a bold constitution that guarantees the rule of law and freedom of assembly, and property rights, and freedom of speech and the press, and women's rights, and the right to vote. They see their freedom increasingly being defended by their own soldiers and police instead of foreign forces. And they see that freedom is bringing opportunity and a better life.

The Iraqis still face many challenges, including security, and reconstruction, and economic reform. But they are building a strong democracy that can handle these challenges and that will be a model for the Middle East. Freedom in Iraq will inspire reformers from Damascus to Tehran. This new Iraq shares our deepest values, and it shares our most determined enemies. By helping Iraqis build a nation that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself, we will gain an ally in the war on terror and a partner for peace in the Middle East.

The stakes in Iraq are high, and we will not leave until victory has been achieved. (Applause.) Today there's an intense debate about the importance of Iraq to the war on terror. The constant headlines about car bombings and killings have led some to ask whether our presence in Iraq has made America less secure. This view presumes that if we were not in Iraq, the terrorists would be leaving us alone. The reality is that the terrorists have been targeting America for years, long before we ever set foot in Iraq.

We were not in Iraq in 1993, when the terrorists tried to blow up the World Trade Center in New York. We were not in Iraq in 1998, when the terrorists bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. We were not in Iraq in 2000, when the terrorists killed 17 American sailors aboard the USS Cole. There wasn't a single American soldier in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001, when the terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 people in the worst attack on our home since Pearl Harbor.

These acts are part of a grand strategy by the terrorists. Their stated objective is to drive the United States and coalition forces out of the Middle East so they can gain control of Iraq and use that country as a base from which to launch attacks against America, overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, and establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that stretches from Spain to Indonesia. Hear the words of the terrorists. In a letter to the terrorist leader Zarqawi, the al Qaeda leader Zawahiri has outlined plans that will unfold in several stages. These are his words: "... Expel the Americans from Iraq. ... Establish an Islamic authority over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq... Extend the jihad wave to secular countries neighboring Iraq." End quote.

To achieve these goals, the terrorists are targeting innocent men, women, and children. The enemy has only the ability to create chaos for the cameras with spectacular acts of violence. They know they cannot defeat us militarily. So they're trying to break our will in the hopes of getting America to leave the battlefield early, and they cite Vietnam as a reason they can prevail. Zawahiri, in his letter to Zarqawi, wrote, "The aftermath of the collapse of the American power in Vietnam -- and how they ran and left their agents -- is noteworthy." In the past, al Qaeda has said that American pullouts of Lebanon and Somalia showed them that America is weak and could be made to run. And now the terrorists think they can make America run in Iraq. There's only one way the terrorists can prevail: if we lose our nerve and leave before the job is done. And that is not going to happen on my watch. (Applause.)

Some in Washington are calling for a rapid and complete withdrawal of our forces in Iraq. They say that our presence there is the cause for instability in Iraq, and that the answer is to set a deadline to withdraw. I disagree. I've listened carefully to all the arguments, and there are four reasons why I believe that setting an artificial deadline would be a recipe for disaster.

First, setting an artificial deadline would send the wrong message to the Iraqis. As Iraqis are risking their lives for democracy, it would tell them that America is more interested in leaving than helping them succeed, put at risk all the democratic progress they have made over the past year.

Secondly, setting an artificial deadline would send the wrong message to the enemy. It would tell them that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run. It would vindicate the terrorists' tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder. It would embolden the terrorists and invite new attacks on America.

Third, setting an artificial deadline would send the wrong message to the region and the world. It would tell our friends and supporters that America is a weak and unreliable ally, and that when the going gets tough, America will retreat.

Finally, setting an artificial deadline would send the wrong message to the most important audience -- our troops on the front line. It would tell them that America is abandoning the mission they are risking their lives to achieve, and that the sacrifice of their comrades killed in this struggle has been in vain. I make this pledge to the families of the fallen: We will carry on the fight, we will complete their mission, and we will win. (Applause.)

Victory will be achieved by meeting certain clear objectives: when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can protect their own people, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot attacks against our country. These objectives, not timetables set by politicians in Washington, will drive our force levels in Iraq. As Iraqis stand up, we will stand down. And when victory is achieved, our troops will then come home, with the honor they have earned. (Applause.)

One of the blessings of our free society is that we can debate these issues openly, even in a time of war. Most of the debate has been a credit to our democracy, but some have launched irresponsible charges. They say that we act because of oil, that we act in Iraq because of Israel, or because we misled the American people. Some of the most irresponsible comments about manipulating intelligence have come from politicians who saw the same intelligence we saw, and then voted to authorize the use of force against Saddam Hussein. These charges are pure politics. They hurt the morale of our troops. Whatever our differences in Washington, our men and women in uniform deserve to know that once our politicians vote to send them into harm's way, our support will be with them in good days and bad, and we will settle for nothing less than complete victory. (Applause.)

Before this victory comes, we still have a lot of difficult work ahead. We've made real progress in the last two and a half years, and the terrorists see this progress and they're determined to stop it. These enemies are not going to give up because of a successful election. They know that as democracy takes root in Iraq, their hateful ideology will suffer a devastating blow. So we can expect violence to continue.

We can also expect that the elections will be followed by days of uncertainty. We may not know for certain who's won the elections until the early part of January -- and that's important for our citizens to understand. It's going to take a while. It's also going to take a while for them to form a government. The work ahead will require patience of the Iraqi people, and require our patience, as well. Yet we must remember that a free Iraq is in our interests, because a free Iraq will be a beacon of hope. And as the Middle East grows in liberty, the American people will become safer and our nation will be more secure.

The work ahead will also require continued sacrifice. Yet we can be confident, because history has shown the power of freedom to overcome tyranny. And we can be confident because we have on our side the greatest force for freedom in human history: the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. (Applause.)

One of these men was a Marine lieutenant named Ryan McGlothlin, from Lebanon, Virginia. Ryan was a bright young man who had everything going for him and he always wanted to serve our nation. He was a valedictorian of his high school class. He graduated from William & Mary with near-perfect grade averages, and he was on a full scholarship at Stanford, where he was working toward a doctorate in chemistry.

Two years after the attacks of September the 11th, the young man who had the world at his feet came home from Stanford for a visit. He told his dad, "I just don't feel like I'm doing something that matters. I want to serve my country. I want to protect our lands from terrorists, so I joined the Marines." When his father asked him if there was some other way to serve, Ryan replied that he felt a special obligation to step up because he had been given so much. Ryan didn't support me in the last election, but he supported our mission in Iraq. And he supported his fellow Marines.

Ryan was killed last month fighting the terrorists near the -- Iraq's Syrian border. In his pocket was a poem that Ryan had read at his high school graduation, and it represented the spirit of this fine Marine. The poem was called "Don't Quit."

In our fight to keep America free, we'll never quit. We've lost wonderful Americans like Ryan McGlothlin. We cherish the memory of each one. We pray the loved ones -- pray for the loved ones they've left behind, and we count it a privilege to be citizens of a country they served. We also honor them by acknowledging that their sacrifice has brought us to this moment: the birth of a free and sovereign Iraqi nation that will be a friend of the United States, and a force for good in a troubled region of the world.

The story of freedom has just begun in the Middle East. And when the history of these days is written, it will tell how America once again defended its own freedom by using liberty to transform nations from bitter foes to strong allies. And history will say that this generation, like generations before, laid the foundation of peace for generations to come.

May God bless you all. (Applause.)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:39 PM

IT'S CALLED ACCEPTING REALITY:

Sharon Advisor Says PM Will Partition Jerusalem (Ezra HaLevi, 12/14/05, Arutz Sheva)

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior campaign pollster Kalman Gayer has let the cat out of the bag: Sharon plans to divide Israel's capital, Jerusalem, should he win the elections.

Gayer made the statements speaking with Newsweek about the extent of the withdrawals Sharon is willing to make in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

The relevant passage in the Newsweek article states as follows:

"In theory, Gayer says, Sharon would accept a Palestinian state in Gaza and 90 percent of the West Bank, and a compromise on Jerusalem, in exchange for peace. But the Israeli leader does not believe Palestinians will be able to deliver peace or make other compromises—like forgoing the right of refugees to return to their old homes in Israel—in his lifetime (Sharon is 78). In the meantime, Sharon wants to "lay the contours of an agreement with the Palestinians," according to Gayer, by creating a Palestinian state in half the West Bank and implementing confidence-building measures."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:30 PM

AND AREN'T SWIRLIES LOW-RENT WATERBOARDING?:

Hate torture? Consider boot camp (Max Boot, December 14, 2005, LA Times)

HOLD THE PRESSES. I've discovered that the use of torture by the U.S. government is far more pervasive than previously believed. There are major facilities all over the country where thousands of men and women who have not committed any crime are held for prolonged periods while subjected to physical and psychological coercion that violates every tenet of the Geneva Convention.

They are routinely made to stand for long periods in uncomfortable positions. They are made to walk for hours while wearing heavy loads on their backs. They are bullied by martinets who get in their faces and yell insults at them. They are hit and often knocked down with clubs known as pugil sticks. They are denied sleep for more than a day at a time. They are forced to inhale tear gas. They are prevented from seeing friends or family. Some are traumatized by this treatment. Others are injured. A few even die.

Should Amnesty International or the International Committee of the Red Cross want to investigate these human-rights abuses, they could visit Parris Island, S.C., Camp Pendleton, Calif., Ft. Benning, Ga., Ft. Jackson, S.C., and other bases where the Army and Marines train recruits. It's worth keeping in mind how roughly the U.S. government treats its own defenders before we get too worked up over the treatment of captured terrorists.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:27 PM

WELL, WE ON THE RIGHT SURE HAD THAT ONE WRONG:

Nation-building elevated (Rowan Scarborough, December 14, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The Pentagon yesterday announced a landmark change in the use of combat troops, elevating "stability missions" -- commonly called nation-building -- to an equal status with major combat operations.

The evolution in war-planning priorities underscores how the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States by the al Qaeda terror network continue to fundamentally reshape how U.S. military commanders deploy the armed forces.

Not only are U.S. forces becoming more mobile to better counter Islamic terrorists, but the chain of command now will be trained in how to "build" nations by creating indigenous security forces, democratic institutions and free markets.

In reality it's a far more important mission than combat.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:24 PM

DOESN'T HE READ THE NY TIMES?:

The Truth On the Ground (Ben Connable, December 14, 2005, Washington Post)

When I told people that I was getting ready to head back to Iraq for my third tour, the usual response was a frown, a somber head shake and even the occasional "I'm sorry." When I told them that I was glad to be going back, the response was awkward disbelief, a fake smile and a change of subject. The common wisdom seems to be that Iraq is an unwinnable war and a quagmire and that the only thing left to decide is how quickly we withdraw. Depending on which poll you believe, about 60 percent of Americans think it's time to pull out of Iraq.

How is it, then, that 64 percent of U.S. military officers think we will succeed if we are allowed to continue our work? Why is there such a dramatic divergence between American public opinion and the upbeat assessment of the men and women doing the fighting?

Open optimism, whether or not it is warranted, is a necessary trait in senior officers and officials. Skeptics can be excused for discounting glowing reports on Iraq from the upper echelons of power. But it is not a simple thing to ignore genuine optimism from mid-grade, junior and noncommissioned officers who have spent much of the past three years in Iraq.

We know the streets, the people and the insurgents far better than any armchair academic or talking head.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:12 PM

SNIPPY STRIPED-PANTS SET:

The Top 10 Stories You Missed in 2005: The world will remember 2005 for its natural disasters, the passing of a pope, and the ongoing insurgency in Iraq. But, all the while, FP’s editors have been keeping an eye out for those stories that fell through the cracks but will have a lasting impact for years to come. In a year-end FP exclusive, here are 10 stories you might have missed. (Foreign Policy, December 2005)

Hot Air’s Shifting Winds

When it comes to emitting greenhouse gases, the United States is usually seen as the bad guy, content to belch out fumes at its pleasure. But reports released in late November show that U.S. emissions have fallen for the first time in more than a decade. Between 2000 and 2003, U.S. emissions fell by 0.8 percent. By contrast, global goody-two-shoes Canada saw a 24.2 percent increase in 2003 from its 1990 levels. Even the sanctimonious Europeans are set to miss their Kyoto targets by 6.4 percent.


Wow! You don't normally look to the foreign policy analysis crowd for honesty. Of course, they do manage to miss both the rise of the Axis of Good and the imminent collapse of the PRC....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:04 PM

BLEW A HOLE IN THAT COLUMN:

Breaking The Assassins (David Ignatius, December 14, 2005, Washington Post)

This is the time of the assassins in the Arab world. On Monday they killed a brave Lebanese journalist who dared to tell the truth about Syria. This week in Iraq they will try to kill people who want to vote. They kill wives to intimidate their husbands. They kill children to frighten their parents into silence. Their power is the ability to create raw fear.

The shame for America isn't that we have tried to topple the rule of the assassins but that we have so far been unsuccessful. We thought we were cracking the old web of terror when America invaded Iraq in 2003, but it's still there, in the shadows of the shadows. George W. Bush gets a lot of things wrong, but he knows that he's fighting the assassins. On days like these, I'm glad that he is such a stubborn man.


Wasn't he just arguing that we should keep the head assasssin in power?

MORE:
U.N. Weighs Next Move on Syria: Lebanon is urging the Security Council to widen the inquiry into the slaying of its former premier and to create a tribunal to try suspects. (Maggie Farley, December 14, 2005, LA Times)

In a closed-door Security Council session, Mehlis described interviews with five high-level Syrian officials at the United Nations compound in Vienna last week. He said a sixth had not yet been interviewed, who a diplomat close to the investigation confirmed was Asef Shawkat, the president's brother-in-law and head of Syrian military intelligence. Mehlis did not reveal the names of those interviewed or urge their detention, saying that "it would not be helpful" at this point in the inquiry.

An early draft of Mehlis' first report to the Security Council named some of Syrian President Bashar Assad's close aides as suspects, including Shawkat and Maher Assad, the president's younger brother and commander of the Republican Guard. The names were not in the final report released to the public. [...]

[U].S. Ambassador John R. Bolton said that details in the report about disappearing documents, grudging testimonies and witness intimidation made it clear that Syria was trying to block the inquiry and should be pressured to comply with investigators' demands.

"On the part of the United States there is absolutely no wavering from the proposition that Syria is not going to get away with obstructing this investigation," he said. "It's not going to cover up the actions of its senior officials, and it's not going to escape the consequences."


How many more Lebanese does Assad get to blow up before they do something?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 PM

IT'S ARCHIMEDEAN:

Frist Says AMT Fix May Be Deferred (Bloomberg News, December 14, 2005)

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said Congress may postpone until next year a measure to prevent 15 million households from paying $30 billion under the alternative minimum tax, indicating that extending tax cuts on capital gains and dividends was a higher priority. [...]

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the delay of the AMT measure was "a punch in the gut to the middle class." The minimum-tax fix, he said, "should have been our number one tax priority and instead, because of right wing ideological objectives, the middle and upper middle class will suffer and only the very, very wealthy will benefit."


AMT is the lever by which Democrats can be forced into voting for a real tax bill--why give it away?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:57 AM

NATIVISTS VS. THE ECONOMY:

Immigration Pushes Apart GOP, Chamber (Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, December 14, 2005, Washington Post)

The House Republican leadership and the nation's business lobby, usually close allies, are battling each other over the issue of immigration.

In a rare schism, employer groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are pressing to kill a Republican-sponsored measure that would require businesses to verify that all of their workers are in the United States legally and would increase penalties for hiring illegal employees.

Lobby groups including the chamber, the National Restaurant Association and the Associated General Contractors of America are so vehement in their opposition that they will consider lawmakers' votes on the bill a key measure of whether they will support them in the future. [...]

The business groups contend that the verification system, which has only been tried in experimental form, is too mistake-prone to give employers accurate results. They worry that, as a result, companies might be subjected to steep and misapplied penalties because of faulty computer readouts, and that individuals might have their working status jeopardized and their private backgrounds scrutinized needlessly.


It should at least shut the far Right up about background checks before gun purchases and national identity cards.


Posted by kevin_whited at 11:51 AM

THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS

Sunni politician says Iraq poll could prompt talks with US (Steve Negus, Financial Times, 12/13/2005)

A leading Sunni Arab politician is predicting that Thursday’s parliamentary elections in Iraq will pave the way for negotiations between the US and Sunni leaders on reducing the violence.

Saleh al-Mutlek, a prominent candidate on the list of the Iraqi National Dialogue Front, one of two new Sunni-led coalitions contesting the elections to the first permanent postwar parliament, said such talks could get US troops out of Iraq cities and isolate radicals responsible for attacks on civilians.

“I think we will be able to talk to the Americans in a democratic way through parliament to convince them that they should withdraw from the cities,” he said.

Soldiers play vital role in Iraq’s polling strategy (Neil MacDonald, Financial Times, 12/13/2005)

Scanning the ditches for concealed bombs on Tuesday morning, convoy comman­der Captain Wahab Abu Abbas also took in the numerous Iraqi election banners posted along the main route to Baqouba. Spotting a poster for Iyad Allawi’s secular list, he rattled off a mildly derisive rhyming couplet about the former interim prime minister.

But he and the soldiers with him in the unarmoured Toyota pick-up – the standard patrol vehicle for most of Iraq’s new army – also took some good-humoured potshots at Ibrahim al-Jafari, Iraq’s current prime minister, who was put in office by the Shia religious-leaning United Iraqi Alliance earlier this year.

The soldiers were part of a countrywide Iraqi army operation, escorting truckloads of election materials from 18 provincial capitals to dozens of smaller cities and towns, the staging points to every polling site in tomorrow’s national parliamentary elections.

Capt Wahab’s five machinegun-mounted Toyotas and three larger vans were the first to arrive at Baqouba, capital of the ethnically diverse Diyala province, northeast of Baghdad, where they picked up four civilian delivery trucks containing about 200,000 ballots, packed under United Nations supervision, for the run back to the battalion’s home base next to Muqdadiya, 50km to the north.

[snip]

While airing their political differences openly, the mostly Shia members of the Iraqi 2nd Battalion, 2nd Brigade also appear to take their role as guardians of the election process very seriously.

This wasn't supposed to happen. Iraqis are supposed to be incapable of democracy, and the civil war was supposed to be well underway by now. Has someone informed Fred Kaplan of these developments?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:42 AM

TOM'S JESUS:

Menino's Catholic fallacies (George Weigel, December 14, 2005, Boston Globe)

In the course of his recent remarks to the Catholic Charities Greater Boston Christmas dinner, [Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino] confessed that ''what moves me about being a Christian is what Jesus taught us about being religious. He did not give priority to piety. He didn't make holiness the big thing. And he did not tell us to go around talking up God, either."

Really? One wonders what Menino makes of the last two verses of the Gospel of St. Matthew: ''Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." It is not, shall we say, self-evidently clear how that ''Great Commission" can be fulfilled without ''talking up God."

As for Jesus being anti-pietistic and unconcerned about holiness, it is true that Jesus criticized the formulaic piety that some people of his time mistook for genuine religious conversion. But did the Master who gave his disciples what we know as the Lord's Prayer really not care about prayer? Did the Christ who called on all to ''change your ways" for ''the kingdom of heaven is at hand" not care about holiness? Don't organizations such as Catholic Charities help fulfill Christ's command to ''let your light shine before men, so that they may see the good you do and give glory to your Father in heaven"?

Menino further muddied the waters by commenting that: ''When the pope speaks on doctrine, that's absolute. I don't think choice and gay marriage are doctrine." Wrong again.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:27 AM

OUR SUNNIS (via Kevin Whited):

Where will vote be fairer, Sugar Land or Nineveh? (CRAGG HINES, 12/14/05, Houston Chronicle)

You don't need to know much about the representational models, however imperfect, in the Iraqi elections this week to understand that they certainly are no more egregious than U.S. House districts in Texas.

What hypocrites Republicans can be: All this breast-beating about representative government in Iraq while they continually try to jigger the vote at home.

Is it more than a touch ironic that as ballots began to be cast in the first post-Saddam parliamentary elections in Iraq, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision to hear multiple challenges to the mid-decade, politically inspired redrawing of the 32 U.S. House districts in Texas as demanded in 2003 by then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land?


Folks who've held power illegitimately are naturally reluctant to give it up, even, or especially, to the democratic process. All you really need to know about the tattered status of democracy in Democrat-controlled Texas is that in 2002 when 60% of Texans voted Republican that got them 17 Democrats and just 15 Republicans in their House delegation. Tom DeLay fixed the problem, much like W has fixed the Ba'ath Party's domination of the Iraqi population. One man/one vote is a silly idea, but if the Left wants it to prevail they can live with being the minority.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:16 AM

WITH DEMOCRACY YOU GET THE BAD BITS TOO:

Iraqis Grasp the Art of TV Debate, With Gloves On: The airwaves are rife with candidate forums featuring polite speech in a nation torn by war. (Louise Roug, December 14, 2005, LA Times)

For the first time, the televised campaign debate has come to Iraq, and it has brought with it a level of civility and political discourse far different from that found on the nation's often bloody streets. [...]

Politicians are now free to use the medium of televised debates to expose voters to their styles, images and rhetorical flourishes. And here, the tone has been polite.

There have been few interruptions and fewer insults. In a country where eloquence is admired, canned sound bites have been rare.

"One and a half minutes is too short to answer the question," explained a Sunni Muslim Arab candidate during a debate among aspirants to the national assembly broadcast this week on the U.S.-funded Al Hurra television channel. Four other politicians sat respectfully at the conference table that had been draped with yellow satin. Later in the program, one candidate briefly interrupted to help clarify an opponent's point.

Back in the days of Saddam Hussein, Iraqi voters had one choice on their ballot. Now, with more than 7,600 candidates on various political slates vying for 275 four-year seats on the Council of Representatives, voters are spoiled for choice. Every night in recent weeks, debates featuring Shiite Muslim, Sunni Arab and Kurdish candidates, with TV journalists as hosts, have been broadcast across Iraq from studios in Baghdad.


No wonder they all hate us.

MORE:
Iraq election messages get through (Jon Leyne, 12/14/05, BBC News)

Days before Iraq's general election, workers at the Iraqi Islamic Party stream out of their headquarters with armfuls of banners and posters. They have even persuaded footballing hero Ahmed Radhi to endorse them.

Inside the party offices there's a "war room", where party workers sit at a bank of computers exchanging the latest intelligence.

It could almost be a normal election. [...]

It's the first election under a constitution written by Iraqis themselves.


Iraqis take fight to political realm: Sunni candidacies intensify elections (Sa'ad al-Izzi and Thanassis Cambanis, December 14, 2005, Boston Globe)
The Sunnis' entry into a suddenly contested political race has helped galvanize a new era in Iraq's short political history.

After two static campaign seasons, Iraqi voters in recent weeks have witnessed a fierce battle in the final election of the year.

Political parties have suddenly unleashed the full power of attack ads, negative campaigns, and even threats to give the public its first taste of real competition: One party has sent cellphone text messages promising its followers a place in heaven; rivals accuse one another of being Ba'athist stooges; and opponents of the government accuse the police of ethnic mass murder.

It's all part of Iraq's first full-throttle campaign season, played out almost entirely through television ads, billboards, and posters, since it is far too dangerous for candidates to travel, hold rallies, or make public speeches.

The sleepy ads during January's national election and October's constitutional referendum usually featured still portraits of candidates, vague promises of safety and security, and for Shi'ite candidates, a claim of endorsements by Iraq's top ayatollah.

In the runup to tomorrow's election, which will choose Iraq's first National Assembly under the new constitution, that gentility has yielded to a fiery introduction to modern politics.


Sunni Bastion Now Turning to Ballot Box (EDWARD WONG, 12/14/05, NY Times)
Along the main boulevard here in Saddam Hussein's hometown, hundreds of campaign posters have flowered where insurgents once tossed homemade bombs at American troops.

The guerrilla war found fertile ground in Tikrit, and defiant Sunni Arabs boycotted the elections in January.

But turnout in the parliamentary elections on Thursday is expected to be high, reflecting the shift in attitude of many Sunni Arabs toward the American-engineered political process.

"Last January, the elections were quite different than they are now," Wael Ibrahim Ali, 61, the mayor of Tikrit, said as he strode Tuesday along the grounds of the palace where Mr. Hussein used to celebrate his birthdays. "The people refused to vote, and now they see it was a wrong stand or wrong position."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:14 AM

EVIL EVEN FROM BEYOND:

Watching the Death of Inmate C29300 (Jenifer Warren, December 14, 2005, LA Times)

At 12:01 Tuesday morning, having exhausted all appeals, Stanley Tookie Williams walked slowly into San Quentin's death chamber, shackled at the wrists and waist and escorted by four burly guards.

After he climbed onto a padded gurney, officers buckled Williams down with wide black straps across his shins, thighs, belly and chest. His arms, stretched out to the side, were secured with leather restraints.

At 12:03 a.m., two guards pulled on surgical gloves as another entered the mint-green chamber with a plastic tub of supplies. Three minutes later, a needle was thrust successfully home into Williams' right arm and connected to an intravenous tube.

The rules, however, require a backup in case one tube is jostled loose or fails. And it was here that the carefully choreographed execution turned messy.

For 12 long minutes, a prison nurse — her brow glistening with sweat — poked the convict's muscular left arm again and again, searching for a vein that would deliver a dose of poison. As his loved ones watched in distress, the inmate visibly winced in pain.

Ultimately, the needle found its mark, a stream of lethal chemicals flowed, and Williams — convicted of murdering four people with a shotgun in 1979 — drew his final breath.

Surprising many, he did not leave a statement for the warden to read. But his closest supporters made sure his departure from the world was not a quiet one. Filing out after witnessing the execution, they yelled a message in unison:

"The state of California just killed an innocent man!"

The startling cry pierced the silence that had cloaked the small observation room, and relatives of Williams' victims appeared shaken. Lora Owens, whose stepson, Albert, was gunned down at a West Whittier convenience store, hunched forward in her brown metal chair and wept. Another woman wrapped her in an embrace.


Should have quartered the corpse at that point.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:10 AM

EVEN LILLIAN HELLMAN WOULDN'T CUT AND TRIM (via Mike Morley):

Stephen Barr writes (On the Square, 12/13/05)

The philosopher Daniel Dennett visited us at the University of Delaware a few weeks ago and gave a public lecture entitled “Darwin, Meaning, Truth, and Morality.” I missed the talk—I was visiting my sons at Notre Dame and taking in the Notre Dame-Navy football game. Friends told me what I missed, however. Dennett claimed that Darwin had shredded the credibility of religion and was, indeed, the very “destroyer” of God. In the question session, philosophy professor Jeff Jordan made the following observation to Dennett, “If Darwinism is inherently atheistic, as you say, then obviously it can’t be taught in public schools.” “And why is that?” inquired Dennett, incredulous. “Because,” said Jordan, “the Supreme Court has held that the Constitution guarantees government neutrality between religion and irreligion.” Dennett, looking as if he’d been sucker-punched, leaned back against the wall, and said, after a few moments of silence, “clever.” After another silence, he came up with a reply: He had not meant to say that evolution logically entails atheism, merely that it undercuts religion.

Always helpful to have a theory you're just making up as you go along.....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:08 AM

GASTROCASTING?:

P-I podcast gets Bon Appetit nod (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 12/14/05)

The January 2006 issue of Bon Appetit magazine delivers kudos to three "early standouts" in the "nascent medium" of "gastrocasting," including the P-I's podcast: "On Food With Hsiao-Ching Chou." [...]

To tune in to the latest installment of "On Food" -- which features an interview with chef Jerry Traunfeld of The Herbfarm restaurant -- visit www.seattlepi.com/foodcast or subscribe through Apple iTunes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:57 AM

ALWAYS EASIER TO GET A KID TO EAT CARROTS IF YOU'RE HOLDING A STICK:

The Libya option for Syria (Ronald Bruce St John, 12/15/05, Foreign Policy in Focus)

The Bush administration continues to talk about applying the "Libya option" to Syria. In itself, this would be an excellent idea. The problem is the White House took the wrong lessons from Libya's decision to renounce weapons of mass destruction and rejoin the international community. The Libya model may yet provide a path through the Syrian imbroglio, but only if applied correctly. [...]

In March 2003, weeks before the invasion of Iraq, Libyan officials approached the British government, initiating talks with Great Britain and the United States aimed at dismantling Libya's unconventional weapons programs. Nine months later, Libyan Foreign Minister Mohammed Abderrahman Chalgram announced Libya's decision to renounce weapons of mass destruction, emphasizing his country had decided of its own "free will" to be completely free of internationally banned weapons. Gaddafi and other Libyan officials stressed this point in later statements.

One clear lesson to be taken from the Libyan model is the power of engagement as opposed to containment.


Actually, the Libya breakthrough required a series of convergent events and tactics -- getting caught red-handed violating international law, watching Saddam be pulled from his spider-hole, a European power to negotiate surrender with instead of the U.S. -- almost all of which are likewise present in Syria, except the most important: despite early hopes, Baby Assad is no Saif al-Islam


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:48 AM

BOILING DRAGON:

Stifling in Jade Dust: At 31, Feng Xingzhong is dying after years of toiling in one of China's gemstone factories. He's not alone -- except in speaking up for justice. (Ching-Ching Ni, December 14, 2005, LA Times)

The boulders were as big as farm animals, and for $20 a month Feng Xingzhong's job was to slice them with an electric saw, cutting the hulks into fillets small enough to throw into a bowl.

Other workers in the jewelry factory would trim the pieces of jade, turquoise, onyx and other gemstones into little hearts and beads, polish them, drill holes and string them onto earrings, bracelets and necklaces to be shipped off to American shoppers.

Feng thought little about that, or anything else during his earsplitting 12-hour shift. By day's end, he looked like a coal miner emerging from the shaft, covered from head to toe in red, green or yellow dust, depending on the stone he had been cutting.

From age 18 to 26, Feng toiled without so much as a mask, trying to turn himself from an impoverished peasant into a prosperous city worker. He married a fellow employee, had two sons.

"We had a beautiful dream," Feng said. "To make some money, go home and start a small business."

Today, Feng hopes mostly to live long enough to collect some money from the factory where he developed silicosis, an incurable ailment known as dust lung that kills more than 24,000 Chinese workers each year in professions such as mining, quarrying, construction and shipbuilding.

Most slowly suffocate without protest. But not Feng. He sought workers' compensation. He sued his employer in two courts. He picketed near the company headquarters. He went to arbitration with the help of a Hong Kong labor group and even won a judgment.

But he hasn't received so much as a penny.

"I could die in a year or two," said Feng, now 31, who speaks in a soft, wispy voice and coughs frequently. "I am still so young. I have a wife, two children and an elderly mother. No amount of money can bring back my life. All I want is some justice."


Rural areas of China put squeeze on farmers (Calum MacLeod, 12/13/05, USA TODAY)
This year, Zhou Junniu got an unexpected gift from Beijing: The government abolished rural taxes and fees, saving the garlic farmer an amount equal to $800 annually.

He'll need every penny. Beijing's move has spurred authorities at the local level to squeeze all they can from Zhou and millions of other Chinese farmers. As a result, local governments have begun levying indiscriminate fines — often using China's strict legal limits on family size as a pretext — and employing heavy-handed collection tactics to make up for a lack of revenue from Beijing.

Since September, Zhou and his wife, both 40, have been hit with $1,000 in fines for bearing a child without official approval. In addition, they owe $4,000 in medical bills from treatment for her 9-year-old son Qianlong, who was badly beaten when he tried to prevent police from arresting Zhou, his stepfather. [...]

Zhou boils with frustration when he talks about his arrest and feelings of powerlessness. "I was so angry when I found out they had hit my son," he says. "But I do not dare sue them in court. It was the court officials that did this. If I sue, they will take me away and beat me."


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:45 AM

HOW DARE HE


Wilkins irked by 'chest thumping'
(Anne Dawson, et. al., National Post. December 13th, 2005)

The U.S. ambassador to Canada yesterday rebuked politicians in this country who criticize the United States for their own political gain, in remarks that appear to be aimed at Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Although foreign envoys rarely make such statements in the course of an election campaign, David Wilkins warned Canadians to back off the U.S.-bashing rhetoric in advance of the Jan. 23 election.

"It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner," Mr. Wilkins said. "But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on our relationship."[...]

Mr. Wilkins, a lawyer who served as House Speaker in the South Carolina legislature since 1994, told the crowd he is familiar with election-year politics having been on the ballot 13 times in his state, but he noted the United States is not on the election ballot in Canada.

"It's also a great time for a political junkie like me to be here to watch your first winter election in 25 years and I've discovered that in Canada, politics is very much a contact sport. It shouldn't be lost on any of us that some of your politicians use my country to score political points," Mr. Wilkins said.

Mr. Wilkins signalled his country's leaders are bothered by Mr. Martin's hard-hitting comments. He pointed out Canadian media have documented that the Americans have a better record than Canada in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, he said between 1990 and 2003, emissions in the U.S. increased by 13% compared with 24% in Canada over the same period.

"I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a global conscience, the U.S. is walking the walk. And when it comes to climate change, we are making significant progress, greater progress than many of those who have been most critical of the U.S.," he said.


December 13, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:20 PM

DEAD KENNEDY:

Lib Dem revolt puts Kennedy on brink (Greg Hurst, 12/14/05, Times of London)

A REVOLT by senior Liberal Democrat MPs has left Charles Kennedy fighting to save his leadership of the party. [...]

David Cameron’s election as leader of the Conservative Party has put further pressure on Mr Kennedy to give a clearer sense of strategic direction to the Lib Dems and map out how he intends to confront the challenge of a more centrist Tory party.


Have they ever had a strategic direction?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:53 PM

THANK YOU, SIR, MAY I HAVE ANOTHER (via Brian Boys):

National Smiles (D.T. MAX, 12/11/05, NY Times Magazine)

Dacher Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, contends that Americans and the English smile differently. On this side of the Atlantic, we simply draw the corners of our lips up, showing our upper teeth. Think Julia Roberts or the gracefully aged Robert Redford. "I think Tom Cruise has a terrific American smile," Keltner, who specializes in the cultural meaning of emotions, says. In England, they draw the lips back as well as up, showing their lower teeth. The English smile can be mistaken for a suppressed grimace or a request to wipe that stupid smile off your face. Think headwaiter at a restaurant when your MasterCard seems tapped out, or Prince Charles anytime.

Keltner hit upon this difference in national smiles by accident. He was studying teasing in American fraternity houses and found that low-status frat members, when they were teased, smiled using the risorius muscle - a facial muscle that pulls the lips sideways - as well as the zygomatic major, which lifts up the lips. It resulted in a sickly smile that said, in effect, I understand you must paddle me, brother, but not too hard, please. Several years later, Keltner went to England on sabbatical and noticed that the English had a peculiar deferential smile that reminded him of those he had seen among the junior American frat members. Like the frat brothers', the English smile telegraphed an acknowledgment of hierarchy rather than just expressing pleasure.

"What the deferential smile says is, 'I respect what you're thinking of me and am shaping my behavior accordingly,"' Keltner says.


No wonder they favor life in jail.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:39 PM

TIRED OF BEING TREATED LIKE TERRORISTS?:

What Sunni voters want (Ilene R. Prusher and Jill Carroll, 12/14/05, CS Monitor)

In a complete turnabout from last January's vote to select an interim assembly, Sunni Arabs are expected to turn out in large numbers Thursday to select Iraq's new parliament. [...]

Sunni anger grew Tuesday as news spread that Mizhal al-Duleimy, a prominent Sunni politician, was fatally shot while campaigning in the city of Ramadi, west of Baghdad. That comes on top of fresh reports that Sunnis arrested by Shiite forces are being mistreated and tortured in underground prisons. Iraq's interim prime minister, Ibrahim Jafaari, acknowledged that more abused prisoners have been found inside jails run by his interior ministry.


End the insurgency.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:33 PM

EMMISSIONS PROBLEM:

He's unbelievable!: Is there no end to Paul Martin's grand pronouncements, stirring appeals, and full-of-holes commitments? Talk about your gaseous emissions. (PAUL WELLS

They do politics differently in places where it actually matters. In Ottawa, we tend to surf contentedly on assumptions born from prosperity: that policy is boring, that hard choices are a downer, that only personality can sell papers. But Paul Martin began his second week of campaigning at a radio station in St. John's, Nfld., on a brutal rainy Monday morning. He soon learned that in a place where government can make the difference between lighter and darker shades of grief, the questions tend to be more pointed.

Martin's host on VOCM Radio, Randy Simms, didn't waste a second on the subjects that normally transfix the Bytown gallery (Is Peter staring at Belinda? What are the "optics" of this or that?). Instead, he worked hard to pin Martin down on a checklist of local desiderata. The whole process was amazingly businesslike and unsentimental, as shakedowns often are.

Would Martin extend custodial management to the fisheries on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks, shooing away foreign fishing boats even more than 200 miles offshore? Would he help pay for the Lower Churchill hydro development? Couldn't he build up the Canadian Forces base at 5 Wing Goose Bay? "Obviously you currently hold 8 1/2 per cent of Hibernia, as an asset to the Canadian government," Simms said at one point. "You've made a lot of money on it. We'd like to have it now."

The barrage of requests would have brought an ordinary man to his knees, but Paul Martin is made of sterner stuff. There is no known request he can't kind-of seem, briefly, to be sort-of fulfilling. The Lower Churchill? "This is really up to the province. But does the federal government want it to go forward? Yes, we do." Custodial management? "I think this is a huge problem."

But as the reporters travelling with Martin listened to a live audio feed of his chat with Simms in a boardroom down the hall from the studio, what quickly became apparent was how full of holes Martin's commitments really are. [...]

On Wednesday, Martin gave a blandly hortatory speech to the UN Climate Change Conference in Montreal, a global meeting to begin designing a sequel to the Kyoto accord on greenhouse gas emissions. He opened yet another news conference by reading a statement that would take little time to come back to haunt him. "To the reticent nations, including the United States, I'd say this: there is such a thing as a global conscience, and now is the time to listen to it."

It was a striking choice of words. A "conscience" is normally understood as a sense of one's own responsibilities. But Canada has increased its greenhouse gas emissions by 24 per cent since 1990, the United States by only 13 per cent. If the U.S. had been as profligate over the same period as Canada, it would have spat an extra 662 million tonnes of carbon products into the air last year. That's more than Britain's total emissions in 2003. The gap between Martin's remarks and the truth is as big as Britain. Usually when a politician utters a whopper, you can't actually give the whopper a name. But you can name this one. You can call it Britain. Say hello to Britain, the whopper.

After visiting Montreal, Martin stopped in Toronto to announce a total ban on handguns. Well, not total: the ban would exempt gun-club members and, for five years, collectors who would then have to join gun clubs. The same two groups are exempted today from a near-total ban that has been in place for decades. And individual provinces would have a right to opt out. That's going to be a bit tricky, because if you can obtain handguns in even one province, then unless you plan to station border guards between the provinces, you might as well try to ban clouds.

In the space of a single week, Martin had skated himself offside the truth on climate studies, phone-in calls, referendum elections, tax policy, daycare, handguns, and, ironically, given the rest of it, gaseous emissions.


And coasting to victory.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:22 PM

ORIGINALS OF THE SPECIES:

Bono Dines With Jesse Helms (PAUL NOWELL, December 13, 2005, Associated Press)

Not only are they friends, but the Irish rocker and archconservative former North Carolina senator also share a common cause: fighting AIDS in Africa.

Before U2 opened to a raucous crowd of 17,000 at the city's new downtown arena, Bono had dinner with Helms.

"He (Bono) called us a couple of weeks ago and said he wanted to see his old friend the senator," said John Dodd, president of the Jesse Helms Center, who accompanied Helms and other family members to Monday's meeting.

Since they were introduced several years ago, the Republican Helms and Bono have become close allies in the fight against the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

Helms, who is 84 and suffers from a number of serious health problems, arrived backstage before the show and was joined by Bono for a casual meal. On the menu: grilled chicken, roast beef and salmon.

"It was nothing fancy," Dodd said. "They ate in the cafeteria with the roadies and the rest of the crew."



Posted by David Cohen at 5:39 PM

THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD, AND OTHER DEMOCRATIC ELECTION STAPLES

Let Joe Know: Sign the Letter (blogforamerica.com, 12/8/05)

Earlier this week while discussing the war in Iraq, Senator Joseph Lieberman said, "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril."

Unfortunately, President Bush has no credibility. His administration misled our nation into the war in Iraq on trumped-up charges of weapons of mass destruction. His "stay the course" strategy has led to over 2,100 American deaths. And no one sees an end in sight.

It is disturbing enough that Senator Lieberman remains one of the president's biggest cheerleaders. But his call for opponents of the president's failed policy to keep quiet is outrageous.

The only way we will end this war is by having an honest debate about how and when we can bring our troops home.

Join me in sending Senator Lieberman an open letter asking him to join the majority of Americans in questioning the Bush administration's Iraq policy....

Sincerely,

Jim Dean
Chair

If the brother of the Chairman of the Democratic Party can attack a sitting Democratic Senator for his refusal to turn tail in the middle of a war and run, can Republicans demand an apology?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:36 PM

COULD BE WORSE...:

Fed lifts rates, shifts language (Tim Ahmann, 12/13/05, Reuters)

The Federal Reserve on Tuesday lifted a key U.S. interest rate for a 13th straight time but signaled, as one economist put it, the "beginning of the end" of a 1-1/2 year credit-tightening campaign.

...Lizzie Borden didn't stop 'til 40 whacks.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:07 PM

RETREAT!!!!:

Sunnis Change Course: Even some insurgents and their sympathizers are reassessing their strategy, and plan to vote in this week's elections for a new government. (Joshua Hammer and Scott Johnson, Dec. 19, 2005, Newsweek)

Ahmed Duraid is ready for a new era. Like almost all of his neighbors in Adhamiya, a stronghold of the Sunni insurgency along the Tigris River in central Baghdad, the 35-year-old clothes vendor boycotted Iraq's National Assembly elections last January on the advice of Sunni fighters and influential political groups such as the Association of Muslim Scholars. But the consequences for Adhamiya were severe: shadowy religious militias with ties to the Shiite-dominated government began arresting, kidnapping and sometimes murdering young Sunni men in the neighborhood; Duraid felt unprotected, even abandoned, by the country's new leaders. "We didn't participate, and the others took power alone, and this is the result," Duraid told NEWSWEEK.

Saddam Hussein once ruled Iraq with brutal predictability. In the political realm, nobody had to think, or to choose, or to compete. You did what you were told, and when elections came around, you voted for Saddam. But today, as the ex-dictator stands trial for atrocities, even some Sunni insurgents and their sympathizers are beginning to acknowledge the power of the ballot box. Duraid and his fellow residents say they've learned from their mistake: they plan to participate in the Dec. 15 vote for a new National Assembly.

This new determination has transformed the atmosphere of places like Adhamiya.


Not only do we have the current batch of stories with the MSM suddenly realizing that Iraq is working out, but on NPR today they were basically reading the last rites for the PRC. The World, in particular, had a story on comparing the unrest in the countryside to that which has historically preceded the fall of Chinese regimes. Add in their realization that the economy is doing rather well and that the president's poll numbers aren't trending into the negatives and it's rude awakening time for the chattering class.


Posted by David Cohen at 4:23 PM

A SPECIAL THOUGHT FOR TOOKIE

Europeans Outraged at Schwarzenegger (Vanessa Gera, AP, 12/13/05)

The execution of convicted killer Stanley Tookie Williams sparked outrage Tuesday throughout Europe, which has a deep aversion to capital punishment sustained by the painful memory of state-organized murder during the Nazi era. The disappointment was particularly strong in Austria, native country of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, where many had hoped the former bodybuilder and film star would spare the 51-year-old Williams.

Leaders of Austria's opposition Green Party even called for Schwarzenegger to be stripped of his Austrian citizenship _ a demand rejected by Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel as "absurd" despite his government's opposition to the death penalty.

Capital punishment is illegal throughout the European Union, and the issue was amplified in Williams' case due to the remorse supporters believe the Crips gang co-founder showed by writing children's books about the dangers of gangs and violence. . . .

Rome's Colosseum, once the arena for deadly gladiator combat and executions, has become a symbol of Italy's anti-death penalty stance. Since 1999, the monument has been bathed in golden light every time a death sentence is commuted somewhere in the world or a country abolishes capital punishment.

"I hope there will be such an occasion soon," Rome Mayor Walter Veltroni said. "When it happens, we will do it with a special thought for Tookie."

An American politician can't buy publicity this good. It can only come as a gift from Europe.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:46 PM

BUT THAT 1% ALL HAVE ACCESS TO KEYBOARDS:

Gallup: Poll Finds Americans' Belief in God Remains Strong (E&P Staff, December 13, 2005, Editor & Publisher)

A new Gallup survey released today finds that four decades after the "God Is Dead" controversy was first noted, Americans retain a strong belief in a higher power. Some 94% think God exists.

Only 5% feel God "does not exist" -- and even most of them "are not sure" of that. Exactly 1% are certain there is no God.


Howard Dean calls them "the base."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:51 AM

HOPE WINS OUT:

SPIEGEL Survey of Iraq: Dreaming of Normalcy amid Chaos: As Iraqi voters pick a new parliament this Thursday, most of the country's people are hoping their future leaders can clamp down on violence and increase security. But in spite of the current chaos a majority of Iraqis believe their lives will improve soon, according to a new SPIEGEL survey. (Der Spiegel, 12/13/05)

Conducted by Oxford University and the University of Baghdad, the survey suggests a solid commitment to democracy; 6 out of 10 Iraqis prefer a democratic system to some sort of rule by an Islamic leader.

But the desire for a "strong man" in Iraq hasn't disappeared. Half the respondents believe that only an authoritarian can ensure unity and security for now. But that's the problem: no single party or politician has the trust of all the people. Ex-prime minister Iyad Allawi leads this contest with a humble 15 percent, while current President Jalal Talabani has to content himself with a 10 percent popularity rating.

The same goes for political organizations in Iraq. Only in the Kurdish region and among voters with a religious orientation are there clear preferences. The sympathies of the rest of the survey respondents are divided between more than 30 groups.

This could pay off for current Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jafaari on Thursday. Although he's lost personal popularity, two-thirds of Iraqis are in favor of keeping his government in power. Popular opinion of the police and security forces has also clearly improved. Trust in the new Iraqi army has gone up since October 2003 (38 percent) to a current level of 67 percent. [...]

At any rate, Iraqi incomes have more than doubled in the past two years, to an average of $236 a month, and the range of consumer durables on offer has improved markedly. Almost every household now possesses a television set, and 86 percent of TV viewers also have a satellite dish.

Mobile telephones, luxury items owned by just five percent of the population two years ago, are now mass market goods possessed by 62 per cent of households. The number of people owning cars (55 percent) and washing machines (54 percent) has risen along similar lines.

Reason enough for Iraqis to display an almost inexplicable confidence. Across the country, almost 70 percent of the population believe that within a year, the situation in Iraq will be either "somewhat better" or "a lot better".

That optimism, though, is not shared equally throughout Iraq's different geographical regions. In the center of the country, the mood is gloomy: only 41 percent of residents believe there will be an improvement. By contrast, 85 percent of people in the capital are looking to the future with great enthusiasm, followed by those in the Shiite south and the Kurdish areas.

Howe does this happily expectant mood fit in with the bloody scenes of bombings and shootings, the reports of kidnappings, curfews and shortages?

The apparent contradiction arises from differing perceptions of reality. Western media concentrate their efforts on the theater of war in the heart of Iraq. Daily reports from the strongholds of resistance in Samara, Fallujah and Ramadi ignore the fact that huge tracts of the country remain untouched by the fighting.

Away from the confrontation, in villages, small towns and desert settlements, the research team was able to speak to members of the "silent majority". Here, the principle of hope wins out: despite all the scepticism about the general state of the country, 71 percent of the people questioned were either "very" or "quite" happy with their personal circumstances. A lack of somewhere to live, poor standards of living and unemployment trouble between six and 13 percent of the population, depending on the region they are in.

The everyday life of these towns and villages is dominated by a sense of the positive. Iraqis look at their new-found freedom of expression, the state of their schools, healthcare system and water supplies with satisfaction.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:30 AM

A MERE PRODUCT OF ITS TIME (via Kevin Whited):

The Fear of Teaching Darwin (Larry Arnhart, 12/13/05, Inside Higher Ed)

The endless debate over the teaching of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution has now moved from the high schools to the universities. In this debate, the advocates of “intelligent design theory” say that this should be taught as a scientific alternative to Darwin’s theory. It’s time to consider radical ideas for resolving this dispute.

I have a proposal. Why not introduce our students to this debate by having them read Darwin’s own writings in their biology classes? We could teach the controversy by teaching Darwin.

I suspect, however, that this proposal will be rejected by almost everyone in this debate, because both sides — the proponents as well as the critics of evolution — have a deep fear of teaching Darwin. [...]

[I] cannot see that there would be anything wrong with having students weigh the evidence and arguments for themselves by reading selections from Darwin’s own writings — particularly, The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. Surely, the proponents of evolution couldn’t object to having students read Charles Darwin. And yet this could also satisfy the proponents of intelligent design, because Darwin presents intelligent design theory, which he calls the “theory of creation,” as the major alternative to his theory.

In The Origin of Species, Darwin frames the fundamental debate as a controversy between two theories — the “theory of creation” (or the “theory of independent acts of creation”) versus the “theory of natural selection” (or the “theory of descent with modification”). He indicates that until recently “most naturalists” — including himself — have accepted the “theory of creation,” which says that each species has been independently created by a Creator. But Darwin thinks that now we have a better theory — a “theory of natural selection,” which says that although the general laws of nature might have been ultimately created by a Creator, those general laws allow for the natural evolution of species through natural selection of inherited variations. Consequently, there is no need for special interventions by a Creator to design each species and each complex organic mechanism.

Darwin thinks that neither theory can be conclusively demonstrated. [...]

Darwin acknowledges the many “difficulties” with his theory, which turn out to be the very problems that are commonly stressed by proponents of intelligent design theory. But while Darwin admits that these “difficulties” are so severe as to be “staggering,” he tries to resolve them, while arguing that the “theory of creation” has its own difficulties. [...]

[G]enerally I have found that most university biologists are opposed to using Darwin’s writings in their classes and allowing their students to study the debate over intelligent design. A few years ago, I noticed that the biology department at my university was offering a course on “The Evolution/Creationism Debate. ”I went to the class and found that it was for biology majors planning on teaching high school biology. At the first meeting of the class, the students were told that they would not be reading any of the publications by proponents of creationism and intelligent design because all of this writing was “crap.” Instead, they would memorize the standard arguments defending evolution so that they could respond to those “ignorant parents” who might object to their teaching. But doesn’t this actually play into the hands of the intelligent design proponents by confirming their claim that the teaching of evolution to students has become indoctrination without freedom of thought?


Mr. Arnhart's idea is excellent, though it's obvious from what he's said that Darwinism belongs in a history of ideas or philosophy course with Creationism and ID, not in a science class. And the idea should be expanded so that students are presented the context in which Darwinism was invented, so that they can see that it was simply a product of the zeitgeist, as Edward Larson does reasonably well in his book, Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory:
Essential to Darwin's conception was a modern worldview influenced by ideas of utilitarianism, individualism, imperialism, and laissez-faire capitalism. Of course Malthus was a utilitarian-minded political economist who championed the laissez-faire ideal. Darwin also read the writings of Adam Smith and other utilitarian economists who presented individual competition as the driving force of economic progress. Perhaps most important, he lived in a society that embraced this view....

Stripped of its a priori claims to scientific truth, Darwinism is a fascinating example of how our prevailing philosophical paradigms create the "science" that we choose to believe in at any given moment.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:25 AM

ANYBODY EDIT THE GLOBE?:

A hungry eye for Damascus? (H.D.S. Greenway, December 13, 2005, Boston Globe)

MY HEART SANK when I read that Syrian exile Farid Ghadry met recently with Ahmed Chalabi, Iraq's deputy prime minister, in a Washington suburb. Ghadry heads something called the Syrian Reform Party. The party was formed three years ago, and is made up almost entirely of exiles, such as Ghadry, who left Syria when he was 10. ''Ahmed paved the way in Iraq for what we want to do in Syria," Ghadry told The Wall Street Journal.

The real heart-sinker was that the two met in the living room of Richard Pearl, whom George Packer, author of ''The Assassins' Gate," calls the ''impresario of the neo-cons." Pearl was among the leading intellectual lights urging forceful regime change in Iraq.

Pearl told the Journal that ''there's no reason to think engagement with Syria will bring about any change," and he is worried that the conquistador zeal to spread democracy is diminishing within the Bush administration. Syria's strongman Bashir Assad ''has never been weaker, and we should take advantage of that," according to Pearl.
Which is more amusing (or pitiful) here, that they can't even get Richard Perle's name right or that Mr. Greenway is depressed by the idea of Syrians wanting to be free of a brutal Ba'athist dictatorship?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:11 AM

SECURITY IS JOB ONE:

Ex-general says Iranian led torture of detainees (Paul Martin and Maria Cedrell, 12/13/05, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

An Iraqi general formerly in charge of special Interior Ministry forces said yesterday that a senior Iranian intelligence officer was in charge of a network of detention centers where suspected insurgents were routinely tortured and sometimes killed. [...]

Gen. al-Samarrai said the Iranian intelligence officer, Tahseer Nasr Lawandi, works directly under the Kurdish deputy minister, Gen. Hussein Kamel, and is known throughout the ministry as "The Engineer."

"The Engineer was behind the torturing and killing in the ministry and was also in charge of Jadriya prison," said Gen. al-Samarrai, who left the ministry after a dispute with superiors and is now living in Jordan. [...]

Mr. Lawandi, who had been a colonel in the Iranian Mukhabarat intelligence service, was granted Iraqi citizenship May 12, 2004, and awarded the rank of general, Gen. al-Samarrai said by telephone from Amman, Jordan, where he moved his family after two attempts on his life.

The Iranian officer not only masterminded interrogations, tortures and executions at the prisons, but also would take part in torture sessions, often using an electric drill, Gen. al-Samarrai said.

Some of the tortured prisoners were found in morgues with drill holes in their legs and eyes, according to another security source, who declined to be identified.

The general said Mr. Lawandi had worked with the minister and deputy minister to form a special security service to run the detention and interrogation operation and a separate group called the Wolf Brigade to capture suspects and bring them to the secret locations -- usually under cover of darkness.

Gen. al-Samarrai, a 46-year-old career officer, was ousted from the Interior Ministry in a purge of about 600 staff in July. Many were replaced by hard-line loyalists to new Interior Minister Bayan Jabr Solagh and his allies in the Badr Brigade, a militia affiliated with Iraq's largest Shi'ite religious party, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

The general said the minister had brought 17,000 Badr organization fighters into the ranks of Interior Ministry forces after Iraq's militias were officially disarmed. Most had received military training in Iran and were infiltrated into Iraq soon after the defeat of dictator Saddam Hussein.


Just one of the ways we and the Iranians are de facto allies in Iraq.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:13 AM

ALL MEN IS FAIRLY INCLUSIVE:

Superpower vulnerability (Henry C K Liu, 12/14/05, Asia Times)

In foreign policy, the US has been operating on the basis that its national values have been validated by triumph in the Cold War and that its resultant sole-superpower status now earns it both the moral right and the military means to spread such values over the whole world. Resistance to such self-righteous values is now deemed evil by US moral imperialism, in need of elimination not by persuasion but by force. This new approach has made the world less safe than it was during the Cold War, the end of which briefly entertained a false hope for a new age in which a world with only one superpower could thereafter live without war, hot or cold. Instead, the world has been plunged into successive holy wars of imperialistic moral conquest by the sole remaining superpower, bringing escalating terrorist attacks on to the US homeland. The impact on domestic policy from terrorist threats has in turn been the wholesale suspension of civil liberties in the name of homeland security.

Such holy wars of moral imperialism cannot be blamed entirely on neo-conservatives in the second Bush administration. While the two wars on Iraq were initiated by the two pere et cie Bush administrations that sandwiched eight years of Clinton rule, the Bosnia and Kosovo wars were the handiwork of Clinton administration neo-liberals. The faith-based foreign policy of George W Bush echoes the value-based interests of the foreign policy of Bill Clinton, such as the grandiose aim of enlarging democracy by force around the world and preventing mass starvation and ethnic genocide by spilling more blood.


We have, of course, operated on this premise since at least the Revolution, though arguably since Magna Carta, and perhaps since the Crucifixion, Mount Sinai, or the Garden. The Holy War ends when every people enjoys the liberty that God granted them a right to. The idea that just because History has Ended, war could end, while the Middle East was still benighted, was obviously absurd.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:11 AM

LINE OF THE DAY:

Blame it on the French (Julio Godoy, 12/14/05, Asia Times)

French opposition to reform the European common agricultural policy is at the bottom of the difficulties the World Trade Organization (WTO) is expected to face in Hong Kong this week.

The French refusal to agree to a cut in European subsidies for agriculture within the common agricultural policy (CAP) will also be at the core of EU talks this week on a long-term budget. [...]

Jean-Gabriel Fredet, a leading commentator at the weekly newspaper Le Nouvel Observateur, said France's stubborn agricultural policy based on mass production and a phobia of free markets "represents the culprit our critics [at the WTO negotiations] have dreamed of".

France, he wrote, was fighting "its last fight" in defending European subsidies for its farmers.

Britain's ambassador to Poland, Charles Crawford, described the subsidies in a leaked internal e-mail as "the most stupid, immoral state-subsidized policy in human history, give or take communism".


That should be the example the textbooks use for a dispositive statement.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:58 AM

WHEN IDEOLOGY TRUMPS REALITY (via Gene Brown):

The Panic Over Iraq: What they're really afraid of is American success. (NORMAN PODHORETZ, December 12, 2005, Opinion Journal)

In Iraq today...and in the Middle East as a whole, a successful outcome is staring us in the face. Clearly, then, the panic over Iraq--which expresses itself in increasingly frenzied calls for the withdrawal of our forces--cannot have been caused by the prospect of defeat. On the contrary, my twofold guess is that the real fear behind it is not that we are losing but that we are winning, and that what has catalyzed this fear into a genuine panic is the realization that the chances of pulling off the proverbial feat of snatching an American defeat from the jaws of victory are rapidly running out.

Of course, to anyone who relies entirely or largely on the mainstream media for information, it will come as a great surprise to hear that we are winning in Iraq. Winning? Militarily? How can we be winning militarily when, day after day, the only thing of any importance going on in that country is suicide bombings and car bombings? When neither our own troops nor the Iraqi forces we have been training are able to stop the "insurgents" from scoring higher and higher body counts? When every serious military move we make against the strongholds of these dedicated and ruthless adversaries is met with "fierce resistance"? When, for every one of them we manage to kill, two more seem to pop up?

Winning? Politically? How can we be winning politically when the very purpose for which we allegedly invaded Iraq has been unmasked as a chimera? When every step we force the Iraqis to take toward democratization is accompanied by angry sectarian strife between Shiites and Sunnis and between Arabs and Kurds? When our clumsy efforts to bring the Sunnis into the political process have hardly made a dent in their support for the insurgency? When the end result is less likely to be the stable democratic regime we supposedly went there to establish than a civil war followed by the breakup of Iraq into three separate countries?

There has been one great exception to this relentless drumbeat of bad news. It occurred in January 2005, in the coverage of the first election in liberated Iraq. To the astonishment of practically everyone in the world, more than eight million Iraqis came out to vote on election day even though the Islamofascist terrorists had threatened to slaughter them if they did. This very astonishment was a measure of how false an impression had been created of the state of affairs in Iraq. No one fed by the mainstream media could have had the slightest inkling that these eight million people were actually there, so invisible had they been to reporters who spent all their time interviewing the discontented Iraqi man-in-the-street and to cameras seemingly incapable of focusing on anything but carnage and rubble.

But the mainstream media soon recovered from the shock.


It's that imperviousness to reality that leaves them so confused by the optimism Iraqis express in this recent spate of opinion polls as well.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:50 AM

LATVIANS NEED NOT APPLY:

For Irish, Latvians fill role of bogeymen (Brian Lavery, DECEMBER 12, 2005, International Herald Tribune)

When nearly 100,000 people took to the streets of Ireland to protest the hiring of cheap East European labor for Irish Ferries, they gave voice to old familiar fears about job security that many thought had been forgotten.

The last time similar crowds demonstrated here over industrial issues was 1979, when young people left the country in droves to find work and Ireland's unemployment rate hovered around 20 percent.

Today, the Irish economy is no longer expanding at the double-digit rates of the 1990s, when it was dubbed the "Celtic Tiger," but it is still the fastest-growing in Western Europe and enjoys nearly full employment. [...]

Sean Barrett, a professor of economics at Trinity College Dublin, said, "The Latvian sailor will become like the Polish plumber in Paris." He was referring to the jack-of-all-trades bogeyman invoked by French politicians to try and keep the labor market closed to foreign workers.

Or the Irish fleeing the potato famine?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:32 AM

IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE A CONSOLATION PRIZE:

Tookie Williams Is Executed: The killer of four and Crips co-founder is given a lethal injection after Schwarzenegger denies clemency. He never admitted his guilt. (Jenifer Warren and Maura Dolan, December 13, 2005, LA Times)

Stanley Tookie Williams, whose self-described evolution from gang thug to antiviolence crusader won him an international following and nominations for a Nobel Peace Prize, was executed by lethal injection early today, hours after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger refused to spare his life.

His death was announced at 12:35 a.m.


More than one winner of the Peace Prize has deserved the same fate.


MORE:
Governor Didn't Believe Williams Had Reformed (Henry Weinstein and Peter Nicholas, December 13, 2005, LA Times)

"[T]here is nothing in the tone of the governor's decision that suggests it was a close call or agonized over," said USC law professor Jody Armour.

Instead, Schwarzenegger said there was no question that Williams had murdered four people in 1979. Williams' repeated refusal to admit that became, to the governor, a powerful factor against clemency.

"Stanley Williams insists he is innocent, and that he will not and should not apologize or otherwise atone for the murders," Schwarzenegger wrote. "Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption."

The evidence of guilt, the governor's statement said, included testimony from two of Williams' accomplices, ballistics evidence linking Williams' shotgun to the murders and testimony from four people that Williams had at different times confessed to one or both murders.

Moreover, he said, after Williams' arrest, he conspired to escape "by blowing up a jail transportation bus and killing the deputies guarding" it. Although the escape was never carried out, "there are detailed escape plans in Williams' own handwriting," the statement said, adding that an escape plan is "consistent with guilt, not innocence."

Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson said she thought that Williams' clemency bid was plagued from the start by his position that he would never acknowledge that he committed the four murders.

"I will never admit capital crimes that I did not commit — not even to save my life," Williams wrote in his 2004 autobiography "Blue Rage, Black Redemption." He repeated that position Monday afternoon in a conversation with the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Jackson told reporters.

"Tookie wanted to have it both ways — he wanted to maintain his actual innocence claim so that he would have something to argue in the courts, but he still wanted to claim that he had been redeemed," Levenson said. "In the end, he lost on both fronts."

In addition to arguing that Williams' continued claims of innocence should be counted against him, the governor made a point of quoting the dedication of Williams' 1998 book "Life in Prison."

In the dedication, Williams named 11 people, all of whom had been imprisoned or in custody. Among them were Nelson Mandela, the South African anti-apartheid leader; Malcolm X, the black nationalist leader assassinated in 1965; and Angela Davis, the black Marxist professor acquitted of murder charges in 1972.

Schwarzenegger and his aides focused on one name on the list — George Jackson, the author of "Soledad Brother," a book about life in prison. Jackson was "gunned down on the upper yard at San Quentin Prison" on Aug. 21, 1971, in a "foiled escape attempt on a day of unparalleled violence in the prison that left three officers and three inmates dead," Schwarzenegger said.

"The inclusion of George Jackson on this list defies reason and is a significant indicator that Williams is not reformed and that he still sees violence and lawlessness as a legitimate means to address societal problems," the governor said.

Finally, Schwarzenegger discounted the main arguments made by backers of clemency — that Williams should be kept alive because of the power of his anti-gang message.

"It is hard to assess the effect of such efforts in concrete terms, but the continued pervasiveness of gang violence leads one to question the efficacy of Williams' message," the governor's statement said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:28 AM

WTO AS POLISH PARLIAMENT:

EU blamed for looming WTO failure (Lucia Kubosova, 13.12.2005, EU Observer)

With the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit starting in Hong Kong on Tuesday (13 December), the European Union is facing heavy criticism for its offer on agriculture, which some claim has spoiled the chance of a major breakthrough at the talks.
[...]

Arriving to Hong Kong on Monday, US representative Rob Portman argued that the EU - among others - had not matched the "bold proposal" on eliminating farm subsidies and import tariffs made by Washington.

"The key to development is market access. Agriculture access is the top challenge and we think that we need to make more progress here", Mr Portman said, according to AFP.

Brazil, the main spokesman for the developing countries, also blamed the EU directly, indicating that the Doha talks would not be completed without a better offer from Brussels.


Why seek unanimity?

MORE:
Free trade for a better future: Open markets for agriculture could help lift the world's poor out of poverty. (PAUL WOLFOWITZ, December 13, 2005, LA Times)

Rich countries — primarily the U.S., Japan and the members of the European Union — spend $280 billion annually on agricultural support. That's $5 billion a week to protect their often-rich farmers from competition. Ultimately, it is the taxpayers and consumers in these countries who shoulder the costs of these support programs. Economists estimate that consumers pay $168 billion a year because of tariffs, and taxpayers pay $112 billion a year for direct subsidies.

But the real damage is done to farmers in poor countries, because high tariffs keep them out of key markets, and tariffs and subsidies together drive down the world price of their exports. Without the income that trade could provide, it is their children who go hungry and who are deprived of clean water, medicines and other basic necessities of life.

Tariffs also hurt poor countries by blocking them from moving up the production chain. Even though 90% of the world's cocoa beans are grown in developing countries, they produce only 4% of its chocolate. One reason is that tariffs often escalate with the degree of processing — in the EU, producers of raw cocoa pay a tariff of 0.5% of the value of the beans, semi-processed cocoa pays about 10% of its value and chocolate even more.

If the rich countries would agree to level the playing field, everyone would see enormous gains. The World Bank estimates that full liberalization of trade in goods alone could generate $300 billion per year for the global economy. Developing countries would gain $86 billion of this share. And these numbers can grow as producers in poor countries take advantage of new markets.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:23 AM

NAMING THE ENEMY:

Lawyer takes on China's 'unwinnable' cases (Joseph Kahn, DECEMBER 12, 2005, The New York Times)

One November morning, the Beijing Judicial Bureau convened a hearing on its decree that one of China's best-known law firms must shut down for a year because it failed to file a change of address form when it moved offices.

The same morning, Gao Zhisheng, the law firm's founder and star litigator, was 2,900 kilometers, or 1,800 miles, away in the remote western region of Xinjiang. He skipped what he called the "absurd and corrupt" hearing so he could rally members of an underground Christian church to sue China's secret police.

"I can't guarantee that you will win the lawsuit. In fact you will almost certainly lose," Gao told one church member who had been detained in a raid. "But I warn you that if you are too timid to confront their barbaric behavior, you will be completely defeated."

The advice could well summarize Gao's own fateful clash with the authorities. Bold, brusque and often roused to fiery indignation, Gao, 41, is one of a handful of self-proclaimed legal "rights defenders." He travels the country filing lawsuits over corruption, land seizures, police abuses and religious freedom. His opponent is usually the same: the ruling Communist Party.

China scholars condemn shootings (Louisa Lim, 12/13/05, BBC News)
A number of Chinese intellectuals have written an open letter condemning the shooting of protesters in the south. [...]

The bold letter draws parallels with the violent suppression of protesters in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

The signed letter, posted on the internet, calls on the government to release a list of the names of those who were killed.

It also demands the launch of a special investigation and for journalists to be allowed to report freely on the killings in Dongzhou, near Shanwei.

The statement describes China as a society in crisis, with the rich grabbing what they can from the poor, leading to ever more confrontations.

This open letter is a bold move, especially given that it condemns China's political system and says that without democracy such conflicts cannot be solved peacefully.


The falcon has stopped listening to the falconer.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:24 AM

WE DIDN'T GET THE SOBRIQUET "THE GREAT SATAN" FOR NOTHIN':

Islamic extremists: Iraqi vote 'satanic' (AP, 12/13/05)

Soldiers, patients and prisoners began voting Monday in national elections, three days ahead of the general population, while insurgents denounced the balloting as a "satanic project" but did not threaten to attack polling stations. [...]

In a rare joint statement, al-Qaeda in Iraq and four other Islamic extremist groups denounced the election as a "satanic project" and said that "to engage in the so-called political process" violates "the legitimate policy approved by God."

The groups vowed to "continue our jihad (holy war) ... to establish an Islamic state ruled by the book (the Quran) and the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad." [...]

The absence of a clear-cut threat could reflect the growing interest among Sunni Arabs, the foundation of the insurgency, to take part in the election. The Sunni decision to boycott the January ballot left parliament in the hands of Shiites and Kurds — a move which increased communal friction and cost the Sunnis considerable influence in drafting the constitution.


And a lack of interest in the jihad.

MORE:
'Blowback' in Iraq (Gary Rosen, 12/13/05, LA Times)

Military setbacks are the least of the radicals' worries, however. Despite their continuing appeal to a segment of Arab opinion — think of young men shouting "Allahu Akbar!" as they watch endless iterations of beheadings on the Internet — Zarqawi and his followers have lost considerable ground in the struggle for Arab "hearts and minds." Their indiscriminate brutality in striking at Shiites and at Sunni "collaborators" has turned much of Iraq, including elements of the insurgency, against them, and their early November bombings of Western hotels in Amman, Jordan, sparked outrage across the Arab world. Even Ayman Zawahiri, Bin Laden's top lieutenant, felt compelled to rebuke Zarqawi, instructing him (in a recently intercepted letter) to cease actions that "the masses do not understand or approve."

The still-deeper threat to the legitimacy of the jihadists, as they themselves recognize, is the ongoing democratic project in Iraq. In January, as Iraqis went to the polls for the first of their three elections this year, Zarqawi released a message declaring "a bitter war against democracy and all those who seek to enact it." He has made good on his pledge, even to the point of lashing out at the growing number of Sunnis who, despite hating the U.S. occupation, have reconciled themselves to the new Iraq. Just two weeks ago, Zarqawi's forces assassinated the grand imam of Fallouja. The 70-year-old cleric's crime? Urging fellow Sunnis to vote. A strong Sunni turnout is expected on Thursday, and the radicals will be left to sulk in the shadows.

Whether the United States will succeed in helping to establish a more liberal, pluralistic Iraq remains to be seen. But if nothing else, the conflict there has served a useful, clarifying purpose — revealing the jihadists as nihilistic spoilers opposed to the aspirations of most of the Muslim world.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

ANOTHER ALLY TOO LITTLE NOTICED:

1,923 Colombian Paramilitaries Surrender: Move by rightist militia members renews the stalled demobilization process. A leftist group meets with government officials to plan talks. (Chris Kraul, December 13, 2005, LA Times)

Frozen for two months, the demobilization of Colombia's militias took a step forward Monday with the surrender of 1,923 paramilitary fighters and a large arsenal of weapons, including two helicopters. [...]

The demobilization of paramilitary forces is a key element in President Alvaro Uribe's strategy to end the civil war. Uribe hopes to complete it by mid-February, then turn his attention to defeating the FARC, which has refused to negotiate with the national government.

The other main insurgent army, the National Liberation Army, known by its Spanish initials ELN, has expressed interest in a negotiated settlement and held preliminary talks with Colombian officials in Havana on Monday.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

DISRUPT YOURSELF:

Our 10 Most Enduring Ideas: To celebrate s+b’s 10th anniversary, we looked back at the conceptual breakthroughs that appeared in this magazine — and invited our readers to vote on which were most likely to last. (Art Kleiner, 12/12/05, Strategy + Business))

From its inception in 1995, strategy+business has been a magazine dedicated to the value and power of ideas. It has embodied the view that, as Victor Hugo once put it, “An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come.” We like to think that our readers are real-world users of ideas, pragmatists who understand that a conceptual breakthrough can make enormous day-to-day difference.

Thus, for our 10th-anniversary issue, we took the question head-on: Of all the ideas strategy+business has covered, which are most likely to endure for (at least) another 10 years? [....]

Here, then, are the winners — the ideas voted most likely to affect the way businesses, including your business, are conducted in the long run. [...]

5. Disruptive Technology (1,513; 39.0 percent). As Clayton Christensen noted in The Innovator’s Dilemma, technological innovation radically alters markets by undermining incumbent companies — which are vulnerable because their offerings are all tailored to the needs of their existing customers. Change feels like a betrayal of those customer relationships. Thus the makers of personal computers trumped Digital Equipment; Wal-Mart trumped Sears; and downloadable music is trumping the recording industry. “You can be doing everything for your customer,” one reader wrote, “and not see a market shift while it is occurring.” Professor Christensen’s idea lives on, to an extent, because of its two-part form. First, there is a warning: Your most cherished policies and practices — in this case, the hallowed sanctity of a successful customer relationship — can include the seeds of your undoing. Second, there is a way out: Preempt your own comfort zone, adopting a disruptive technology yourself before others beat you to it.


Raising gas taxes and pollution emission limits are two ways of forcing such disruption.


December 12, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:14 PM

HATE TO INTERRUPT YOUR HYSTERICS, BUT...:

Environment and Cancer: The Links Are Elusive
By GINA KOLATA


When Mike Gallo learned he had cancer, a B cell lymphoma, two years ago, his friends and relatives told him that they knew how he got it.

His cancer, Dr. Gallo's friends said, was obviously caused by the dioxin that he had worked with for three decades in his laboratory. After all, the Environmental Protection Agency classifies dioxin as a probable human carcinogen. And among the cancers that it may increase the risk for, in high doses, is lymphoma.

Dr. Michael A. Gallo, director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Center of Excellence at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J., tells his well-meaning advisers that he does not think so.

"I say, 'No, I know my blood levels of dioxin,' " Dr. Gallo said, explaining that he measured them when he worked with the chemical. His levels, he said, are low. And there is no way to make a leap from such low levels of dioxin to his cancer.

Yet many of his friends and relatives remain convinced.

"That's the way people think," Dr. Gallo said. "If you get cancer, there has to be a reason."

And there may be a reason, he and other scientists say. But pinning cancer on trace levels of poisons in the environment or even in the workplace is turning out to be a vexing task. [...]

Gerald N. Wogan, a chemist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, takes a different approach. He, like most other scientists, worries that the public is overly concerned about cancer risks from the chemicals they are exposed to. But, he says, the question of how environmentally induced cancers arise is a puzzle that he would like to solve.

Dr. Wogan became interested in pollutants and cancer when he began studying the effects of aflatoxin, produced by mold on peanuts. The toxin caused liver cancer in rats and, Dr. Wogan and others showed, it also causes liver cancer in people. But exposure to aflatoxin was just part of the risk.

Dr. Wogan studied men in Shanghai who were eating foods with high doses of the toxic chemical. They ended up with four times the risk of liver cancer. Another cause of liver cancer, hepatitis B infections of the liver, increases the risk by a factor of seven.

Then Dr. Wogan noticed something that astonished him. The risk of liver cancer was increased 70 times in people who met both criteria; they ate contaminated foods and they were infected with hepatitis B.

"It was like a model system for the environmental causes of cancer," Dr. Wogan said.

The two cancer-causing agents were amplifying each other's effects. He went on to study the mechanisms of cancer causation and discovered that the more he looked at environmental pollutants the more complex and individualistic the biochemical pathways leading to cancer turned out to be.

"People differ very greatly in their response to chemical carcinogens," Dr. Wogan said. "Almost all chemicals, with relatively few exceptions, have to be converted from what they are into something more chemically active to be carcinogenic.

"If you encounter one of these compounds, most of it is converted to less toxic material that is excreted," he continued. "Only a tiny amount is converted to a form that could cause cancer. A small fraction of 1 percent gets converted. And people can differ enormously in their genetic ability to do these metabolic conversions."

Further complicating the issue is that a person's diet, or components of the diet, can increase the activity of enzymes that convert chemicals into carcinogens. And other dietary components can inactivate enzymes that detoxify chemicals.

The calculus grows so complex that it can be virtually impossible to predict what will happen in an individual person exposed to low levels of a possibly toxic chemical. For example, Dr. Wogan said, "The same food, broccoli, can affect both types of enzymes."

Added to this are the effects of chronic infections, like hepatitis B, in which the immune system releases chemicals that can magnify the effects of carcinogens.

In theory, Dr. Wogan said, there is hope for untangling the mess.

"If we knew how to identify exactly which factors or agents or dietary factors were responsible and if we were able to identify their effects in people, then, in principle, cancer is preventable," he said. But, he added: "It's so tough. It's so very tough to do."

In the meantime, he and others say they take comfort in cancer statistics that do not indicate a cancer epidemic. Rates of cancer have been steadily dropping for 50 years, if tobacco-related cancers are taken out of the equation, said Prof. Richard Peto, an epidemiologist and a biostatistician at Oxford University.

What appear as increases in cancers of the breast and prostate, Dr. Peto added, are in fact artifacts of increased screening. When healthy people are screened, the tests find not only cancers that would be deadly if untreated, but also a certain percentage of tumors that would never cause problems if let alone.

His analysis of cancer statistics leads Dr. Peto to this firm conclusion: "Pollution is not a major determinant of U.S. cancer rates."


There's a group of doctors up here who have done eye-opening work on what screenings are really telling us and what they aren't.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:09 PM

CALLED ON ACCOUNT OF INEVITABILITY:

Giuliani in '08 might be an uphill battle against McCain (GLENN THRUSH, December 10, 2005, Newsday)

"In my humble opinion, Rudy wouldn't get out of the gate," said longtime McCain strategist John Dennehy, who helped engineer the Arizona senator's victorious 2000 primary in New Hampshire. [...]

McCain has steadily expanded a national team of hundreds of political professionals and volunteers. While Giuliani's admirers number in the millions, his organization could fit comfortably into a minivan. His advisers include Carbonetti, a former City Hall chief of staff; longtime friends Peter Powers and Dennison Young; former city Corporation Counsel Michael Hess; and, on occasion, GOP consultant Frank Luntz.

In a bid to pick up President George W. Bush supporters, McCain's backers have been casting him as the president's conservative heir-apparent in key primary states like Michigan, New Hampshire and South Carolina, where the senator suffered his most bitter primary defeat.

The senator's aides underscore the fact he's a pro-gun, anti-abortion conservative who gets an 83 out of 100 rating from the Christian Coalition, even after criticizing the role evangelical Christians played in Bush's 2000 campaign.

McCain supporters think it would only be a matter of time before GOP voters realize Giuliani is to the left of their candidate.


The time being Fall of '07.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:50 PM

...BESIDES, WE'RE NEEDED NEXT DOOR....:

Syria blamed as another critic is murdered in car bombing (Nicholas Blanford, 12/13/05, Times of London)

GEBRAN TUENI, Lebanon’s leading journalist and a prominent politician, was killed by a huge car bomb explosion yesterday, the latest victim of a campaign against anti-Syrian figures.

Mr Tueni’s death, in a suburb of East Beirut, came less than 24 hours after his return from France, where he had based himself for several months because of death threats.

Lebanese politicians blamed Syria. [...]

Mr Tueni, who was 48 and married with four daughters, was publisher of the An-Nahar newspaper in Lebanon and a leading figure in the independence uprising triggered by Mr Hariri’s death, which culminated in a Syrian troop withdrawal from Lebanon in April.

MORE:
Report Says Syria Interfered in Hariri Probe (Colum Lynch, 12/13/05, Washington Post)

Syria has interfered with a U.N. probe into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri by burning intelligence archives and intimidating a key witness who had tied senior Syrian officials to the killing, according to testimony made public Monday by U.N. investigators.

The investigators released their second report Monday. It said new interviews have provided further "probable cause" to conclude that senior Syrian and Lebanese officials plotted and carried out the Valentine's Day assassination of Hariri and 22 others in a car bombing in Beirut. The 25-page report, which followed an initial report in October, cited new testimony linking an unnamed "high-level" Syrian official to a campaign to "create public disorder" in Lebanon by providing arms and ammunition to provocateurs in the days after Hariri's death.

German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, who headed the inquiry, said the probe should continue, and the report's findings set the stage for a renewed U.S. push for sanctions against Damascus.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:44 PM

CO-DEPENDENT NO MORE:

Iraq troop pull-out to begin in months (Richard Beeston and Stephen Farrell in Baghdad and Michael Evans in Basra, 12/13/05, Times of London)

BRITAIN and America are planning a phased withdrawal of their forces from Iraq as soon as a permanent government is installed in Baghdad after this week’s elections.

In a move that has caused alarm in the outgoing Iraqi administration, American and British officials have made clear that they regard the end of Iraq’s two-and-a-half-year transitional period as the green light to begin withdrawing some of their combined force of around 170,000 troops as early as March. [...]

Zalman Khalilzad, the US Ambassador to Baghdad, said last week that the US military role would increasingly become one of supporting frontline Iraqi forces until it was merely “a reserve”.

“Our goal will be to leave Iraq as soon as possible but without increasing insecurity,” he said. “Our strategic goal is Iraq standing on its own feet and American troops out.”


Always tough to send your young ones out on their own,m but its the only way to get them to stand on their own two feet, eh?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:10 PM

YET KRUGMAN CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE HOUSING MARKET?:

Immigration Hits Five-Year High, Report Says (STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, 12/12/05, Associated Press)

A new report by the Center for Immigration Studies found that 7.9 million people moved to the United States in the past five years, the highest five-year period of immigration on record.

MORE (via mc):
US household net worth up to new record high in third quarter (People's Daily Online, 12/11/05)

The net worth of US households increased by 2.6 percent to a record 51.1 trillion dollars in the third quarter of this year, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. [...]

It was the 12th straight quarterly increases of the US household net worth, which measures household assets minus liabilities.

US household net worth has risen because the value of household assets, such as stock holding and the value of homes themselves, has increased faster than household debts including mortgage.


That poor, debt-burdened American consumer....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:16 PM

THE ADVANTAGE OF DEMOCRATIZING LATE:

Palestinian 'third way' rises: A new political group offers voters a choice between Fatah and Hamas. (Ilene R. Prusher, 12/13/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

A group of respected Palestinian leaders and intellectuals has formed an independent list to run in January's elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council. The new "party" presents a potential challenge to the two major forces of political life here: Fatah, the ruling Palestinian faction, and Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement.

The names topping the new list are well-known: Salam Fayyad, the respected finance minister and former World Bank official - a man seen by the international donor community as one of the most reliable and capable people in the Palestinian Authority (PA) - and Hanan Ashrawi, a former minister and Palestinian spokeswoman who has lobbied for an improved human rights record and respect for the rule of law in areas under the PA's control.


Jobs vs. efficiency as Afghan Ma Bell goes private (Scott Baldauf, 12/13/05, The Christian Science Monitor)
Afghanistan has become a nation of state-owned industries that don't make anything, bureaucrats who don't do anything, and citizens who don't get anything from their government. The solution seems simple on paper: Tear it all down and start from scratch. Yet laying off thousands of well-educated bureaucrats would only add to the angry unemployed.

For now, the state is easing citizens into the free market and quietly making Afghanistan a decent place to make a buck.


The Islamic world has had the enormous benefit of having seen socialism and welfare statism fail, but one could fairly doubt whether they'll manage to take advantage or our experience.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:13 PM

WHAT'S WRONG WITH BEER? (via obc):

PM's aide sorry for daycare remark (LES WHITTINGTON, 12/12/05, Toronto Star)

Paul Martin's high-profile daycare pitch was knocked off track yesterday when his chief spokesperson said the $25 a week that parents would receive under a competing Conservative plan would be blown on beer and popcorn.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:06 PM

FOUNDED ON PABULUM:

Left, lefter and leftest (SALIM MANSUR, 12/12/05, Toronto Sun)

Recently in the online edition of the U.S. conservative magazine National Review, California-based Canadian Doug Gamble provided Americans with an astute analysis of Canada's upcoming winter election.

Gamble noted the three national parties -- the Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats -- could be "best described as left, more left and most left," relative to America's Republicans and Democrats. [...]

Liberalism in Canada -- the sort retailed by the Liberal party -- has been consistent with the country's founding theme of "peace, order and good government," in contrast with the republican liberalism of America, which promotes "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Canadian liberalism has been elite-driven and top-down.


"Peace, order and good government"? It's like a comedy sketch.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:23 PM

THE COMPANY YOU KEEP:

Crowd agitators linked to neo-nazis (David King, December 13, 2005, news.com.au)

EXTREMIST groups accused of links to neo-Nazis have admitted mobilising more than 100 people to attend the riots in Cronulla.

Jim Saleam, the New South Wales secretary of ultra-nationalist group Australia First, said his members had recruited up to 120 people for the rally but denied they were involved in violence.

"We do have some local supporters and these guys mobilised their family friends, mates, work-mates, associates, every Jack and Harry, to come," he said.

NSW Police Minister Carl Scully confirmed that extremists had taken part in the riots.

"There appears to be an element of white supremacists and they really have no place in mainstream Australian society," he said. "Those sort of characters belong in Berlin 1930s."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:55 PM

APPLIED LAMARCKIANISM? (via Timothy Goddard):

Napoleon's genocide 'on a par with Hitler' (Colin Randall, 26/11/2005, Daily Telegraph)

A French historian has caused uproar by claiming Napoleon provided the model for Hitler's Final Solution with the slaughter of more than 100,000 Caribbean slaves.

In The Crime of Napoleon, Claude Ribbe accuses the emperor of genocide, gassing rebellious blacks more than a century before the Nazis' extermination of the Jews.

His accusations refer to the extreme methods used to put down a ferocious uprising in Haiti at the start of the 19th century. Then known as San Domingo, the colony was considered a jewel of the French empire and to save it troops launched a campaign to kill all blacks aged over 12.

"In simple terms, Napoleon ordered the killing of as many blacks as possible in Haiti and Guadeloupe to be replaced by new, docile slaves from Africa," Ribbe said yesterday.

He said he had found accounts from officers who refused to take part in the massacres, especially the use of sulphur dioxide to kill slaves held in ships' holds.

His book is already provoking controversy prior to its publication on Thursday. The newspaper France Soir juxtaposed images of Napoleon and Hitler yesterday before asking: "Did Napoleon invent the Final Solution?"


As Timothy points out, it's just fortunate that Darwinism hadn't been invented yet.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:55 PM

THOUGH RUDY COULD CERTAINLY PASS AS VP:

N.Y.'s Favorite Republicans: John McCain and Rudy Giuliani seem like the kind of GOPers city Dems could get behind—but one’s pro-life and the other can’t win and won’t run. (John Heilemann, New York Magazine)

[T]he emergence of McCain and Giuliani as front-runners is about more than numbers, name recognition, or wanton starf***ing. It’s about a surge of receptiveness to both of them on the diamond-hard right and in the Republican Establishment. It’s about the denizens of Bushworld whispering that they’re now copacetic with McCain: “As soon as he stood up and saluted the ticket a year ago, the fences were mended,” one Bushie tells me. [...]

[I] told McCain that the infatuation with him by countless liberals—barely a day goes by in New York without some habitual Democrat telling me he would consider voting for McCain against Clinton—struck me as hard to fathom.

McCain, without missing a beat, replied, “They don’t know me well enough.”

We both laughed at that, but he wasn’t entirely kidding, for McCain has always been more conservative than either the left or the right wishes to admit. A recent piece in The Nation captured the point concisely: “In 2004 he earned a perfect 100 percent rating from Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum and a 0 percent from NARAL. . . . He has supported school vouchers, a missile defense shield, and private accounts for Social Security. Well before 9/11 McCain advocated a new Reagan doctrine of ‘rogue-state rollback.’” [...]

McCain now seems determined to pursue the path that [David Keene, head of the American Conservative Union] suggests he should have the first time around. Throughout our conversation, he invokes Reagan’s name repeatedly, along with the two issues that have served as the basis for the thaw between him and the right: his hawkish stance on the Iraq war and his crusade against federal spending. By letting McCain adopt a posture at once conservative and anti-Establishment, the latter is especially clever: “I’m just beside myself about this spending—I can’t tell you how awful it is,” he says. “I haven’t left the Republican Party; the party has abandoned the Republican principle of fiscal discipline.” [...]

“He’s trying to run from a much more mainstream Republican posture while maintaining a patina of independence,” says Keene. “He doesn’t need to make the right love him; he just needs to defang the right so it can’t hurt him. I think he’s in good shape—he’s definitely the front-runner.” [...]

[N]o one doubts that Giuliani’s popularity is real and sincerely felt. Yet among political professionals there is something approaching a consensus that of the two men, he occupies the far weaker position. To start with, McCain has run a national campaign before—a considerable asset. McCain can also lay claim to the “it’s my turn” mantle of seniority in the presidential sweepstakes—another important advantage in a party of primogeniture.

Worse for Giuliani, because he and McCain have the same set of strengths—heroism, national-security cred—and appeal to the same moderate and independent base of voters, it will make it devilishly difficult for Hizzoner to portray himself as a McCain alternative. As Keene puts it, “If McCain is the problem, Rudy isn’t the solution.”

Even if McCain weren’t present in the race, Giuliani would have his share of obstacles to surmount. Unlike McCain, who can at least lay credible claim to being conservative on many social issues, Giuliani is something close to a bona fide social liberal: pro–gay rights, pro–gun control, thrice married, etc. Can some of these issues be fudged, rendering Giuliani modestly more palatable to the red-meat-eating right? Sure. But one of them cannot.

“It’s simply inconceivable that there would be a pro-choice nominee in today’s party,” says Wittman. “It’s too central a component in holding the entire Republican coalition together. Before he takes another step, Giuliani has to figure out how to deal with that. And I don’t see how he does it, other than changing his position—which raises its own set of issues altogether. It’s truly an impossible hurdle for him to get over.”

All of which leads Keene to a stark conclusion: “Rudy has to know that his best day will be the day he announces—it’ll be all downhill from there. And Rudy is no fool. So I frankly don’t believe that, in the end, he’ll run for president.”


If Jeb isn't interested, the Mayor is a perfectly reasonable second choice for VP.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:47 PM

WOULDN'T WANT TAX DOLLARS TO SERVE THE WILL OF TAX PAYERS:

Bush plans overhaul of US foreign aid system (Guy Dinmore, December 11 2005, Financial Times)

World AidPresident George W. Bush’s administration is drawing up plans to carry out the biggest overhaul of the US foreign aid apparatus in more than 40 years in an attempt to assert more political control over international assistance, according to officials and aid experts.

The proposed reorganisation could lead to a takeover by the State Department of the independent US Agency for International Development. USAID was established by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, managing aid programmes, disaster relief and post-war reconstruction totalling billions of dollars each year.

Critics in the aid community fear the reorganisation will lead to a politicisation of foreign assistance, where aid will become subordinated to the Bush administration’s drive to promote democracy.


These folks just have no concept of what America is, do they?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:29 PM

FOLKS GOTTA LIVE SOMEWHERE (via Luciferous):

Limits on homes push up prices (Patrice Hill, December 12, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Escalating prices that have made houses unaffordable for many people in Washington are mostly the result of homeowners using political and regulatory means to block construction of new housing, economic studies show.

Washington home prices continued to soar last month despite a slowdown in sales, with gains of 21.5 percent and 18 percent over November 2004 in the District and Montgomery County, respectively, the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors reported this week.

Nothing incentivizes elitism like when keeping the riff--raff (everyone unlucky enough to build after you) out also increases the value of your own home.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:13 PM

SOCCER IS AS SOCCER DOES (via Matthew Cohen):

Italian Player Accused of Fascist Salute (AP, 12/12/05)

An Italian soccer player appeared to give a fascist salute to his fans during a league game for the second time this season. Italian papers ran photos Monday showing Lazio forward Paolo Di Canio with his arm outstretched as he was being substituted during the second half of his team's 2-1 loss to Livorno on Sunday. He could face disciplinary action. [...]

The game featured teams whose fans have opposing political allegiances: Lazio fans waved swastika flags while Livorno fans had red Communist flags. Clashes between Livorno fans and police were reported outside the stadium before the game, with one officer slightly injured.


It's not like he can claim he was throwing overhand.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:23 PM

JUST TWO AND HALF YEARS:

Bush Speech on Iraq (President George W. Bush, December 12, 2005, World Affairs Council)

Today, I'm going to speak in depth about another vital element of our strategy: our efforts to help the Iraqi people build a lasting democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

I can think of no better place to discuss the rise of a free Iraq than in the heart of Philadelphia, the city where America's democracy was born. [...]

A few blocks from here stands Independence Hall, where our Declaration of Independence was signed and our Constitution was debated.

From the perspective of more than two centuries the success of America's democratic experiment seems almost inevitable. At the time, however, that success didn't seem so obvious or assured.

The eight years from the end of the Revolutionary War to the election of a constitutional government were a time of disorder and upheaval.

There were uprisings, with mobs attacking courthouses and government buildings. There was a planned military coup that was defused only by the personal intervention of George Washington.

In 1783, Congress was chased from this city by angry veterans demanding back pay, and they stayed on the run for six months.

There were tensions between the mercantile North and the agricultural South that threatened to break apart our young republic.

And there were British loyalists who were opposed to independence and had to be reconciled with America's new democracy.

Our founders faced many difficult challenges, they made mistakes, they learned from their experiences and they adjusted their approach.

Our nation's first effort at a governing charter, the Articles of Confederation, failed. It took years of debate and compromise before we ratified our Constitution and inaugurated our first president.

It took a four-year civil war and a century of struggle after that before the promise of our Declaration was extended to all Americans.

It is important to keep this history in mind as we look at the progress of freedom and democracy in Iraq.

No nation in history has made the transition to a free society without facing challenges, setbacks and false starts.

The past 2 1/2 years have been a period of difficult struggle in Iraq, yet they have also been a time of great hope and achievement for the Iraqi people.

Just over 2 1/2 years ago, Iraq was in the grip of a cruel dictator who had invaded his neighbors, sponsored terrorists, pursued and used weapons of mass destruction, murdered his own people and, for more than a decade, defied the demands of the United Nations and the civilized world.

Since then, the Iraqi people have assumed sovereignty over their country, held free elections, drafted a democratic constitution and approved that constitution in a nationwide referendum.

Three days from now they go to the polls for the third time this year and choose a new government under the new constitution.

It's a remarkable transformation for a country that has virtually no experience with democracy and which is struggling to overcome the legacy of one of the worst tyrannies the world has known.

And Iraqis achieved all this while determined enemies used violence and destruction to stop the progress.

There's still a lot of difficult work to be done in Iraq. But thanks to the courage of the Iraqi people, the year 2005 will be recorded as a turning point in the history of Iraq, the history of the Middle East and the history of freedom.

As the Iraqi people struggle to build their democracy, adversaries continue their war on a free Iraq. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists and Saddamists and terrorists.

The rejectionists are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein. They reject an Iraq in which they're no longer the dominant group.

We believe that, over time, most of this group will be persuaded to support a democratic Iraq led by a federal government that is strong enough to protect minority rights. And we're encouraged that many Sunnis plan to actively participate in this week's election.

The Saddamists are former regime loyalists who harbor dreams of returning to power, and they're trying to foment anti- democratic sentiment amongst the larger Sunni community. Yet they lack popular support and, over time, they can be marginalized and defeated by the people and security forces of a free Iraq.

The terrorists, affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaeda, are the smallest, but most lethal, group. Many are foreigners, coming to fight freedom's progress in Iraq. They are led by a brutal terrorist named Zarqawi, Al Qaeda's chief of operations in Iraq, who has stated his allegiance to Usama bin Laden.

The terrorists' stated objective is to drive U.S. and coalition forces out of Iraq and gain control of that country and then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America, overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East and establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Spain to Indonesia.

The terrorists in Iraq share the ideology of the terrorists who struck the United States on September the 11th. They share the ideology with those who blew up commuters in London and Madrid, murdered tourists in Bali and killed workers in Riyadh and slaughtered guests at a wedding in Amman, Jordan.

This is an enemy with conscience and they cannot be appeased.

If we were not fighting and destroying this enemy in Iraq, they would not be leading quiet lives as good citizens. They would be plotting and killing our citizens across the world and here at home.

By fighting the terrorists in Iraq, we are confronting a direct threat to the American people. And we will accept nothing less than complete victory.

We are pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq. Our goal is victory. And victory will be achieved when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can provide for the safety of their own citizens, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation.

Our strategy in Iraq has three elements.

On the economic side, we're helping the Iraqis restore their infrastructure, reform their economy and build the prosperity that will give all Iraqis a stake in a free and peaceful Iraq.

On the security side, coalition and Iraqi forces are on the offense against the enemy. We're working together to clear out areas controlled by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, and leaving Iraqi forces to hold territory taken from the enemy.

And as we help Iraqis fight these enemies, we're working to build capable and effective Iraqi security forces so they can take the lead in the fight and eventually take responsibility for the safety and security of their citizens without major foreign assistance.

We're making steady progress. The Iraqi forces are becoming more and more capable. They're taking more responsibility for more and more territory. We're transferring bases to their control, so they can take the fight to the enemy.

And that means American and coalition forces can concentrate on training Iraqis and hunting down the high-value targets, like the terrorist Zarqawi and his associates.

Today, I want to discuss the political element of our strategy: our efforts to help the Iraqis build inclusive democratic institutions that will protect the interests of all the Iraqi people.

By helping Iraqis to build a democracy, we will win over those who doubted they had a place in a new Iraq and undermine the terrorists and Saddamists.

By helping Iraqis to gain a democracy, we will gain an ally in the war on terror.

By helping Iraqis build a democracy, we will inspire reformers across the Middle East.

And by helping Iraqis build a democracy, we will bring hope to a troubled region. And this will make the American people more secure.

From the outset, the political element of our strategy in Iraq has been guided by a clear principle.

Democracy takes different forms in different cultures. Yet in all cultures, successful free societies are built on certain common foundations: rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, a free economy and freedom to worship.

Respect for the belief of others is the only way to build a society where compassion and tolerance prevail.

Societies that lay these foundations not only survive, but thrive. Societies that do not lay these foundations risk backsliding into tyranny.

When our coalition arrived in Iraq, we found a nation where almost none of these basic foundations existed. Decades of brutal rule by Saddam Hussein had destroyed the fabric of Iraqi civil society.

Under Saddam, Iraq was a country where dissent was crushed, a centralized economy enriched a dictator instead of the people, secret courts meted out repression instead of justice, and Shia Muslims and Kurds and other groups were brutally oppressed.

And when Saddam Hussein's regime fled Baghdad, they left behind a country with few civic institutions in place to hold Iraq society together.

To fill the vacuum after liberation, we established the Coalition Provisional Authority. The CPA was ably led by Ambassador Jerry Bremer, and many fine officials from our government volunteered to serve in the CPA.

While things did not always go as planned, these men and women did a good job under extremely difficult and dangerous circumstances, helping to restore basic services, making sure food was distributed and re-establishing government ministries.

One of the CPA's most important tasks was bringing the Iraqi people into the decision-making process of their government after decades of tyrannical rule.

Three months after liberation, our coalition worked with the United Nations and Iraqi leaders to establish an Iraqi Governing Council. The governing council gave Iraqis a voice in their own affairs, but it was unelected, and it was subordinate to the CPA and, therefore, did not satisfy the hunger of Iraqis for self-government.

Like free people everywhere, Iraqis wanted to be governed by leaders they had elected, not foreign officials. So in the summer of 2003, we proposed a plan to transfer sovereignty to the Iraqi people.

Under this plan, the CPA would continue to govern Iraq, while appointed Iraqi leaders drafted a constitution, put that constitution before the people and then held elections to choose a new government.

BUSH: Only when that elected government took office would the Iraqis regain their sovereignty.

This plan met with the disapproval of the Iraqis. They made it clear that they wanted a constitution that was written by elected leaders of a free Iraq, and they wanted sovereignty placed in Iraqi hands sooner. We listened and we adjusted our approach.

In November of 2003, we negotiated a new plan with the governing council, with steps for an accelerated transition to Iraqi self- government.

Under this new plan, a Transitional Administrative Law was written by the governing council and adopted in March of 2004. This law guaranteed personal freedoms unprecedented in the Arab world and set forth four major milestones to guide Iraq's transition to a constitutional democracy.

The first milestone was the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi interim government by the end of June 2004.

The second was for Iraqis to hold free elections to choose a transitional government by January of 2005.

The third was for Iraqis to adopt a democratic constitution which would be drafted no later than August 2005 and put before the Iraqi people in a nationwide referendum no later than October.

The fourth was for Iraqis to choose a government under that democratic constitution, with election held December of 2005.

The first milestone was met when our coalition handed over sovereignty to the Iraqi leaders on June 28, 2004, two days ahead of schedule.

In January 2005, Iraqis met the second milestone when they went to the polls and chose their leaders in free elections. Almost 8.5 million Iraqis defied the car bombers and assassins to cast their ballots. And the world watched in awe as jubilant Iraqis danced in the street and held ink-stained fingers and celebrated their freedom.

The January elections were a watershed event for Iraq and the Middle East, yet they were not without flaws.

One problem was the failure of the vast majority of Sunni Arabs to vote. When Sunnis saw a new 275-member parliament taking power in which they had only 16 seats, many realized that their failure to participate in the democratic process had hurt their chances and hurt their groups and hurt their constituencies.

And Shia and Kurdish leaders who had won power at the polls saw that for a free and unified Iraq to succeed, they needed Sunni Arabs to be part of the government.

We encouraged Iraq's leaders to reach out to Sunni leaders and bring them into the governing process.

When the transitional government was seated in the spring of this year, Sunni Arabs filled important posts, including a vice president, a minister of defense and the speaker of the national assembly.

The new government's next political challenge was to meet the third milestone, which is adopting a democratic constitution.

Again, Iraq's leaders reached out to Sunni Arabs who had boycotted the elections and included them in the drafting process. Fifteen Sunni Arab negotiators and several Sunni Arab advisers joined the work of the constitutional drafting committee.

After much tough debate, representatives of Iraq's diverse communities drafted a bold constitution that guarantees the rule of law, freedom of assembly, property rights, freedom of speech and the press, women's rights and the right to vote.

As one Arab scholar put it, the Iraqi constitution marks the dawn of a new age in Arab life.

The document that initially emerged from the committee did not unify Iraqis. And many Sunnis on the constitutional committee did not support the draft. Yet Iraq's leaders continued working to gain Sunni support.

And thanks to last-minute changes, including a new procedure for considering amendments to the constitution next year, a deal was struck four days before the Iraqis went to the polls.

The revised constitution was endorsed by Iraq's largest Sunni party. It was approved in referendum that attracted over a million more voters than in the January elections.

Many Sunnis voted against the constitution, but Sunnis voted in large numbers for the first time. They joined the political process and by doing so they reject the violence of the Saddamists and rejectionists.

Through hard work and compromise, Iraqis adopted the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world.

On Thursday, Iraqis will meet their fourth milestone. And when they do go to the polls and choose a new government under the new constitution, it'll be a remarkable event in the Arab world.

Despite terrorist violence, the country is buzzing with signs and sounds of democracy in action.

The streets of Baghdad and Najaf and Mosul and other cities are full of signs and posters. The television and radio airwaves are thick with political ads and commentary. Hundreds of parties and coalitions have registered for this week's elections and they're campaigning vigorously. Candidates are holding rallies and laying out their agendas and asking for the vote.

Our troops see this young democracy up close. First Lieutenant Frank Shirley (ph) of Rock Hall, Maryland, says, It's a cool thing riding around Baghdad and seeing the posters. It reminds me of being home during election time. After so many years of being told what to do, having a real vote is different.

Unlike the January elections, many Sunnis are campaigning vigorously for office this time around. Many Sunni parties that opposed the constitution have registered to compete in this week's vote. Two major Sunni coalitions have formed and other Sunni leaders have joined national coalitions that cross religious, ethnic and sectarian boundaries.

As one Sunni politician put it, This election is a vote for Iraq. We want a national Iraq, not a sectarian one.

To encourage broader participation by all Iraqi communities, the national assembly made important changes in Iraq's electoral laws that will increase Sunni representation in the new assembly.

In the January elections, Iraq was one giant electoral district, so seats in the transitional assembly simply reflected turnout. Because few Sunnis voted, their communities were left with little representation.

Now Iraq has a new electoral system where seats in the new council of representatives will be allocated by province and population, much like our own House of Representatives.

This new system is encouraging more Sunnis to join in the democratic process, because it ensures that Sunnis will be well- represented even if the terrorists and Saddamists try to intimidate voters in the provinces where most Sunnis live.

More Sunnis are involved because they see Iraqi democracy succeeding. They have learned a lesson of democracy: They must participate to have a voice in their nation's affairs.

A leading Sunni who had boycotted the January vote put it this way: The Sunnis are now ready to participate.

A Sunni sheik explains why Sunnis must join the process: In order not to be marginalized, we need power in the national assembly.

As more Sunnis join the political process, the Saddamists and remaining rejectionists will be marginalized. As more Sunnis join the political process, they will protect the interests of their community.

Like the Shia and Kurds who face daily attacks from the terrorists and Saddamists, many Sunnis who join the political process are being targeted by the enemies of a free Iraq.

The Iraqi Islamic Party, a Sunni party that boycotted the January vote and now supports elections, has seen its offices bombed. And a party leader reports that at least 10 members have been killed since the party announced it would field candidates in Thursday's elections.

Recently a top Sunni electoral official visited the Sunni stronghold of Baquba. He went to encourage local leaders to participate in the elections. During his visit a roadside bomb went off, rattled his convoy, but it didn't stop it.

He says this about the attempt on his life: The bomb is nothing compared to what we're doing. What we're doing is bigger than the bomb.

By pressing forward and meeting their milestones, the Iraqi people have built momentum for freedom and democracy.

They've encouraged those outside the process to come in.

At every stage, there was enormous pressure to let the deadlines slide, with skeptics and pessimists declaring that Iraqis were not ready for self-government.

At every stage, Iraqis proved the skeptics and pessimists wrong. At every stage, Iraqis have exposed the errors of those in our country and across the world who questioned the universal appeal of liberty.

By meeting their milestones, Iraqis are defeating a brutal enemy, rejecting a murderous ideology and choosing freedom over terror.

This week elections won't be perfect, and a successful vote is not the end of the process. Iraqis still have more difficult work ahead and our coalition and the new Iraqi government will face many challenges, including in four critical areas: ensuring Iraqi security, forming an inclusive Iraqi government, encouraging Iraqi reconciliation and maintaining Iraqi democracy in a tough neighborhood.

The first key challenge is security. As democracy takes hold in Iraq, the terrorists and Saddamists will continue to use violence.

They will try to break our will and intimidate the Iraqi people and their leaders.

These enemies aren't going to give up because of a successful election. They understand what is at stake in Iraq.

They know that as democracy takes root in that country, their hateful ideology will suffer a devastating blow and the Middle East will have a clear example of freedom and prosperity and hope.

So our coalition will continue to hunt down the terrorists and Saddamists, will continue training Iraqi security forces to take the lead in the fight and defend their new democracy.

As the Iraqi security forces stand up, coalition forces can stand down. And when victory is achieved, our troops will then return home with the honor they have earned.

The second key challenge is forming an inclusive government that protects the interests of all Iraqis and encourages more in the rejectionist camp to abandon violence and embrace politics.

Early next year, Iraq's new parliament will come to Baghdad and select a prime minister and a presidency council and a cabinet of ministers. Two-thirds of the new parliament must agree on the top leadership posts. And this will demand negotiation and compromise. It will require patience by America and our coalition allies.

This new government will face many tough decisions on issues such as security and reconstruction and economic reform.

Iraqi leaders will also have to review and possibly amend the constitution and ensure that this historic document earns the broad support of all Iraqi communities.

By taking these steps, Iraqi leaders will build a strong and lasting democracy. It's an important step in helping to defeat the terrorists and the Saddamists.

The third key challenge is establishing rule of law and the culture of reconciliation. Iraqis still have to overcome long-standing ethnic and religious tensions and the legacy of three decades of dictatorship.

During the regime of Saddam Hussein, Shia, Kurds and other groups were brutally oppressed. And for some there is now a temptation to take justice into their own hands.

Recently, U.S. and Iraqi troops have discovered prisons in Iraq where mostly Sunni men were held, some of whom have appeared to have been beaten and tortured.

This conduct is unacceptable and the prime minister and other Iraqi officials have condemned these abuses. An investigation has been launched.

And we support these efforts. Those who committed these crimes must be held to account.

We will continue helping Iraqis build an impartial system of justice that protects all of Iraq's citizens.

Millions of Iraqis are seeing their independent judiciary in action as their former dictator, Saddam Hussein, is put on trial in Baghdad. The man who once struck fear in the hearts of Iraqis has heard his victims recount the acts of torture and murder that he ordered.

One Iraqi watching the proceeding said, We all feel happiness about this fair trial.

Slowly but surely, with the help of our coalition, Iraqis are replacing the rule of tyrant with the rule of law and ensuring equal justice for all their citizens.

No, I know some fear the possibility that Iraq could break apart and fall into a civil war. I don't believe these fears are justified. They're not justified so long as we do not abandon the Iraqi people in their hour of need.

Encouraging reconciliation and human rights in a society scarred by decades of arbitrary violence and sectarian division is not going to be easy and it's not going to happen overnight.

Yet the Iraqi government has a process in place to resolve even the most difficult issues through negotiate, debate and compromise. And the United States, along with the United Nations and the Arab League and other international partners, will support these efforts to help resolve these issues.

And as Iraqis continue to develop the habits of liberty, they will gain confidence in the future and ensure that Iraqi nationalism trumps Iraqi sectarianism.

A fourth key challenge is for the Iraqis to maintain their newfound freedoms in a tough neighborhood. Iraq's neighbor to the east, Iran, is actively working to undermine a free Iraq.

Iran doesn't want democracy in Iraq to succeed because a free Iraq threatens the legitimacy of Iran's oppressive theocracy.

Iraq's neighbor to the west, Syria, is permitting terrorists to use that territory to cross into Iraq.

The vast majority of Iraqis do not want to live under an Iranian- style theocracy, and they don't want Syria to allow the transit of bombers and killers into Iraq. And the United States of America will stand with the Iraqi people against the threats from these neighbors.

We'll continue to encourage greater support from the Arab world and the broader international community. Many Arab states have kept the new Iraq at arm's distance. Yet as more Arab states are beginning to recognize that a free Iraq is here to stay, they're starting to give Iraq's new government more support.

Recently, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan have welcomed the Iraqi prime minister on official visits. Last month, the Arab League hosted a meeting in Cairo to promote national reconciliation among Iraqis, and another such meeting is planned for next year in Baghdad.

These are important steps, and Iraq's neighbors need to do more.

Arab leaders are beginning to recognize that the choice in Iraq is between democracy and terrorism, and there is no middle ground. The success of Iraqi democracy is in their vital interests because if the terrorists prevail in Iraq, they will then target other Arab nations.

International support for Iraq's democracy is growing as well. Other nations have pledged more than $13 billion in assistance to Iraq, and we call on them, those who have pledged assistance, to make good on their commitments.

The World Bank recently approved its first loan to Iraq in over 30 years, lending the Iraqi government $100 million to improve the Iraqi school system.

The United Nations is playing a vital role in Iraq. They assisted in last January's elections, in the negotiations for the constitution and in the recent constitutional referendum. And at the request of the Iraqi government, the U.N. Security Council unanimously approved a resolution extending the mandate of the multinational force in Iraq through 2006.

Earlier this year, the European Union co-hosted a conference for more than 80 countries and international organizations so they can better coordinate their efforts to help Iraqis rebuild their nation.

Whatever differences there were over the decision to liberate Iraq, all free nations now share a common interest: building an Iraq that will fight terror and be a source of stability and freedom in a troubled region of the world.

The challenges ahead are complex and difficult. Yet Iraqis are determined to overcome them and build a free nation. And they require our support.

Millions of Iraqis will put their lives on the line this Thursday in the name of liberty and democracy. And 160,000 of America's finest are putting their lives on the line so Iraqis can succeed.

The American and Iraqi people share the same interests and the same enemies. And by helping democracy succeed in Iraq, we bring greater security to our citizens here at home.

The terrorists know that democracy is their enemy. And they will continue fighting freedom's progress with all the hateful determination they can muster.

Yet the Iraqi people are stepping forward to claim their liberty. And they will have it.

When the new Iraqi government takes office next year, Iraqis will have the only constitutional democracy in the Arab world, and Americans will have a partner for peace and moderation in the Middle East.

People across the broader Middle East are drawing and will continue to draw inspiration from Iraq's progress. And the terrorists' powerful myth is being destroyed.

In a 1998 fatwa, Usama bin Laden argued that the suffering of the Iraqi people was justification for his declaration of war on America. Now bin Laden and Al Qaeda are the direct cause of the Iraqi people's suffering.

As more Muslims across the world see this, they're turning against the terrorists. As the hope of liberty spreads in the Middle East, the terrorists will lose their sponsors, lose their recruits and lose the sanctuaries they need to plan new attacks.

A free Iraq's not going to be a quiet Iraq. It'll be a nation full of passionate debate and vigorous political activity. It'll be a nation that continues to face some level of violence.

Yet Iraqis are showing they have the patience and the courage to make democracy work. And Americans have the patience and courage to help them succeed.

We've done this kind of work before. We must have confidence in our cause.

In World War II, free nations defeated fascism and helped our former adversaries, Germany and Japan, build strong democracies. And today these nations are allies in securing the peace.

In the Cold War, free nations defeated communism and helped our former Warsaw Pact adversaries become strong democracies. And today nations of Central and Eastern Europe are allies in the war on terror.

Today in the Middle East, freedom is once again contending with a totalitarian ideology that seeks to sow anger and hatred and despair. And like fascism and communism before, the hateful ideologies that use terror will be defeated by the unstoppable power of freedom.

And the advance of freedom in the Middle East requires freedom in Iraq. By helping Iraqis build a lasting democracy, we will spread the hope of liberty across a troubled region. We'll gain new allies in the cause of freedom.

By helping Iraqis build a strong democracy, we're adding to our own security. And like a generation before us, we're laying the foundation of peace for generations to come.

Not far from here, where we gather today, is a symbol of freedom familiar to all Americans: the Liberty Bell. When the Declaration of Independence was first read in public, the Liberty Bell was sounded in celebration and a witness said, It rang as if it meant something.

Today the call of liberty is being heard in Baghdad, in Basra and other Iraqi cities, and its sound is echoing across the broader Middle East. From Damascus to Tehran, people hear it and they know it means something. It means that the days of tyranny and terror are ending and a new day of hope and freedom is dawning.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:16 PM

JUST AS WELL OBL DIDN'T LIVE TO SEE IT (via Luciferous):

Muslims to guard churches on Xmas! (REUTERS, 12/10/05)

Volunteers from Indonesia's largest Islamic organisation will guard churches across the world's most populous Muslim nation on Christmas amid fears of terrorist attacks on those places, the group said on Friday.

Jakarta police have said they would boost security in the capital ahead of Christmas to avoid a repeat of 2000 Christmas Eve bombings on churches in several Indonesian cities, including in the country's capital.

A youth wing affiliated with Indonesia's largest Muslim group Nahdlatul Ulama, some 40 million strong, said that members would guard churches for the coming Christmas festivities and it had persuaded youths from other religions to join the project.

"We have an annual programme to set up posts to secure Christmas. For this year, I have contacted groups from other religions like the Hindus and Buddhists and they have responded positively," said Tatang Hidayat, National Coordinator of NU's Banser group, known for its military-like uniform.

Hidayat said the volunteers would closely collaborate with existing police operations and the churches' own security.



Posted by Peter Burnet at 12:37 PM

CHAMPIONS OF THE PEOPLE

Harper blasts Martin over aide’s remarks (Michael den Tandt, Globe and Mail, December 12th, 2005)

Stephen Harper's Conservatives made hay again today with remarks by Scott Reid, Paul Martin's communications adviser, about parents, beer and popcorn.

Mr. Reid apologized Sunday after suggesting that parents would spend a promised Tory $1,200 daycare tax credit on "beer and popcorn."

Mr. Harper dismissed the apology, saying Mr. Reid had expressed regret for his choice of words, but not the sentiment.

"I feel a sense of sadness when I hear these comments," Mr. Harper said. "We value parents. We think parents are the most critical part of raising kids."

The Conservatives have seized on Mr. Reid's comments as being emblematic of Liberal arrogance and unwillingness to trust individual Canadians to make wise spending choices.

The Liberals are trying to replace parents with the hand of government, Mr. Harper said, whereas Conservatives believe in giving tax dollars back to parents and trusting them to decide how to spend it.

"So many Liberal programs are targeted at large organizations," Mr. Harper said. "We want ordinary families to understand the benefits to them."

The Conservatives rolled out a child-care plan last week that would give parents of preschool children an annual $1,200 per child to spend as they see fit.

Mr. Reid tried to explain on CBC News: Sunday the difference between that approach — which he broke down to $25 a week —and the Liberal plan to establish a national child-care system.

"Working families need care," he said. "They need care that is regulated, safe and secure and that's what we're building here. Don't give people $25 a week to blow on beer and popcorn. Give them child-care spaces that work."

Their real worry isn’t beer and popcorn, it’s that people might spend it on private healthcare.


Posted by kevin_whited at 11:09 AM

WHY LET CIVILIANS RUN THE MILITARY?

Political pullout (Ralph Peters, New York Post, 12/12/2005)

Republicans are frightened of losing seats on the Hill. Despite all their lofty rhetoric, they just may be willing to gamble away Iraq's future in order to say, "Look, ma! Only 75,000 troops left in Iraq!"

We don't need any more premature declarations of "Mission accomplished."

If the situation warrants a swift reduction, that's great. But decisions on troop strength must be made by military commanders with Iraqi dust on their boots. None of us wants to hear Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld putting words in soldiers' mouths again. Trust the troops, not the mandarins.

Peters is a much more effective columnist when he doesn't let his personal hatred of Secretary Rumsfeld cloud his judgment and writing.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:05 AM

MAGGIE WINS:

Clarke attacks Cameron's European 'disaster' (George Jones and David Rennie, 12/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Kenneth Clarke claimed yesterday that David Cameron risked becoming the most extreme Eurosceptic ever to lead the Conservatives.

It only took them fifteen years to figure out EUphilia was a political, as well as existential, dead-end.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:59 AM

LIKUD DERANGEMENT SYNDROME:

Efforts Continue to Form Non-Sharon Government (Hillel Fendel, 12/12/05, INN)

Labor Party leader Amir Peretz says he will not cooperate with the attempts to have him head a 61-MK coalition with the Likud and thus postpone the elections to November. [...]

More likely is a Likud bid to support Amir Peretz of Labor. This would be a hard pill for Likud front-runner Binyamin Netanyahu to swallow, as he and Peretz have long been political rivals. Most recently, late last year, Peretz led a nationwide strike against then-Finance Minister Netanyahu's policies.

Netanyahu has not made his position clear, but Peretz said unequivocally today that he would not participate in "tricks" of this nature. "The Prime Minister must be chosen in the voting booth, and not by tricks," Peretz said.

However, others in Labor are not so sure. It is assumed that if Labor's poll showings continue to drop, the party will consider the option more seriously.

Likud MK Ayoub Kara said he would be willing to do "almost anything" in order to "send the Kadima Party to flounder and drown in the ocean" - including supporting Amir Peretz as Prime Minister until November.


At least they aren't pretending it's principled.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:57 AM

TCS DAILY:

Tech Central Station has a major relaunch today and it looks pretty snappy


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:39 AM

NOTHING COSTS MORE THAN IT USED TO:

Mario Kart and more come to McDonald's (Hiawatha Bray, December 12, 2005, Boston Globe)

At McDonald's restaurants across the country, the idea of playing with one's food has taken on a whole new meaning.

Look around on your next visit and you may notice that some of the guests are letting their french fries grow cold while they sit twitching and giggling, their fingers wrapped tightly around a silver-gray box.

You may have seen the box before. It's a Nintendo DS, the Japanese company's popular portable game machine. But you'll likely see a great many more of them at McDonald's in days to come.

That's because the DS contains WiFi wireless Internet technology that enables an owner to play electronic games with other DS owners anywhere in the world. All that's needed is a WiFi hot spot where the DS can log on to the Internet. And now, there are 6,000 such hot spots in McDonald's restaurants from coast to coast, part of a three-way deal between the hamburger titan, Nintendo, and Wayport, a wireless Internet company best known for serving hotels and airports.

Anybody with a WiFi device can use the McDonald's hot spots, for a sensible price -- $2.95 for two hours.


How long will $2.95 get you on the pay phone in the corner?


Posted by kevin_whited at 9:24 AM

BUT ISN'T THE DOLLAR WORTHLESS?

Counterfeiting Cases Point to North Korea: Pyongyang is accused of being behind a growing effort to print and move rafts of U.S. $100 bills (Josh Meyer and Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, 12/12/2005)

The counterfeiting operation began a quarter of a century ago, he recalled, at a government mint built into a mountain in the North Korean capital.

Using equipment from Japan, paper from Hong Kong and ink from France, a team of experts was ordered to make fake U.S. $100 bills, said a former North Korean chemist who said his job was to draw the design.

"The main motive was to make money, but the secondary motive was inspired by anti-Americanism," said the chemist, now 56 and living in South Korea.

Before long, sheets with 30 bills each were rolling off the printing presses. By 1989, millions of dollars' worth of high-quality fakes were showing up around the world. U.S. investigators dubbed them "supernotes" because they were virtually indistinguishable from American currency. The flow of forged bills has continued ever since, U.S. officials say, despite a redesign intended to make the cash harder to replicate.

They haven't shifted to production of the renminbi?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:04 AM

THOUGH WHO DIDN'T ROOT FOR BRUCE?:

The gay, the bad and the Israeli (Spengler, 12/13/05, Asia Times)

But no film of the first decade of the 21st century will flop as miserably as Spielberg's Munich, a "prayer for peace" derived from the 1972 terrorist attacks on Israeli athletes at the Olympic Games. Spielberg's theme, as he explained in the Time story, is the futility of the Israelis' subsequent retaliation.

Futility makes poor theater. If Spielberg had portrayed a moral equivalence between the great white shark and its hunters, Jaws would have bombed at the box office. American audiences sat on the edge of their seats waiting for Roy Scheider to wreak vengeance against the toothsome monster. Indiana Jones' enemies meet hideous deaths, to audience cheers. The director who made his reputation pandering to vengeful bloodlust now wants moviegoers to ponder the moral equivalences in war. Vengeance makes for good box office, as Aeschylus well knew. Moral ambiguity just wins the Pulitzer Prize (or in the case of Harold Pinter, the Nobel).

Speaking of the Pulitzer, noteworthy is Spielberg's choice of the world's worst playwright as screenwriter, namely Tony Kushner. Thanks to HBO, Kushner's Pulitzer-winning magnum opus Angels in America was played before the world by the likes of Meryl Streep and Dustin Hoffman. Kushner's "gay fantasia on political themes" waves placards and shouts slogans with the worst kind of agitprop didacticism. Kushner is not only gay, but also a Marxist. Of Jewish extraction, he despises Zionism.

Kushner identified with the Soviet Union until its collapse. Afterward he told an interviewer, "The collapse of the Soviet system does not mean that capitalism has succeeded ... Socialism is simply the idea that people are better off if we work collectively and that the economic system we live in is made by people and therefore can be controlled intelligently rather than let loose. There's no way that can't be true." [...]

It may seem incongruous for the liberal mainstream to set against the Bush administration a gay Marxist's view of the Middle East. In fact, Spielberg's transition from the world of Indiana Jones to the realm of Angels in America measures the miserable state of the liberal mainstream since September 11, 2001. Well may Americans disapprove of the president's poor handling of Iraq, but they are quite happy to slaughter their enemies when opportunity permits. Nor do they sit up nights worrying, like Kushner's fictional Mossad agents, about whether they might kill the wrong fellow on occasion.

If one disdains revealed truth as a relic of the barbaric past, one finds truth only in the "authentic" self-expression of every grouplet in the world. Gays become authentic by actualizing their own truth, along with African-Americans, Native Americans, Palestinians, or whatever band of sufferers might turn up with a grievance.

The more evidence accumulates that the "authenticity" of some groups centers on wreaking havoc on other groups, the more desperately liberal opinion clings to the illusion that the self-expression of each grouplet may be subject to universal reconciliation.


"Revealed truth" is, of course, redundant, but disdain for it is in fact why secularism is suicidal, destroying the basis of liberal society and delegitimizing its defense.


MORE:
Christian community in the shadow of Hegel, Nietzsche, and Fukuyama (Peter Sellick, 10/2/03, Online Opinion)

Francis Fukuyama's book The End of History and the Last Man draws heavily on the above authors to tell us that liberal democracy is the end point of political development. He attributes the movement towards liberal democracy to the equalitarian aspects of Christianity which proclaim that all are equal in the Kingdom of God. However, following Hegel, he argues that Christianity is the last great slave religion because the freedom that adherents are called to is cancelled when they bow their necks to an imaginary Lord who is none other than their own projection. Furthermore, he argues, along with Nietzsche, that the idea that all men are equal is a prejudice perpetrated by Christianity and an expression of the assertion of the weak against the strong. This has produced a fanaticism that strives to make all equal as witnessed by the programs of political correctness. Christians are thus the un-free compared to those liberated by the movements of secular liberalism. [....]

The old joke about Hegel is pertinent here: he explained all things except how we must get through the day. My recent reading of Walker Percy underlines this. Our science is able to explain the macrocosmic and the microcosmic but we find ourselves "left over". We must still struggle with the mystery of our own lives. Stable government may bring an end to war and revolution and establish a soft welfare net but the journey towards God, discovered in the ancient accounts and in our own lives must still be embarked upon. This is why the end of history in liberal democracy may not be likened to the end of history described so luridly and mysteriously in the book of Revelation in which Christ becomes all in all.

Hegel located the event that signalled the end of history as the battle of Jena in 1806 at which the basic principles of the liberal democratic state were seen in their full form although not in their universal application (we are not there yet). The church, on the other hand, proclaims a different date and event, the crucifixion of a wandering teacher by the Roman authorities in AD 30. This is the hinge of history from which there is no turning back that directs all events towards a culmination in the kingdom of God, that earthly reality in which human freedom and justice and peace will be complete. That would be a real end of history, not just the end of political evolution. It shares with Hegel's end of history the continuing tension of the now but not yet, of the end being seen in the present in an incomplete form yet glimmering on the horizon to beckon us on.

May we understand the establishment of liberal democracy as being a part of the journey towards the Kingdom? But then why not see the invention of penicillin or electrification or any number of technologies as being a part of our progression towards the Kingdom? We could well point to the materialism of Israel being the necessary precursor to scientific thought in a similar way that we point to the egalitarian content of Christianity being the precursor to the liberal democratic state.

The parable of the ferment of the yeast is apt here. The yeast remains invisible in the dough but produces the leavening that makes the bread delicious. Just so the gospel ferments in culture to produce good things. It is not there for itself but for the ferment that it produces.

So there is a way that we can see liberal democracy as a fruit of the gospel, but it is not the gospel itself. As such it is not any kind of end or telos. History or geography may still sweep Western culture away, even end the species. We would be mistaken to identify our cozy position in life with the kingdom. Such a conclusion would pre-empt the kingdom and close the future. It would also strengthen the hubris of the West. The establishment of liberal democracy does not end our waiting. For as John says in his first letter:

Beloved, we are God's children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. (1 John 3:2)

This is the arrow of history, this waiting and not knowing, this leaning into an unknown history to reveal what we already know in part that we will know in full.


The ease with which we can choose secular "liberation" from God's commands to us puts the lie to the notion that Judeo-Christianity is a form of slavery. Rather God grants us Free Will to either choose to conform to the good or instead sink into selfish evil and demonstrates His astonishing faith in us by assuming that we, or at least some considerable portion of us, will indeed choose well.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:49 AM

TT FILES:

Hillary Clinton Crafts Centrist Stance on War (Dan Balz, December 12, 2005, Washington Post)

At a time when politicians in both parties have eagerly sought public forums to debate the war in Iraq, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has kept in the shadows.

Clinton has stayed steadfastly on a centrist path, criticizing President Bush but refusing to embrace the early troop withdrawal options that are gaining rapid favor in her party. This careful balance is drawing increasing scorn from liberal activists, frustrated that one of the party's leading lights has shown little appetite to challenge Bush's policy more directly and embrace a plan to set a timetable for bringing U.S. forces home.

Clinton is confronting the Democratic Party's long-standing dilemma on national defense, with those harboring national ambitions caught between the passions of the antiwar left and political concerns that they remain vulnerable to charges of weakness from the Republicans if they embrace the party's base. But some Democrats say, the left not withstanding, her refusal to advocate a speedy exit from Iraq may reflect a more accurate reading of public anxiety about the choices now facing the country.


The instinct to triangulate is understandable and isn't going to get her in much trouble, but sometimes you have to place your bet with History. She could do herself a world of good in the 2008 general by being seen now as Scoop Jackson-like/Liebermanesque.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:46 AM

THEY CAN SWAP WHITE FLAGS WITH MURTHA AND PELOSI (via Robert Schwartz):

Iraqi insurgents urge Sunnis to vote, warn Zarqawi (Reuters, 12/11/05)

Saddam Hussein loyalists who violently opposed January elections have made an about-face as Thursday's polls near, urging fellow Sunni Arabs to vote and warning al Qaeda militants not to attack.

In a move unthinkable in the bloody run-up to the last election, guerrillas in the western insurgent heartland of Anbar province say they are even prepared to protect voting stations from fighters loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of al Qaeda in Iraq.

Graffiti calling for holy war is now hard to find.

Instead, election campaign posters dominate buildings in the rebel strongholds of Ramadi and nearby Falluja, where Sunnis staged a boycott or were too scared to vote last time around.

"We want to see a nationalist government that will have a balance of interests. So our Sunni brothers will be safe when they vote," said Falluja resident Ali Mahmoud, a former army officer and rocket specialist under Saddam's Baath party.

"Sunnis should vote to make political gains. We have sent leaflets telling al Qaeda that they will face us if they attack voters."


Haven't they heard they're winning?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:41 AM

EGALITIE FOR ME, NOT FOR THEE:

So much for égalité (LA Times, December 12, 2005)

AT THE TIME OF THE INVASION of Iraq, the idea of boycotting French products — freedom fries, anyone? — was all the rage among American conservatives. Well, maybe liberals around the world should soon issue their own call to boycott French products. That's because France, inexcusably, is blocking a global trade deal that would benefit the world's poor. [...]

The United States has plenty of trade-distorting farm subsidies and import quotas, but the European Union is the real villain here, thwarting any progress. While the Bush administration has made proposals that would dramatically overhaul Washington's support to American farmers, the European Union's trade negotiators made it clear before the Hong Kong meeting that they would not go beyond current proposals, which the rest of the world find laughably insufficient.

France's government considers even the current weak-kneed EU position too aggressive and is defiantly threatening to renege on any deal. Britain, the Netherlands and many other EU members have been struggling to roll back the unsustainable Common Agricultural Policy, which eats up nearly half the EU's budget, hurts the developing world and disproportionately benefits French farmers. But French President Jacques Chirac, a former agriculture minister, obstinately insists that he and then-German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder cut a deal in 2002 to freeze farm support in real terms until 2013. Never mind all those people around the world struggling to get by on $1 a day.

France plays a pivotal role in EU trade policy. It likes to think of itself as a champion of the developing world, but its posture in these trade talks belies that claim and is a moral stain on the nation.


Does one notice when a tatterdemalion patches a hole?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:09 AM

LOSING THE FATEFUL DISTINCTION:

Military Officer Tied to Killings Is Held by China (JOSEPH KAHN, 12/12/05, NY Times)

The commander of paramilitary forces who opened fire on villagers protesting land seizures has been detained by the authorities in connection with the shootings, an extraordinary response that suggested high-level concern over whether the crackdown was justified. [...]

The decision to detain any commander so soon after a shooting incident is rare in China.

Police and paramilitary commanders have limited autonomy to decide on the use of force against civilians and would generally need high-level approval before opening fire. Even if the commander acted on his own or gave inaccurate information to higher authorities before getting approval, however, security forces would generally be expected to close ranks and defend one of their own leaders rather than accept responsibility for mistaken killings.

It would be especially notable if the detained commander worked for the People's Armed Police, which was reported by villagers to have deployed troops in the area. Civilian government officials generally have no power to detain or bring charges against military officers. In many such cases, President Hu Jintao, who has the top civilian, military and Communist Party titles, might be expected to be consulted before conflicts between civilian and military officials could be resolved.

Since the large-scale killings to put down a democracy movement in Beijing in 1989, Chinese authorities have invested heavily in training and equipping riot police to suppress protests without the use of lethal force. Since that time, shootings of unarmed demonstrators have been unusual.

China had 74,000 mass incidents of unrest in 2004, according an a police tally. While some of them resulted in deaths and a few led to local declarations of martial law, very few involved police or paramilitary troops opening fire on civilians.


Communists above all have to recognize that regimes fall when they lose the will to open fire on those who oppose them.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:02 AM

REALISM MEANS ALWAYS BEING SURPRISED BY REALITY:

Degrees of optimism in Iraq: The latest survey of opinion in Iraq shows a degree of optimism at variance with the usual depiction of the country as one in total chaos. (Paul Reynolds, 12/12/05, BBC News)

The figures will provide evidence for supporters of the invasion and occupation to argue that the international media have got it wrong - that, despite everything, most Iraqis are wedded to a democratic future in a unified state and have faith it will come.

The findings are in line with the kind of arguments currently being deployed by President George W Bush.


Ever get the feeling the MSM is surprised when the sun comes up in the morning?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:58 AM

BEARING THE COST OF DRIVING:

A Future Free From Gridlock, For a Price: Toll Lane Network Swiftly Taking Form (Steven Ginsberg, December 12, 2005, Washington Post)

Motorists would drive on the Capital Beltway during rush hour at the mind-blowing rate of a mile a minute. Drivers would zip from Fredericksburg to Frederick without hitting a single traffic jam.

In this strange, new world, people would run errands whenever they pleased, vacationers would leave town without spending hours in traffic, and express bus service would be launched on the region's major commuter routes.

But these dream scenarios come with a cost: a toll as high as a dollar a mile in heavily traveled areas during peak times. A 56-mile commute between the Fredericksburg area and Washington could cost as much as $30 if a driver chose the traffic-free route, according to one analysis.

These 21st-century traveling possibilities are the result of fast-moving efforts in Virginia and Maryland to build a network of express toll lanes -- roads on which tolls increase when traffic levels rise to manage demand and prevent jams -- that would parallel nearly every major route in the Washington area. The existing routes would remain free -- and packed.


Just privatize the entire road network and business will impose the real costs of driving on drivers.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:48 AM

PRETTY SWEET DEAL:

Mars Hill Review is offering its first 25 issues on one cd for $55. Should even fit in a stocking....


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:26 AM

WHY DO YOU THINK HE GAVE US SCRABBLE AND CHARADES?

Pope: Life without sin does not mean life without fun (Nick Pisa, The Scotsman, December 9th, 2005)

Being good does not mean missing out on a good time or that you are boring, Pope Benedict XVI yesterday insisted.

The Pontiff sought to reassure the world's one billion Roman Catholics at a sermon in a packed St Peter's Basilica in Rome.

Since becoming Pope in April following the death of John Paul II, Pope Benedict has reinforced the Church's tough policy on birth control and abortion.

In the sermon yesterday, Pope Benedict said: "Man nurtures the suspicion that God, at the end of the day, takes something away from his life, that God is a competitor who limits our freedom and that we will be fully human only when we will have set Him aside.

"There emerges the suspicion that the person who doesn't sin at all is basically a boring person, that something is lacking in his life, the dramatic dimension of being autonomous, that the freedom to say 'no' belongs to real human beings. Man lives in the suspicion that the love of God creates a dependency and that it is necessary to get rid of this dependence and to be full of one's self."

Thank-you, Your Holiness, that needed to be said. The popular notion that the faithful lead circumscribed, boring lives is a great and destructive secular slander. Religious people know very well that their faith brings them not only the gifts of serenity, wisdom and grace, but also a rollicking good time. Although...



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:02 AM

THE CONSTITUTION SUFFICES:

In wartime, this lawyer has got Bush's back (Anne-Marie O'connor, December 12, 2005, LA Times)

As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attempts to lessen anger in Europe over reports that the CIA has operated secret prisons in European countries, it might not be the best time for [UC Berkeley law professor John Yoo, the author of a new book, "The Powers of War and Peace,"] to argue his contention that the Bush administration has the right to hold "enemy combatants" indefinitely without charges, and question them without a lawyer present, in wartime. Although even Rice seemed to reverse her administration's contention that the prohibition on cruel or inhumane prisoner interrogations didn't apply overseas, Yoo is still ardently opposed to such a ban, saying it could cripple the effectiveness of coercive interrogations abroad.

And even some of Yoo's fellow conservative intellectuals are disturbed by his contention that President Bush has the constitutional power to unilaterally start a war. [...]

Yoo doesn't employ the usual rationale for a strong Bush presidency. He says in his book that it is not the 9/11 terrorist attacks that justify the extraordinary presidential powers he advocates. In Yoo's view, the constitution itself gives the president lots of leeway, allowing him to invade Iraq without congressional permission and to disregard such treaties as the Geneva Convention, which governs the moral code of conduct of war.

"I'm pretty sure that's an argument no one has ever made before," Yoo, 38, said recently with evident pride. Most people, he said, "say the world's too dangerous and the Constitution's obsolete."


While he's unquestionably right that detainees have no constitutional rights, the fact that the Constitution itself expressly makes Treaties the law of the land makes just ignoring the Geneva Convention problematic. Rather we should break the treaty and any other that may infringe on our sovereignty, not least GATT.


MORE:
The International-Law Trap: What Europe thinks is “cruel, inhuman, and degrading” doesn’t govern us. (Andrew McCarthy, 12/12/05, National Review)

Who should decide what obligations the United States owes to the world? Who should determine what measures are necessary to protect the United States from attack? Should it be the American people or the European Commission? The American people or the United Nations? The American people or Human Rights Watch?

These are the questions at the heart of the controversy swirling around interrogation tactics. [...]

In remarks especially noteworthy because State Department officials reportedly egged inquiring journalists on, Rice asserted without qualification that the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) "prohibits, of course, cruel, inhumane [sic] and degrading treatment." She further declared that " [a]s a matter of U.S. policy, [American] obligations under [UNCAT] ... extend to U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside of the United States." (Italics mine.)

Rice's statements were both wrong and extremely unwise. [...]

UNCAT came open for ratification in 1984. It targets two related but significantly distinct types of conduct: (a) torture, and (b) treatment that is "cruel, inhuman and degrading" (CID). The United States mulled UNCAT for a full decade before finally approving it under our Constitution's treaty procedure (Art. II, Sec. 2) by the required two-thirds super-majority of the Senate. That ratification treated torture and CID very differently.

That torture was the dominant American concern is illustrated by the care taken to define it. As recounted on NRO last Friday by Mark Levin (a Justice Department official during the Reagan administration), President Reagan's transmittal of UNCAT to the Senate expressly provided that the word torture was to be interpreted in a "relatively limited fashion, corresponding to the common understanding of torture as an extreme practice which is universally condemned." The State Department added that torture was "usually reserved for extreme, deliberate, and unusually cruel practices ... [such as] sustained systematic beating, application of electric currents to sensitive parts of the body, and tying up or hanging positions that cause extreme pain." It would not, State elaborated, envelop even such "deplorable" practices as "police brutality."

The order of the day was narrowness and the avoidance of loose language that could result in the unintended extension of American obligations to conduct that was not egregious enough to be considered torture. Thus UNCAT' specifically defined torture as involving the "intentional inflict[ion]" of "severe pain or suffering" to interrogate, punish, or intimidate a person. With that clear, the Senate ratified this part of UNCAT without qualification, and prompted the enactment of federal anti-torture statutes to support and carry out this treaty obligation.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 AM

FOOL ME ONCE...:

A Fantasy Realm Too Vile for Hobbits (DINITIA SMITH, 12/12/05, NY Times)

In the vast continent of Westeros, the alliance of the Seven Kingdoms is disintegrating. King Robert Baratheon has been murdered. A strange winter is descending on the countryside. Could this be another ice age?

Meanwhile, Queen Cersei is sleeping with her twin brother, Jaime, while their other brother, the cynical dwarf Tyrion Lannister, has gone into hiding. And the woman warrior, Brienne of Tarth, is searching for Sansa, who was married to Tyrion, and is a member of the House of Stark, daughter of Eddard, Lord of Winterfell.

And ... well, to keep track of it all it helps to have the 63-page list of characters at the back of George R. R. Martin's "Feast for Crows," the fourth and latest installment in his fantasy series, "A Song of Ice and Fire." [...]

Reviewing "Crows" in Time magazine, Lev Grossman called Mr. Martin "the American Tolkien," only better...[b]ut he has outdone Tolkien in at least one respect: "All three of 'The Lord of the Rings' books are the size of just one of my books."

"Crows" alone is 684 pages, not counting the appendix.


Reliable folks swear by him, but having gotten sucked into Robert Jordan's unending series, where by book four absolutely nothing was happening to advance the story, I swore never again to start a series until the author was done with it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

HELP A BROTHER OUT:

ESR's Tenth Annual Person of the Year (Enter Stage Right)

It's that time of year again! We want to know who you think made the biggest impact during 2005!

Last year's winner was none other than U.S. President George W. Bush (who made history by becoming the first four-time winner of our prize)...can he do it again? (See below for a complete list of winners.)

All you have to do is tell us their name and a few good reasons why you think your nominee should be named the ESR Person of the Year for 2005. Only one entry per person. Nominations will be accepted until December 31, 2005 and the results will be posted January 2, 2006.


It's not really an open question. To an extent that's rather rare in human history, nearly the entire world is defined by how it acts with or reacts to just one man, George W. Bush.


December 11, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:25 PM

20%?:

Key Iraqi sees loose alliance as future (Rick Jervis, 12/11/05, USA TODAY)

A future Iraq should consist of semi-autonomous regions that share the country's oil wealth, the top contender to become the next prime minister said ahead of Thursday's parliamentary elections.

Adel Abdul Mahdi, 63, Iraq's vice president and a member of the ruling Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), described a post-election Iraq with a less powerful central government. U.S. and other Iraqi officials favor tight control in Baghdad to maintain national unity.


The election is about federalism, not unity. When the Sunni see how little power they'd have in a democratic Iraq they'll be forced to realize that their best interests are served by a separation from the Kurdish north and Shi'a south. They'll likely still be a minority in a central state, but a powerful one.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:02 PM

RENDERING UNTO THE RENDERERS:

The presidency & faith (Jimmy Carter, 12/11/05, USA Today)

As did all presidents, I carried my own religious faith and moral values to my duties in Washington, with the realization that there might be some potential conflicts between my personal beliefs and my official duties, which I swore before God to perform in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States of America. The ultimate legal interpretations of these laws, of course, are made by the U.S. Supreme Court. In general, the moral values of our country are the same as those of all the major religions and even of most individuals who may be agnostics or atheists. [...]

The only potential conflict between my personal beliefs and my official duties was with abortion. I have never thought that Jesus Christ would approve of abortions unless, perhaps, the mother's life or health were endangered, or the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. However, being willing to accept the Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade, I did everything possible to reduce the desire for abortions. [...]

All Christians will remember Jesus' admonition to "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's"...


There can hardly be a more unAmerican/anti-JudeoChristian notion than that Caesar is entitled the 45 million victims of Roe. Life is God's, not Caesar's.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 9:08 PM

GAYS 1 CHILDREN 0

Police warn author over gay comments (Sally Pook, The Telegraph, December 12th, 2005)

An author and broadcaster condemned as "sinister" yesterday an inquiry conducted by police over comments she made about homosexuals on a live radio programme.

Lynette Burrows, an author on children's rights and a family campaigner, took part in a discussion on the Victoria Derbyshire show on Radio Five Live about the new civil partnerships act.

During the programme, she said she did not believe that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt. She added that placing boys with two homosexuals for adoption was as obvious a risk as placing a girl with two heterosexual men who offered themselves as parents. "It is a risk," she said. "You would not give a small girl to two men."

A member of the public complained to the police and an officer contacted Mrs Burrows the following day to say a "homophobic incident" had been reported against her.

"I was astounded," she said. "I told her this was a free country and we are allowed to express opinions on matters of public interest. She told me it was not a crime but that she had to record these incidents.

"They were leaning on me, letting me know that the police had an interest in my views. I think it is sinister and completely unacceptable."



Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:35 PM

BRITAIN’S BOLTON

Crikey! FO speaks truth about Europe (David Cracknell, The Times, December 12th, 2005)

A senior British ambassador has lambasted our European Union partners in undiplomatic language, blaming them for farm subsidies that “bloat” rich French landowners, “pump up food prices” and create poverty in Africa.

In an e-mail to colleagues seen by The Sunday Times, Charles Crawford, the ambassador to Poland, mocks “mon ami” Jacques Chirac and the Poles for selfishly blocking Tony Blair’s attempts to secure a face-saving deal on the European budget.

His sardonic tone will embarrass Blair as he seeks to reach agreement this week at a key summit. Some will see his exasperation as revealing what ministers privately think.

Crawford says that Britain has created more jobs for Poles in Britain than the Polish government since EU membership was extended to another 10 countries last year. He visualises Blair or Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, telling the new member states that the UK wants to help them, despite their “rudeness and ingratitude”. [...]

Much of it represents Crawford’s blackly humorous opinions on what Blair should tell other European ministers. He suggests putting a children’s alarm clock on the conference table and giving delegates an hour to accept Britain’s offer.

If it is not accepted, he suggested, Britain would be able to walk away with its rebate intact. It would then be able to use money that it was prepared to deduct from its rebate to fund projects directly in former eastern bloc countries.

Crawford estimates that it would be equivalent to twice as much spent through the EU and that Britain’s help would go much further, faster and more efficiently to the countries concerned. There will not be the loss of money in “all the bollocky EU bureaucracy” and “sticky transaction costs, local and Brussels corruption, overheads and other rubbish”.

Crawford describes the common agricultural policy (CAP) as “the most stupid, immoral state-subsidised policy in human history, give or take communism”.

Worth framing, that last bit.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:23 PM

DANG BIG NICHE:

`Narnia' turns fantasy into hard cash with $67.1 million (DAVID GERMAIN, 12/11/05, Associated Press)

Another fantasy world has joined Hollywood's instant-blockbuster club.

Disney's "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" - adapted from C.S. Lewis' tale of enchantment, epic battles and talking animals - debuted as the weekend's top movie with $67.1 million, according to studio estimates Sunday. [...]

"Chronicles of Narnia" follows the "Harry Potter" and "The Lord of the Rings" films as the latest fantasy franchise making the leap from book to screen courtesy of dazzling computer animation to create its legions of creatures.

The three "Lord of the Rings" movies had respective debuts of $47.2 million, $62 million and $72.6 million. The first three "Harry Potter" flicks each opened in the $90 million range, with the fourth film, "Goblet of Fire," debuting in November with $102 million.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:10 PM

EVERYBODY PRETEND TO BE SURPRISED:

Iran's leader drawing fire: President Ahmadinejad is proving too radical even for some Iranian conservatives. (Scott Peterson, 12/12/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

While Iran's parliament is dominated by conservatives, analysts say that Ahmadinejad can only count on one-quarter of the votes. The parliament rejected his first three inexperienced candidates for oil minister - an unprecedented setback for a new president here. [...] Now some in parliament are trying to unseat his defense minister over the military plane crash that killed 108 people last week.

"The fundamentalists criticize [Ahmadinejad] because they don't want a bad situation to get worse," says Mohammad Ali Ayazi, a cleric and professor at the prestigious seminary in Iran's religious center of Qom. "The more [Ahmadinejad's cabinet] do not satisfy the promises they made, the criticism will increase toward them," says Mr. Ayazi. The president's [populist] election slogans "have less color now; it's not the same. Maybe after six months, they will have no color at all."


At this rate even the MSM won't act shocked when the Guardian Council sacks him.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:37 PM

DO BIOLOGY CLASSES HAVE TO DWELL ON EUGENICS AND NAZISM? (via Kevin Whited)

A new book tries to teach the Bible's role in culture without preaching religion. It doesn't quite succeed (Houston Chronicle, 12/11/05)

One of the few things both sides of the religion-in-schools debate agree on is that studying the Bible has its merits. [...]

A new book, The Bible and Its Influence...[c]ommissioned for $2 million by a nonprofit group called the Bible Literacy Project, [i]s the first Bible textbook ever written to conform to the First Amendment. Its publishers consulted 41 reviewers, including the nonprofit First Amendment Center, the American Jewish Congress and the National Association of Evangelicals.

Meant to give a neutral tool for teaching a keystone of Western culture, the project very nearly works.

The book includes color illustrations, discussions of The Matrix and Handel's Messiah, and studies of the Bible's influence on social activists from Martin Luther King Jr. to Cesar Chavez. It sidesteps contested questions. "Scholars and faithful readers differ on the date and author of Genesis," the text notes, leaving it at that.

Admirably, the book also states students' First Amendment rights in the first pages. "You are going to study the Bible academically, not devotionally," it reads. "You will not be pressed into accepting religion ... you will not be engaged in the practice of religion."

Even so, the textbook includes a few of the biases its authors tried so hard to fight. It doesn't mention that the Bible's influence has not always been positive.


Entirely typical, if unintentionally hilarious, that they think the First Amendment requires that students be taught that religion is pernicious.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:30 PM

HER YOU COULD SEE SCHIAVOING (via Brian Boys):

Foreign Accent syndrome baffles medical experts (STEVE PAUL, 12/10/05, The Kansas City Star)

Cindy Langdon spent the weekend in bed. She felt nauseous, and the words tumbling out of her mouth had nothing to do with what she was trying to say. It was frightening. And before this Memorial Day weekend was over, her son took her to the hospital.

Langdon, a healthy, active woman of 51, had had a stroke. And like many people who suffer strokes, her life since that weekend in May 2002 hasn't been quite the same.

She doesn't run for exercise anymore; her weakened right arm keeps her off the tennis court.

And - most puzzling to her and others - when she speaks, her voice sounds like she comes from France.

The accent is rather odd for a woman who grew up in Missouri. And it's still much a mystery even to scientists who have studied cases similar to Langdon's.

Langdon is among only a couple of dozen known cases of people who developed what's been labeled Foreign Accent syndrome./blockquote>
Or at least I'd want to be put out of that misery.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:22 PM

JIMMY CARTER REDUX (via David Hill, The Bronx):

Democrats Test Themes for `06 and `08 (RON FOURNIER, December 11, 2005, AP)

Democrats believe they can put Republicans on the defensive by articulating the public's sense of malaise and offering hope to erase it.

Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean has commissioned confidential polling and analysis that suggest candidates in 2006 and 2008 should frame their policies — and attacks on Republicans — around the context of community.

It seems to be the emerging message from a party that has been bereft of one.

"What's happening in this country is we're losing our sense of common purpose," Vilsack told Florida Democrats. "We're losing a sense of community."


Democrats aren't wrong that running on community is a good idea in America, just delusional in thinking that higher taxes, more government programs, secularism, and defeatist isolationism are what's meant by community and the American purpose.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:20 AM

SOVEREIGNTY REDEFINED:

The Promise of Democratic Peace: Why Promoting Freedom Is the Only Realistic Path to Security (Condoleezza Rice, December 11, 2005, Washington Post)

President Bush outlined the vision for it in his second inaugural address: "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." This is admittedly a bold course of action, but it is consistent with the proud tradition of American foreign policy, especially such recent presidents as Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan. Most important: Like the ambitious policies of Truman and Reagan, our statecraft will succeed not simply because it is optimistic and idealistic but also because it is premised on sound strategic logic and a proper understanding of the new realities we face.

Our statecraft today recognizes that centuries of international practice and precedent have been overturned in the past 15 years. Consider one example: For the first time since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, the prospect of violent conflict between great powers is becoming ever more unthinkable. Major states are increasingly competing in peace, not preparing for war. To advance this remarkable trend, the United States is transforming our partnerships with nations such as Japan and Russia, with the European Union, and especially with China and India. Together we are building a more lasting and durable form of global stability: a balance of power that favors freedom.

This unprecedented change has supported others. Since its creation more than 350 years ago, the modern state system has always rested on the concept of sovereignty. It was assumed that states were the primary international actors and that every state was able and willing to address the threats emerging from its territory. Today, however, we have seen that these assumptions no longer hold, and as a result the greatest threats to our security are defined more by the dynamics within weak and failing states than by the borders between strong and aggressive ones.

The phenomenon of weak and failing states is not new, but the danger they now pose is unparalleled. When people, goods and information traverse the globe as fast as they do today, transnational threats such as disease or terrorism can inflict damage comparable to the standing armies of nation-states. Absent responsible state authority, threats that would and should be contained within a country's borders can now melt into the world and wreak untold havoc. Weak and failing states serve as global pathways that facilitate the spread of pandemics, the movement of criminals and terrorists, and the proliferation of the world's most dangerous weapons.

Our experience of this new world leads us to conclude that the fundamental character of regimes matters more today than the international distribution of power. Insisting otherwise is imprudent and impractical. The goal of our statecraft is to help create a world of democratic, well-governed states that can meet the needs of their citizens and conduct themselves responsibly in the international system.


Precisely the argument of our book: for its sovereignty to be recognized as legitimate a regime must be liberal democratic or we, as we always have, reserve the right to intervene on behalf of the liberty of its people.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:15 AM

WE NEED THEM MORE THAN THEY NEED US:

A Hispanic work wave (Miguel Llanos, 12/08/05, MSNBC)

The color of Hancock County is changing. To the blue roof tarps and white FEMA trailers, add this: brown workers.

It’s a trend seen across Katrina country as Hispanics who worked in construction in other parts of the United States were drawn by the prospect of good money.

In this town and neighboring Waveland, the pre-Katrina demographics had been 80 percent white, 15 percent African American and less than 2 percent Hispanic. Since Katrina, however, Hispanics are very visible at the few restaurants now open and especially at the largest debris removal sites.

Workers like Osmin, a Honduran who had lived for years in California before seeking his fortune from Katrina. He acts as the foreman of a group of fellow Hondurans hired to remove debris, drywall and sheetrock from a Bay St. Louis school. [...]

Many of these Hispanic workers are in the country illegally, which means they fly under the radar of social services and employment centers.

But they have become a critical part of the workforce, filling in a gap that most locals are unable or unwilling to deal with.

“The need far outweighs the help that’s available,” says Tee McCovey, a Mississippi Department of Employment Services supervisor. “And it will be like that for years.”

MORE:
Americans Still Aren't Rushing to Take Some Jobs (Ruben Navarrette Jr., 12/11/05, Real Clear Politics)

The minute I saw the harrowing video of the scaffold caught up in high winds and crashing into a Denver office building 12 stories above the ground -- with two terrified window washers hanging on for dear life -- I just knew that when the time came to get the men's statements, we'd need a translator who spoke Spanish.

Maybe it's because Denver is one of those U.S. cities with a substantial immigrant population, both legal and illegal. Or because this looked precisely like the type of job that immigrant-bashers insist that Americans are eager to do -- dirty, distasteful and sometimes dangerous.

Maybe it was because of what I saw one afternoon a couple of years ago outside the 72-story Bank of America Plaza building in downtown Dallas. Coming back from lunch, I noticed what seemed to be two Mexican immigrant men getting instructions from a third man through an interpreter. The two men were tied to a harness and had cleaning supplies. It was obvious that they were window washers, and that they were headed straight up.

As I walked away, I remember thinking that this episode was positive proof of two things -- that immigrants will do just about anything, and that I'm no immigrant. Washing windows while dangling 70 stories off the ground? Not me. No thanks. Not at any price.

Still, someone has to do those jobs. That's where immigrants come in.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:06 AM

MAY AS WELL FINISH WHAT HE STARTED:

Red Sox discussing Clemens (Nick Cafardo, Globe Staff | December 11, 2005, Boston Globe)

The Red Sox have communicated with Roger Clemens's agents, the Hendricks brothers, over the past few days to express their interest in the future Hall of Famer if he elects to play in 2006.

Clemens, who was not offered salary arbitration by the Houston Astros, was informed of the contact, and sources close to Clemens said the pitcher reacted positively to the scenario of a return to Boston. [...]

In an interview with the pitcher during the playoffs, Clemens spoke fondly about Boston and the many friends he still has in the area.

''Here I am, still pitching," Clemens said in October. ''Debbie and I were looking forward to the day where we could just go up to my old neighborhood [Framingham] and just hang out with some of our friends up there. Maybe go to a few games at Fenway. Same in New York. Just grab five or six of your close friends up there and go out to eat and see a ballgame.

''But here I am, still pitching."

Clemens is 341-172 lifetime with a 3.12 ERA in 672 games and 4,502 strikeouts. Last season, he went 13-8 with a league-low 1.87 ERA and likely would have won his eighth Cy Young Award had Astros hitters supported him better.

He is 100-55 with a 3.19 ERA in 199 starts at Fenway and 53-22 with a 3.55 ERA in 101 starts at Yankee Stadium.

At 42, Clemens still pitched 211 innings and made 32 starts, striking out 185 and walking 62. He was bothered by back and hamstring problems late in the season and into postseason.

The Astros feared Clemens's salary ($18 million last season) would likely increase in arbitration and the team would not be able to offer more than $15 million.

Another Sox link for Clemens would be Boston's offseason addition of his former teammate, Al Nipper, as bullpen coach. Clemens and Nipper remain close friends.

Sox pitchers Curt Schilling and Josh Beckett have idolized Clemens, and Tim Wakefield is a holdover from Clemens's tenure with the team, which ended after the 1996 season.

The Sox also have had contact with Clemens's Houston batterymate, Brad Ausmus, about coming aboard as a backup to replace Doug Mirabelli.

Ausmus, who is from Connecticut and has a home on Cape Cod, is still negotiating with the Astros and would prefer to remain in Houston as a starter, but so far the numbers haven't worked to his satisfaction.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:00 AM

DEMOCRATS VS. BLACKS:

Home Schools Are Becoming More Popular Among Blacks (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, 12/11/05)

The move toward home schooling, advocates say, reflects a wider desire among families of all races to guide their children's religious upbringing, but it also reflects concerns about other issues like substandard schools and the preservation of cultural heritage.

"About 10 years ago, we started seeing more and more black families showing up at conferences, and it's been steadily increasing since then," said Michael Smith, president of the Home School Legal Defense Association, a national advocacy group. [,,,]

To help guide black families though home schooling, Joyce Burges and her husband, Eric, started the National Black Home Educators Resource Association in 2000.

Ms. Burges said many black families were unaware that home schooling was a legal option. But she said that she and other blacks who school their children at home had been considered turncoats by people who think they have turned their backs on the struggle by blacks to gain equal access to public education.

Still, she said, when schools are not teaching children to read, or are failing to provide a safe place to learn, the children should come first.

"You do what you have to do that your children get an excellent education," she said. "Don't leave it up to the system."


Educational choice and Christianity are the hammers with which the GOP can crack the Democrats grip on blacks.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:52 AM

IDIOTIC SUPERGENIUSES:

Was Focus of Patriot Act Debate a Dodge?: The 'library provision' took center stage, but critics say subpoena-like national security letters, widely used by the FBI, deserve greater scrutiny. (Richard B. Schmitt, December 11, 2005, LA Times)

Although focus has been on extending the act, the library provision has turned out to be rarely used by authorities. Instead, the tool of choice for federal agents has been a more obscure measure, a form of administrative subpoena known as a national security letter.

Unlike the library provision, national security letters have been used thousands of times, although that fact has until very recently been virtually lost amid the intense discussions on renewing the controversial law.

The kinds of information the government can obtain through national security letters includes requiring telephone companies, Internet service providers, banks, credit bureaus and other businesses to produce often comprehensive and detailed records about their customers or subscribers.

Some critics of the Patriot Act, which was first approved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, wonder whether members of Congress and the Bush administration essentially manipulated the debate in part by selectively releasing data about the government's use of various sections of the law. They also wonder whether fuller disclosure could have aided the cause of critics and resonated more with the public.

"The focus on [the library provision] turned out to be a gift for the Justice Department," said Peter Swire, a law professor at Ohio State University and critic of the Patriot Act.


How can academics, intellectuals, and other liberal activists be so much smarter than conservative hacks and still get their keisters handed to them every time?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:52 AM

WHO ASKED YA?:

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was bon on this day in 1918, in in Kislovodsk, Russia. Like any great prophet, he's been reviled as much in the West as he ever was in USSR for bluntly telling us the truth about our own flaws. Everyone will be familiar with the Harvard Commencement Address that alienated the Left, but it's sentiments like these that estranged the economic Right:
Bring God Back Into Politics (Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, translated into English by Yermolai Solzhfnitsyn, NPQ: Fall 2000)

What is the role, the justifiable and necessary share, of morality in politics?

Erasmus believed politics to be an ethical category, and called on it to manifest ethical impulses. But of course that was in the 16th century.

And then came our Enlightenment, and by the 18th century, we had learned from John Locke that it is inconceivable to apply moral terms to the state and its actions. And politicians, who throughout history were so often free of burdensome moral constraints, had thus obtained something of an added theoretical justification. Moral impulses among statesmen had always been weaker than political ones, but in our time the consequences of their decisions have grown in scale.

Moral criteria applicable to the behavior of individuals, families and small circles can certainly not be transferred on a one-to-one basis to the behavior of states and politicians: there is no exact equivalence, as the scale, the momentum and the tasks of governmental structures introduce a certain deformation. States, however, are led by politicians, and politicians are ordinary people, whose actions have an impact on other ordinary people. Moreover, the fluctuations of political behavior are often quite removed from the imperatives of state. Therefore, any moral demands imposed by us on individuals, such as understanding the difference between honesty, baseness and deception, between magnanimity, goodness, avarice and evil, must to a large degree be applied to the politics of countries, governments, parliaments and parties.

In fact, if state, party and social policy will not be based on morality, then mankind has no future to speak of. The converse is true: If the politics of a state or the conduct of an individual is guided by a moral compass, this turns out to be not only the most humane, but in the long run the most prudent behavior for ones own future.

Among the Russian people, for one, this concept, understood as an ideal to be aimed for, and expressed by the term truth (pravda) and the phrase to live by the truth (zhit' po pravde), has never been extinguished. And even at the murky end of the 19th century, the Russian philosopher Vladimir Solovyov insisted that from a Christian point of view moral and political activity are tightly linked, that political activity must not be anything but moral service, whereas a politics motivated by the mere pursuit of interests lacks any Christian content whatsoever.

Alas, in my homeland today these moral axes have fallen into even greater disuse than in the West, and I recognize the present vulnerability of my position in passing such judgements. When, in what had been the USSR, seven decades of appalling pressure were followed by the sudden and wide-open unchecked freedom to act, in circumstances of all-around poverty, the result was that many were swept down the path of shamelessness, with the unbridled adoption of the worst features of human behavior. It must be noted in this connection that annihilation was not visited upon people in our country in a purely random fashion, but was directed at those with outstanding mental and moral qualities. And so the picture in Russia today is bleaker and more savage than if it were simply the result of the general shortcomings of our human nature.

But let us not partition the misfortune between countries and nations - the misfortune is for all of us to share, as we stand at the end of Christianity's second millennium. Moreover, should we so lightly fling about this term - morality? [...]

THE ETERNAL QUESTIONS REMAIN

It is up to us to stop seeing Progress (which cannot be stopped by anyone or anything) as a stream of unlimited blessings, and to view it rather as a gift from on high, sent down for an extremely intricate trial of our free will.

The gifts of the telephone and the television, for instance, when used without moderation, have fragmented the wholeness of our time, jerking us from the natural flow of our life. The gift of lengthened life expectancy has, as one of its consequences, made the elder generation into a burden for its children, while dooming the former to a lingering loneliness, to abandonment in old age by loved ones, and to an irreparable rift from the joy of passing on their experience to the young.

Horizontal ties between people are being severed as well. With all the seeming effervescence of political and social life, alienation and apathy toward others have grow stronger in human relations. Consumed in their pursuit of material interests, people find only an overwhelming loneliness. (It is this that gave rise to the howl of existentialism.) We must not simply lose ourselves in the mechanical flow of Progress, but strive to harness it in the interests of the human spirit; not to become the mere playthings of Progress, but rather to seek or expand ways of directing its might toward the perpetration of good.

Progress was understood to be a shining and unswerving vector, but it turned out to be a complex and twisted curve, which has once more brought us back to the very same eternal questions which had loomed in earlier times, except that then facing these questions was easier for a less distracted, less disconnected mankind.

We have lost the harmony with which we were created, the internal harmony between our spiritual and physical being. We have lost that clarity of spirit which was ours when the concepts of Good and Evil had yet to become a subject of ridicule, shoved aside by the principle of fifty-fifty,

And nothing speaks more of the current helplessness of our spirit, of our intellectual disarray, than the loss of a clear and calm attitude toward death. The greater his well-being, the deeper cuts the chilling fear of death into the soul of modern man. This mass fear, a fear the ancients did not know, was born of our insatiable, loud and bustling life. Man has lost the sense of himself as a limited point in the universe, albeit one possessing free will. He began to think himself the center of his surroundings, not adapting himself to the world, but the world to himself. And then, of course, the thought of death becomes unbearable: It is the extinction of the entire universe at a stroke.

Having refused to recognize the unchanging Higher Power above us, we have filled that space with personal imperatives, and suddenly life becomes a harrowing prospect indeed. [...]

Although the earthly ideal of socialism-communism has collapsed, the problems, which it putported to solve, remain: the brazen use of social advantage and the inordinate power of money, which often direct the very course of events. And if the global lesson of the 20th century does not serve as a healing inoculation, then the vast red whirlwind may repeat itself in entirety.

The cold war is over, but the problems of modern life have been laid bare as immensely more complex than what had hitherto seemed to fit into the two dimensions of the political plane. The former crisis of the meaning of life and the former spiritual vacuum (which during the nuclear decades had even deepened from neglect) stand out all the more. In the era of the balance of nuclear terror this vacuum was somehow obscured by the illusion of attained stability on the planet, a stability which has proved to be only transitory. But now the former implacable question looms all the clearer: What is our destination?

ON THE EVE OF THE 21ST CENTURY

Today we are approaching a symbolic boundary between centuries, and even millennia: less than eight years separate us from this momentous juncture. Which, in the restless spirit of modern times will be proclaimed a year early, not waiting until the year 2001.

Who among us does not wish to meet this solemn divide with exultation and in a ferment of hope? Many thus greeted the 20th, as a century of elevated reason, in no way imagining the cannibalistic horrors that it would bring. Only Dostoyevsky, it seems, foresaw the coming of totalitarianism.

The 20th century did not witness a growth of morality in mankind. Exterminations, on the other hand, were carried out on an unprecedented scale, culture fell sharply, the human spirit declined. (Although the 19th century, of course, did much to prepare this outcome.) So what reason have we to expect that the 21st century, one bristling with first-class weaponry on all sides, will be kinder to us?

And then there is environmental ruin. And the global population explosion. And the colossal problem of the Third World, still called that in quite an inadequate generalization. It constitutes four-fifths of modern mankind, and soon will make up five-sixths, thus becoming the most important component of the 21st century. Drowning in poverty and misery, it will, no doubt, soon step forward with an ever-growing list of demands to the advanced nations. (Such thoughts were in the air as far back as the dawn of Soviet communism. It is little known, for example, that in 1921 the Tatar nationalist and communist Sultan Gallev called for the creation of an International of colonial and semicolonial nations, and for the establishment of its dictatorship over the advanced industrial states.)

Today, looking at the growing stream of refugees bursting through all the European borders, it is difficult for the West not to see itself as something of a fortress: a secure one for the time being, but dearly one besieged. And in the future, the growing ecological crisis may alter the climatic zones, leading to shortages of fresh water and suitable land in places where they were once plentiful. This, in rum, may give rise to new and menacing conflicts on the planet, wars for survival.

A complex balancing act thus arises before the West: To maintain a full respect for the entire precious pluralism of world cultures and for their search for distinct social solutions, at the same time not to lose sight of its own values, its historically unique stability of civic life under the rule of lawa hard-won stability which grants independence and space to every private citizen.

SELF-LIMITATION

The time is urgently upon us to limit our wants. It is difficult to bring ourselves to sacrifice and self-denial, because in political, public and private life we have long since dropped the golden key of self-restraint to the ocean floor. But self-limitation is the fundamental and wisest stop of a man who has obtained his freedom. It is also the surest path toward its attainment. We must not wait for external events to press harshly upon us or even topple us; we must take a conciliatory stance and through prudent self-restraint learn to accept the inevitable course of events.

Only our conscience, and those close to us, know how we deviate from this rule in our personal lives. Examples of deviations from this course by parties and governments are in full view of all.

When a conference of the alarmed peoples of the Earth convenes in the face of the unquestionable and imminent threat to the planet's environment and atmosphere (at the Rio Earth Summit in 1991), a mighty power, one consuming not much less than half of the Earth's currently available resources and emitting half of its pollution, insists, because of its present-day internal interests, on lowering the demands of a sensible international agreement, as though it does not itself live on the same earth. Then other leading countries shirk from fulfilling even these reduced demands. Thus, in an economic race, we are poisoning ourselves.

Similarly, the breakup of the USSR along the fallacious Lenin-drawn borders has provided striking examples of newborn formations, which, in the pursuit of great power imagery, rush to occupy extensive territories that are historically and ethnically alien to diem, territories containing tens of thousands, or in some cases millions, of ethnically different people, giving no thought to the future, imprudently forgetting that taking never brings one to any good.

It goes without saying that in applying the principle of self-restraint to groups, professions, parties or entire countries, the ensuing difficult questions outnumber the answers already found. On this scale, all commitments to sacrifice and self-denial will have repercussions for multitudes of people who are perhaps unprepared for, or opposed to them. (And even the personal self-restraint of a consumer will have an effect on producers somewhere.)

And yet, if we do not learn to limit firmly our desires and demands, to subordinate our interests to moral criteria, we, humankind, will simply be torn apart as the worst aspects of human nature bare their teeth.

It has been pointed out by various thinkers many times (and I quote here the words of the 20th century Russian philosopher Nikolai Lossky): If a personality is not directed at values higher than the self, corruption and decay inevitably take hold. Or, if you will permit me to share a personal observation: We can only experience true spiritual satisfaction not in seizing, but in refusing to seize. In other words: in self-limitation.

Today self-limitation appears to us as something wholly unacceptable, constraining, even repulsive, because we have over the centuries grown unaccustomed to what for our ancestors had been a habit born of necessity. They lived with far greater external constraints, and had far fewer opportunities. The paramount importance of self-restraint has only in this century arisen in its pressing entirety before mankind. Yet taking into account even the various mutual links running through contemporary life, it is nonetheless only through self-restraint that we can, albeit with much difficulty, gradually cure both our economic and political life.

Today, not many will readily accept this principle for themselves. However, in the increasingly complex circumstances of our modernity, to limit ourselves is the only true path of preservation for us all.

And it helps bring back the awareness of a Whole and Higher Authority above us -and the altogether forgotten sense of humility before this entity.

There can be only one true Progress: the sum total of the spiritual progress of each individual, of the degree of self-perfection in the course of their lives.

We were recently entertained by a naive fable of the happy arrival at the "end of history," of the overflowing triumph of an all-democratic bliss; that, supposedly, the ultimate global arrangement has been attained.

But we all see and sense that something very different is coming, something new, and perhaps quite stern. No, tranquility does not promise to descend upon our planet, and will not be granted us so easily.

And yet, surely, we have not experienced the trials of the 20th century in vain. Let us hope: We have, after all, been tempered by these trials, and our hard-won firmness will in some fashion be passed on to the following generations.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:49 AM

C'MON, MAN, IT'S US VS. THEM:

China Defends Police Shooting of Villagers: Local authorities blame 'instigators,' saying the protesters threatened officers with explosives. (Mark Magnier, December 11, 2005, LA Times)

The Chinese government broke its silence Saturday on a deadly clash in southern China last week, insisting that police used deadly force only after a "few instigators" threatened them with explosives.

In the first official response since the incident late Tuesday, the state-run New China News Agency said three villagers were killed and eight wounded in the clash in the village of Dongzhou, in Guangdong province near Hong Kong.

In telephone interviews, locals said police killed as many as 20 farmers who were demanding compensation for land seized to build a wind power plant.

The official news agency, quoting authorities from the neighboring city of Shanwei, said police used tear gas to break up a mob of about 170 villagers armed with sticks, knives, steel spears and explosives in the hours before the fatal clash. The villagers' actions were "a serious violation of the law," the authorities said, promising an investigation.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:30 AM

100% CHANCE, 5% THIS WEEK:

Remembrance day: Kanan Makiya wants his fellow Iraqis to remember what Saddam Hussein did to them, and what they did to each other (Chris Berdik, December 11, 2005, Boston Globe)

Profiled in these pages in November 2002, [Kanan] Makiya was an outspoken and influential supporter of invading Iraq on moral grounds-to rid his native land of Hussein and strike a blow for democracy in a region long dominated by dictatorships and the Islamic extremism they spawned. Allied with the controversial Ahmed Chalabi, then head of the pro-war exile group the Iraqi National Congress and now a deputy prime minister of Iraq, Makiya had the ear of the White House, and in January 2003 he assured President Bush that Iraqis would greet American troops ''with sweets and flowers."

But nothing about post-invasion Iraq has been as simple as Makiya and others anticipated, and his argument for a liberal-democratic war has been severely tested. [...]

Over coffee recently in his Cambridge home, surrounded by books shelved from floor to ceiling, and with traces of the Memory Foundation's work sitting in file boxes marked ''documents" and ''oral histories," Makiya spoke of the prospects for a new Iraq and the importance of acknowledging the crimes of the past. A democratic Iraq, says Makiya, ''can only arise in a society that is aware of its own frailties and limitations-that is aware of what it did to itself."

IDEAS: Have your personal views of liberal intervention changed in the aftermath of the invasion?

MAKIYA: I got a number of things wrong, in retrospect. But calling for an intervention, a war, to unseat this regime in Iraq was not one of them. Among my mistakes were underestimating the Baath Party, underestimating the damage done by the sanctions, misjudging the extent to which the state institutions would survive.... But [Iraq] truly was 25 million people without a possibility of hope.... That situation needed a resolution.

In the run-up to the war, I was saying that even if there was just a 5 percent chance of success to build a democracy in Iraq, I thought it was a risk worth taking. Iraq may be a troubled country, may be a country going in all sorts of directions at once, but it is a country that is learning, like an infant in swaddling clothes, to walk in politics for the first time.

[The war] did not go in the facile and simple way that some of us may have painted in the run-up to the war. It turned out to be far more complicated. But that doesn't mean yet that we can make a judgment as to whether we were in error. It will take another generation to judge that in Iraq.

IDEAS: What do you believe is fueling the insurgency now?

MAKIYA: The insurgency is about an old order, that perhaps we underestimated before the war-people like myself underestimated it-that is now at war with the emergent order that was made possible by the US war and occupation of Iraq. At its essence [it] is about Iraqis fighting other Iraqis. It's an incipient civil war.


If universal liberal democracy were easily achieved it woiuldn't have taken us 6,009 years...and counting....


MORE:
Present at the Disintegration (KANAN MAKIYA, 12/11/05, NY Times)

WASHINGTON and Baghdad will be tempted, with the adoption of a new Constitution and the election on Thursday for a four-year government, to declare victory in Iraq. In one sense, they are right to do so. The emerging Iraqi polity undoubtedly represents a radical break not only with the country's past but also with the whole Arab state system established by Britain and France after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

But in the larger sense, such optimism is misguided, for none of the problems associated with Iraq's monumental change have been sorted out. Worse, profound tensions and contradictions have been enshrined in the Constitution of the new Iraq, and they threaten the very existence of the state.


What state? There is no such thing as Iraq and it should and likely will devolve back into three states. What elections will do is show the minority Sunni why this is in their best interest.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:24 AM

TOO UNIMPORTANT TO REMEMBER:

What Viveca Novak Told Fitzgerald (VIVECA NOVAK, 12/11/05, TIME)

Fitzgerald and I met in my lawyer's office on Nov. 10 for about two hours. Schuelke had told him I would discuss only my interactions with Luskin that were relevant to the conversation in question. No fishing expeditions, no questions about my other reporting or sources in the case. He agreed, telling my lawyer that he wanted to "remove the chicken bone without disturbing the body."

He asked how often Luskin and I met during the period from fall 2003 to fall 2004 (about five times), when, where and so forth. I had calendar entries that helped but weren't entirely reliable. Did I take notes at those meetings? No. Luskin was more likely to speak freely if he didn't see me committing his words to paper. Did Luskin ever talk to me about whether Rove was a source for Matt on the subject of Wilson's wife?

That was the "chicken bone" Fitzgerald had referred to, the conversation Luskin had told him about that got me dragged into the probe. Here's what happened. Toward the end of one of our meetings, I remember Luskin looking at me and saying something to the effect of "Karl doesn't have a Cooper problem. He was not a source for Matt." I responded instinctively, thinking he was trying to spin me, and said something like, "Are you sure about that? That's not what I hear around TIME." He looked surprised and very serious. "There's nothing in the phone logs," he said. In the course of the investigation, the logs of all Rove's calls around the July 2003 time period--when two stories, including Matt's, were published mentioning that Plame was Wilson's wife--had been combed, and Luskin was telling me there were no references to Matt. (Cooper called via the White House switchboard, which may be why there is no record.)

I was taken aback that he seemed so surprised. I had been pushing back against what I thought was his attempt to lead me astray. I hadn't believed that I was disclosing anything he didn't already know. Maybe this was a feint. Maybe his client was lying to him. But at any rate, I immediately felt uncomfortable. I hadn't intended to tip Luskin off to anything. I was supposed to be the information gatherer. It's true that reporters and sources often trade information, but that's not what this was about. If I could have a do-over, I would have kept my mouth shut; since I didn't, I wish I had told my bureau chief about the exchange. Luskin walked me to my car and said something like, "Thank you. This is important." Fitzgerald wanted to know when this conversation occurred. At that point I had found calendar entries showing that Luskin and I had met in January and in May. Since I couldn't remember exactly how the conversation had developed, I wasn't sure. I guessed it was more likely May. [...]

When Fitzgerald and I met last Thursday, along with another lawyer from his team, my attorney, a lawyer from Time Inc. and the court reporter, he was more focused. The problem with the new March date was that now I was even more confused--previously I had to try to remember if the key conversation had occurred in January or May, and I thought it was more likely May. But March was close enough to May that I really didn't know. "I don't remember" is an answer that prosecutors are used to hearing, but I was mortified about how little I could recall of what occurred when.

This meeting lasted about an hour and a half. As before, Fitzgerald was extremely pleasant, very professional, and he stuck to his pledge not to wander with his questions. Does what I remembered--or more often, didn't remember--of my interactions with Luskin matter? Will it make the difference between whether Rove gets indicted or not? I have no idea.


Note how every story that comes out indicates just how insignificant everyone thought the underlying matter -- Joe Wilson's real identity -- was?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:20 AM

YOU MEAN THEY WON'T JUMP INTO THE ABYSS?:

Native grounds: Many Europeans are asking whether they can ever emulate the American melting pot -- and whether the should. A letter from England. (Geoffrey Wheatcroft, December 11, 2005, Boston Globe)

America has always been a land of immigration-and until recently, or even now by European standards, of cheap labor. The explosive industrial development of the Gilded Age in the half century after the Civil War was fueled by British capital and by the labor of immigrants, peasants, and proletarians: men, women, and not least children, from all the corners of Europe. Employers in Massachusetts mill towns and Pennsylvania coal mines used those workers like machines, as expendable as any inanimate raw material.

But it worked after its fashion, and it worked because of work. To a remarkable degree, these incomers accepted the American gospel of equality through toil and dignity through reward.

Just how successful assimilation has been in America may be more clearly visible from outside. In 1988 I was taken to a press dinner in Washington at which President Reagan spoke. He gave what was no doubt a well-rehearsed set-piece speech: ''Every immigrant makes America more American," he said. You can't become an Englishman by going to live in England, or a Frenchman by going to live in France, ''but anyone can become an American." It may have been corny; I was moved almost to tears.

Indeed Reagan's words were truer than he may have realized, and even nomenclature is telling. A friend of mine was born and bred in Vienna before he left quickly and for good reason in 1938. Having spent the rest of his life in London and, in the fullness of time, as a subject of Her Majesty, he used to say drily, ''I've become British, but I know I can never become English." But anyone can become an American.

Modern Europe had no experience of large-scale immigration from outside the continent until after 1945. Just as the British were said to have acquired their empire in a fit of absence of mind, so postwar Europe acquired a large new immigrant population without really thinking about it-in the case of England, France, and Holland-as the legacy of empire.

Different countries already had different attitudes to the idea of nationhood: German identity was founded on the Volk (the people) and the French republican version was founded on the patrie, ethnic as opposed to civic nationalism. German immigration law, dating back a hundred years, has been well-nigh racial in inspiration. Anyone can claim German nationality who can prove German descent, but it was very difficult indeed for anyone else to ''become a German." [...]

Another French republican ideal was laicism: not the passive secularism of the First Amendment but an active, or even aggressive, hostility to religion. France may be said to have been evenhanded about this: Forbidding Muslim girls to wear headscarves to school is surely no harsher than closing monasteries and expelling Catholic religious orders, as the Third Republic did early last century. [...]

In England and Holland there has been another factor, what William Pfaff, the American columnist who writes from Paris, calls ''ghettoization through political correctness." People were encouraged to think of themselves as members of a specific community, black or Muslim, rather than as citizens of the country in which they lived.

That was the exact opposite of the American tradition, whereby immigrants were taught to identify with flag and constitution. It is more than significant that the Blair government has now deliberately adopted the American model. Those seeking British citizenship are for the first time expected to show some knowledge of British history and culture, and then take a pledge of allegiance to crown and country.

So can anyone become British after all? Norman Tebbit, who was one of Margaret Thatcher's key lieutenants has proposed a new version of traditional loyalty oaths or badges of identity, in the form of a ''cricket test." When brown-skinned boys, second- or third-generation British, from Bradford or Luton go to watch England play Pakistan, which side do they support? It was a trick question, and a mean one, since (as Lord Tebbit well knew) they are often seen at Headingley and Lord's supporting their ancestral rather than their native land.

That is not in truth a fair test. We all have multiple identities and mixed loyalties, national, religious, political, social.


Beeyond the blood and soil nationalism of the Europeans is their own abandonment of the Grecco-Roman/Judeo-Christian civilization of the West. How would people who believe in nothing assimilate newcomers, especially ones who believe in something quite powerful and compelling? It's the ferocious defense of ancient values in America that gives us enduring ideals to force immigrants to assimilate to, because we assimilate ourselves to them in every generation (well, except the Boomers).


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:18 AM

TV, NOT RADIO, PLEASE:

Anna has Rush on venom (MICHAEL O'KEEFFE, T.J. QUINN & FRANK ISOLA, 12/11/05, NY Daily News)

Is Anna Benson right-wing America's next great political commentator?

The wife of Mets pitcher Kris Benson opines on the important issues of our times on her Web site, AnnaBenson.net, sounding an awful lot like Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh - that is, if Hannity or Limbaugh were former strippers turned lad-mag models.

Anna B. takes no prisoners, for example, in an open letter to anti-war filmmaker Michael Moore: "You are a selfish, pathetic excuse for an American, and you can take your big fat ass over to Iraq and get your pig head cut off and stuck on a pig pole," she writes.

"Then, you can have your equally as-fat wife make a documentary about how loudly you squealed while terrorists were cutting through all the blubber and chins to get that 40-pound head off of you."

Then there's Benson's open letter to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals: "I wear fur. I wear dead rabbits and dead minks and dead anything that will keep me warm. I love it. I don't like to be cold, and nothing keeps me warmer than my dead animals. Between my furs and my shoes, I have a whole zoo in my closet. I also love to eat meat. I eat meat twice a day because I need the protein and soy gives me painful gas." [...]

Although Benson never seems reluctant to speak her mind, she actually believes people should shut up and get in line when it comes to President Bush. "I support the president and I support the troops in Iraq," she says. "I leave the politics to the politicians. I try to trust the politicians as much as possible."

Benson, however, has definitely ruled out running for office. "Honey," she says, "I got too much baggage."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:08 AM

STUBBORN ADHERENCE TO VISION BEING HIS CHIEF VIRTUE:

In Iraq, Bush Pushed For Deadline Democracy: Timeline Yields Constitutional Order, Not Peace (Peter Baker and Robin Wright, December 11, 2005, Washington Post)

A powerful debate was raging, officials now acknowledge, among the president's top advisers over postponing the Jan. 30 interim election in hopes of first tamping down the flaring insurgency and bringing disaffected factions to the table.

"There was a good debate in front of the president," recalled national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley. "It was a close question and if it had gone to consensus, I don't know how it would have come out."

Ultimately, it did not go to a consensus decision but to Bush, who opted to stick with the election, a decision with distinct costs and benefits as the United States labored to build a democratic government in Iraq from the ground up. When U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer transferred sovereignty to Iraqi authorities in June 2004, he left behind a script with hard-and-fast deadlines for drafting a constitution and forming a government, a script that culminates Thursday with another election for a permanent parliament.

The story of the 18-month process that unfolded after Bremer left Baghdad was one of steadfast fidelity to the script, as well as a costly period of U.S. inattention and endless frustrations with squabbling Iraqi leaders, according to a wide array of Bush advisers, Iraqi politicians and others involved in the effort. While Bush refuses to set a timetable for military withdrawal, he has stuck doggedly to the Bremer political timetable despite qualms of his staff, relentless violence on the ground and disaffection of Iraq's minority Sunni Arabs.

Bush's deadline democracy managed to propel the process forward and appears on the verge of creating a new government with legitimacy earned at the ballot box. His approach resulted in a constitution often described as more democratic than any in the Arab world. Yet by pushing forward without Sunni acceptance, the Bush team failed to produce the national accord it sought among Iraq's three main groups, leaving a schism that could loom beyond Thursday's election. And the Sunni-powered insurgency that was supposed to be marginalized by an inclusive democracy remains as lethal as ever.

"The key for a long time in Iraq to stabilization . . . has been to pull in significant elements of Sunnis near the insurgency into the political process," said Larry Diamond, a Stanford University scholar who for a short time advised U.S. authorities in Iraq, only to become a scathing critic. The press to meet the Bremer deadlines, starting in January, he said, only fueled the militants. "Much of the violence after that was entrenched or reinforced by the elections when the Sunnis were pressed to the margins."

In private, Bush aides agree there were tradeoffs but found no better alternatives, and they take heart from signs that Sunnis who boycotted the January election plan to participate this week.


No president in modern memory has been more willing to gamble on his own vision, nor won the gamble more often.

MORE:
Politics, Iraqi Style: Slick TV Ads, Text Messaging and Gunfire (ROBERT F. WORTH and EDWARD WONG, 12/11/05, NY Times)

The campaign is being conducted with few real rules. Technically, the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq is in charge, but it has little money to investigate the more than 80 violations that have been reported in the last month, said Safwat Rashid Sidqi, a commissioner. Last year, the commission fined the Shiite alliance about $1,500 for campaigning after the 48-hour cutoff point before the vote, a pittance for a party with deep pockets.

Money has become a campaign issue too, though there are no limits on spending or contributions, and no public funding. Critics of Mr. Allawi, a White House favorite, accuse him of taking American government money, while enemies of the Shiite alliance say that group gets much of its financing from Iran. Both groups deny the charges, though the sources of their large war chests remain mysterious.

One of the more promising aspects of the election is the participation by Sunni Arabs, who largely boycotted the vote to elect the 275-member National Assembly last January. Many are risking their lives by campaigning in areas where the Sunni-led insurgency is at its worst.

Hatem Mukhlis, the leader of the Assembly of Patriots, a secular Sunni party, has been traveling three or four times a week from Baghdad to Salahuddin Province, an insurgent stronghold whose capital is Tikrit, Mr. Hussein's hometown.

"My father upgraded Tikrit with money and schools," said Mr. Mukhlis, a doctor who lived in the United States for 20 years and met with President Bush at the White House before the war. "They remember my father for the services he provided the people."

Mr. Mukhlis said he hoped the people of Salahuddin would view him in the same light as his father, a respected military officer. He said he has opened up a printing press in Tikrit, and started two mobile health clinics that roam the province in white vans.

Like many other candidates, he has also set up a Web site, www.almalaf.net, to get out his message. On Friday, the home page showed a photo of Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the Shiite prime minister, next to the bruised back of a male detainee, alluding to the Sunni Arabs' fears that government-sponsored militias are abducting, torturing and killing Sunnis.

The headline on the site talked about "secret documents" linking Mr. Jaafari to incidents of torture.

The Web site has other draws. At the bottom of the home page, Mr. Mukhlis has posted photos of Miss Egypt and Miss Puerto Rico in bikinis.

Several American groups are teaching Iraqi politicians the basics of campaigning and helping them polish their messages. Chief among them are the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute, both democracy-promotion groups with financing from the American government and ties to the two major American parties. They run workshops, help coordinate media campaigns and give lessons in organizing volunteers and conducting polls.

Still, these campaigns could never be mistaken for American ones. The sheer number of political groups and competing messages make it hard for Iraqis to distinguish one party from another. There are few debates or substantive discussions of the issues in this campaign, which is still mostly rooted in personalities and appeals to ethnic or sectarian loyalties.


Sunni Factions Plot Their Return: After this week's vote, the minority group may seek alliances with Kurds and secular Shiites to try to take back more power (John Daniszewski, December 11, 2005, LA Times)
Many Sunnis have had a remarkable change of heart about election participation, although the influential Muslim Scholars Assn. continues to stand aloof from the process and the most radical segments of the insurgency — die-hard Hussein loyalists and followers of Al Qaeda and Abu Musab Zarqawi — continue to threaten violence.

U.S. officials have pointed out that 10 million people voted in the constitutional referendum, 2 million more than in the first election of a transitional parliament in January. The White House is counting on an even higher turnout this time, with significant Sunni numbers, as evidence that the U.S.-sponsored transition to democracy is working.

With calls for a troop withdrawal rising in the U.S., some also see in the election a possible turning point that would allow American and British forces to begin to pull out of Iraq with dignity next year.

But that possibility depends on whether the elections actually usher in a government that will have the backing of a broad spectrum of all of the main ethnic, regional and sectarian groups in Iraq.

So far, Sunnis who were the most loyal to Hussein, and who felt they had the most to lose in the new governing arrangement empowering Shiites and Kurds, have been the main holdouts against the new government.

Zeidan, 57, who has twice been detained and released by U.S. forces, has been barred from running as a candidate because of his Baathist affiliations. But that does not matter, he said. His son will be among the candidates on the slate of the Iraqi National Dialogue Front, one of the Sunni coalitions, along with other individuals deemed reliable.

"The candidates we nominated are all good, patriotic elements who aim to serve Iraq and the Iraqis," he said. And those barred from running, he said, "will lead the National Assembly from the outside."

Zeidan declined to predict how many seats his and other "patriotic" Sunni groups would win, but made it clear that he thought the number would be significant.

After the elections, he said, the Sunni groups would seek to enter into alliances to try to deny power to the current Shiite-led coalition under Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari. Possible allies, he said, include the Kurdish parties and the followers of former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, a secular Shiite who was once a Baathist.

He said that if elected, the Sunnis would press for an early U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, and push for added constitutional changes to unify the country and reduce the chances that Iraq could break apart along ethnic and sectarian lines.

Zeidan expressed confidence that his vision would win wide backing.

"Believe me, whoever is supported by the Baathists in the next election will win, because more than 90% of the Iraqi people were Baathists," he said.

Sunni Arabs make up about 20% of the Iraqi population.


You do the math.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:04 AM

TINY BUBBLES & THE WHINE:

Bubbly for Blair heir - but will it all go flat? (BRIAN BRADY, 12/11/05, The Scotsman)

ON WEDNESDAY evening, just a day after being elected leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron faced his first meeting of the 1922 Committee of Tory MPs in Committee Room 12 of the House of Commons. After weeks of campaigning he was weary, but in ebullient mood.

"I don't know about you," the old Etonian told the gathering of senior backbenchers, "but I've had a very tough week. Who's coming downstairs for a drink?" [...]

As the champagne flowed in the Smoking Room, the Labour chief whip, Hilary Armstrong, walked in and was greeted noisily by the Tory MPs who had watched their new leader taunt her humiliatingly at Prime Minister's Question: "That's the problem with these exchanges - the chief whip on the Labour side shouting like a child. Is she finished? Are you finished?"

If speculation at Westminster is to be believed the answer might well be: yes Armstrong is finished, as Blair considers replacing his chief whip.

A peace offering from the Tory MPs gathered with Cameron in the shape of a glass of champagne was turned down by Armstrong, another small indication that Labour MPs are grumpy and unsure exactly how to react to the hype around the new leader of the opposition.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:49 AM

STUPID CONSTITUTION, STUPID VOTERS:

The Excluded Middle: a review of Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy (MATT BAI, NY Times Book Review)

Over the last few years, in this time of Democratic despondency, there has emerged a new genre of comfort books for liberals - books that seek to expose the nefarious means by which conservatives have amassed power, while at the same time reassuring urban liberals that they bear none of the blame. Thomas Frank's best-selling "What's the Matter With Kansas?," for instance, advanced the premise that rural voters just aren't sophisticated enough to vote in their own interests. In "Don't Think of an Elephant!," the linguist George Lakoff took a slightly different angle, suggesting that these voters weren't dumb, exactly, but that their brain synapses had been rewired by the Republicans' skillful manipulation of language. Now come Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, political science professors at Yale and the University of California, Berkeley, with Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy. Hacker and Pierson offer a variation on this same theme: voters can't make the right choices, they contend, because our system of government itself has dangerously malfunctioned.

All these books are premised on two things that almost by themselves explain why the Left is back to its natural 40%: first, they despise the structure of the American Republic; second, they're contemptuous of the American electorate.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 7:26 AM

UH, NIALL, WITH FRIENDS LIKE YOU...

Do the sums, then compare US and Communist crimes from the Cold War Niall Ferguson (The Telegraph, December 11th, 2005)

'There are no hard distinctions between what is real and what is unreal, nor between what is true and what is false. A thing is not necessarily either true or false; it can be both true and false."

No, that wasn't Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, half-answering questions in Europe last week about the CIA's alleged prison camps in Poland and Romania and the "extraordinary rendition" of terrorist suspects to countries where they are likely to be tortured. It was actually Harold Pinter, explaining the difference between drama and politics in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize for Literature.

In the lofty realm of dramatic art, Pinter asserted, there can be nothing so clear-cut as truth. It is, however, a very different matter when it comes to American foreign policy. There, the distinction between true and false is as clear as that between day and night. It's simple. Everything the United States says is false, and everything its critics say is true.[...]

Here are Pinter's five charges:

1. The United States engaged in "low intensity conflict… throughout the world", causing "hundreds of thousands" of deaths. Pinter cites the case of Nicaragua, where American aid helped overthrow the "intelligent, rational and civilised" government of the Sandinistas.

2. "The United States supported and in many cases engendered every Right-wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the Second World War", specifically those in Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Greece, Haiti, Indonesia, Paraguay, the Philippines, Turkey and Uruguay. The deaths of all the people murdered by these regimes were "attributable to American foreign policy".

3. These "systematic, constant, vicious [and] remorseless" crimes bear comparison with those committed during the Cold War by the Soviet Union (no mention, be it noted, of China, Vietnam or North Korea).

4. But these crimes "have only been superficially recorded, let alone documented, let alone acknowledged". It is as if "it never happened", thanks to "a highly successful act of hypnosis".

5. This mass hypnosis has been achieved by repeated use of the phrase "the American people", which "suffocates [the] intelligence and… critical faculties" of all Americans - apart from "the 40 million people living below the poverty line and the 2 million men and women imprisoned in the vast gulag [sic] of prisons, which extends across the US".

First, the true part. Thousands were indeed killed by US-backed dictatorships, especially in Central and South America. What is demonstrably false is that this violence is comparable in scale with that perpetrated by Communist regimes at the same time.

It is generally agreed that Guatemala was the worst of the US-backed regimes during the Cold War. When the civil war there was finally brought to an end in the 1990s, the total death toll may have been as high as 200,000. But not all these deaths can credibly be blamed on the United States. Most of the violence happened long after the 1954 coup, when the regime was far from being under the CIA's control.

By comparison, the lowest estimate for the number of people who were killed on political grounds in the last seven years of Stalin's life is five million, and the camps of the gulag - which only a fraud or a fool would liken to American prisons today - kept on killing long after his death. In their new biography, Jung Chang and Jon Halliday reckon Mao was responsible for anything up to 70 million deaths in China. The number of people killed or starved by the North Korean regime may be in the region of 1.6 million. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia killed between 1.5 and 2 million people. For further details, I refer Pinter to The Black Book of Communism, published in 1997.[...]

Nobody pretends that the United States came through the Cold War with clean hands. But to pretend that its crimes were equivalent to those of its Communist opponents - and that they have been wilfully hushed up - is fatally to blur the distinction between truth and falsehood. That may be permissible on stage. I am afraid it is quite routine in diplomacy. But is unacceptable in serious historical discussion.

Crimes? As much as the charge that the U.S. killed more than the regimes it confronted (who mostly killed their own citizens) is an outrageous slander that demands constant refutation, the truth about numbers is really just a derivative of the main point that the U.S. was all that stood between the new dark ages its adversaries were so keen on ushering in. It’s hard to imagine a defense of Roman civilization resting on the argument that they killed fewer than the Visigoths and that therefore their “crimes” were of less import.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:07 AM

SWEET SURRENDER:

Here's a bit from Oprah this week that's so powerful it can make a rightwing whacko ponder whether she has a purely deleterious effect on the culture, a mother consider being born again again and a wife wonder whether that Christ dude might not have had a point.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 AM

NEVER GONNA DO IT WITHOUT MOFAZ ON BOARD:

Mofaz leaves Likud to join Sharon (BBC, 12/11/05)

Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz has left Likud to join Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's new Kadima party.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

VIMANARAMA:

Burn, Bollywood, burn (Joshua Glenn, December 11, 2005, Boston Globe)

WHAT HAPPENS when one of today's top comic-book creators bones up on Islamic and Hindu theology and history? One word: ''Vimanarama," a three-part miniseries written by Grant Morrison, author of the revisionist Batman book ''Arkham Asylum," among many other groundbreaking projects, and drawn by Philip Bond. The series has just been published in one volume by Vertigo, an imprint of DC. When the science-fiction comic book was launched in February, Morrison said that after 9/11-in an attempt to ''comprehend the world's political and religious situation a little more clearly"-he researched the early history of Pakistan and its religious legends. In tales of the fabled Rama empire, said to exist 6,000 years ago, he stumbled upon ''vimanas," flying-saucer-like machines described in the Mahabharata, the ancient Indian epic. Aha!


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

TWAIN'S HAVE LONG SINCE CROSSED:

The Mideast's Battle of Ideas (Jim Hoagland, December 11, 2005, Washington Post)

This contemporary East is dominated by China and India. West means Britain, France and the United States. And the Middle East is a battle zone of ideas, religions, oil and a cultural use of tribal violence that is now projected onto the global stage.

In reality, of course, India is West and France is East.


December 10, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:35 PM

TRIANGULATING TENTATIVELY:

Protecting Old Glory: Unlike Hatch's proposal, Bennett's plan doesn't seek an amendment and draws fire left and right (Thomas Burr, 12/10/05, The Salt Lake Tribune)

Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, has a new ally in his push to make it a crime to deface the American flag: Sen. Hillary Clinton, who is taking heat for supporting the bill.

The former first lady-turned-senator has joined as a co-sponsor of Bennett's flag-protection bill that allows the government to fine or imprison someone who intentionally defaces or destroys the U.S. flag.

You can understand the inclination to trim, but on this one she's better off if all the hostile fire comes from the Left.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:27 PM

TWO'S A START:

One China, One Taiwan: Bush's democracy-promotion doctrine doesn't square with his China policy. (Ellen Bork, 12/19/2005, Weekly Standard)

DURING HIS RECENT TRIP TO Japan, South Korea, China, and Mongolia, President Bush extolled the region's wave of democratization as "one of the greatest stories in human history" and lamented the holdouts who are "out of step with their neighbors and isolated from the world." The president also made it clear that democratic Taiwan, though itself isolated internationally, is as important to the United States as Japan and South Korea. He pointedly held Taiwan out to China as an example of a "free and democratic Chinese society."

Such praise of Taiwan--delivered in Kyoto shortly before the president arrived in Beijing--contrasts sharply with Bush's humiliating rebuff to Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian in 2003. Partly as a result, Bush's trip to Asia has been interpreted as a turning point, marking the application to Asia of the Bush Doctrine of U.S. support for democracy. This attractive notion, however, is complicated by one essential fact: The Bush Doctrine is incompatible with America's one-China policy, which holds that Taiwan is a part of "one China" and that there should be a peaceful resolution of the dispute between Beijing and Taipei. More recently, the Bush administration has added the demand that neither side change "the status quo."


Not only is Taiwan never again going to be part of China, the current China will splinter into its constituent parts -- Tibet, Uighurstan, etc. -- as it liberalizes. The sooner we bring our policy into accord with our ideals, and make them face facts, the better.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:22 PM

CHALK UP SC:

Christmas at the Hanoi Hilton: Sen. John McCain of Arizona remembers hell on earth, as for five and a half interminable years as a prisoner of the North Vietnamese, he and his fellow prisoners existed from one nightmarish day to another (those who didn't die, that is). But then came one unforgettable Christmas Eve . . . (Sen. John McCain, Focus over Fifty)

O come, all ye faithful, joyful and triumphant …

We sang little above a whisper, our eyes darting anxiously up to the barred windows for any sign of the guards.

Joyful and triumphant? Clad in tattered prisoner-of-war clothes, I looked around at the two dozen men huddled in a North Vietnamese prison cell. Lightbulbs hanging from the ceiling illuminated a gaunt and wretched group of men — grotesque caricatures of what had once been clean-shaven, superbly fit Air Force, Navy and Marine pilots and navigators.

We shivered from the damp night air and the fevers that plagued a number of us. Some men were permanently stooped from the effects of torture; others limped or leaned on makeshift crutches.

0 come ye, O come ye to Bethlehem. Come and behold him, born the King of Angels. …

Still burning in our memories was the time, almost a year before, when North Vietnamese guards had burst in on our church service, beaten the three men leading the prayers, and dragged them away to confinement.

What a pathetic sight we were. Yet here, on this Christmas Eve in 1971, we were together for the first time, some after seven years of harrowing isolation and mistreatment at the hands of a cruel enemy.

We were keeping Christmas — the most special Christmas any of us ever would observe.

There had been Christmas services in North Vietnam in previous years, but they had been spiritless, ludicrous stage shows, orchestrated by the Vietnamese for propaganda purposes. This was our Christmas service, the only one we had ever been allowed to hold, though we feared that at any moment, our captors might change their minds.

I had been designated chaplain by our senior-ranking POW officer, Col. George "Bud" Day, USAF. As we sang "0 Come, All Ye Faithful," I looked down at the few sheets of paper upon which I had penciled the Bible verses that tell the story of Christ's birth.


He's the Christian conservative who can stop Giuliani.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:18 PM

JUST ANOTHER DEMOCRATIC PARTY:

Muslim party ready to talk to US (The Australian, 10dec05)

EGYPT'S Muslim Brothers, who control one in five parliamentary seats after spectacular gains in recent polls, say they are ready to break a long-standing taboo and engage in contacts with Washington.

The Islamist movement's spokesman Issam al-Aryan welcomed the comments of a senior US state department official who said Washington was likely to seek contacts with the Brotherhood.

"We, as representatives of the Egyptian nation, will not refrain from making contacts if they are in the interest of Egypt," he said two days after his movement secured one fifth of parliament.

MORE:
Brotherhood seeks to calm fears and establish dialogue with Copts (Abdu Zeina and Magdy Abdul AlAal, 10/12/2005, Asharq Al-Awsat)

The Muslim Brotherhood released a statement Friday seeking to calm the fears of political and religious circles in Egypt. The officially banned group made historical gains in the parliamentary elections where it won 88 seats, making it the biggest opposition party in Egypt. [...]

“We have suffered from dictatorship and oppression. How can such traits have a place in the hearts and minds of Brotherhood candidates?” In fact, [Supreme Guide Mohammad Akef] said, the group supported political pluralism and the peaceful transition of power, adding that the public was the source of power.

Akef’s latest statement comes in the wake of an open invitation to Coptic Christian intellectuals to begin dialogue with the group in various governorates. Brotherhood MP Akram Shaer has already initiated such talks in Port Said and dialogue is expected to start in Alexandria next week.

Hassan revealed that the Brotherhood’s political reform program will include a draft law to end to the 24-year state of emergency and the temporary detention of journalists. The group also hoped to halt the use of military courts to try civilians and abolish laws which limit freedom of speech, he said. Constitutional reform would also be on the agenda during the next parliament.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:55 PM

CRAWFORD REVISITED:

Cameron is not Brideshead Rebranded (Matthew d'Ancona, 11/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Confronted for the first time since 1997 with an electable Tory leader, Labour is experiencing the strategic confusion that afflicted the Conservatives when Tony Blair succeeded John Smith. Was Blair really a Tory? Was he Bambi or Stalin? Was he a crypto-socialist? Or was "New Labour", in fact, even worse - a "new danger"? The Tories never managed to pin down the Prime Minister, as his remarkable electoral record attests. "I still think we couldn't beat him," one Shadow Cabinet member told me. "The good news is that we don't have to. It's all about Gordon now."

Those Blairites I have spoken to believe that Mr Cameron is vulnerable on Europe because of his plan to withdraw Tory MEPs from the European People's Party grouping, which they hope will generate a good old-fashioned Tory split. But Number 10 also wants to present Mr Cameron more subtly as an impostor on the centre-ground, welcoming him to this terrain and then belittling him. "It'll be useful to Tony," according to one Cabinet Minister. "It'll prove the difference between Centre-Left and Centre-Right." Another senior minister puts it thus: "We'll be fine, as long as Cameron's plans for reform look frightening enough, and ours don't look too timid."

Mr Brown, in contrast, wants a much more aggressive attack. He sees Mr Cameron as a deeply fraudulent politician, the son of privilege, the new darling of the London media elite and a slasher of public services posturing as a "compassionate Conservative".


Amusing how readily the names Clinton, Gore and Bush can be substituted.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:36 PM

"YES" MEN:

Iraq's Dr No says Yes to peace and democracy (Colin Freeman and Aqeel Hussein, 11/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

As befits the holder of a doctorate in classical Arabic, Adnan al Duleimi is known as one of the more polished orators among Iraq's aspiring politicians. Yet his popularity in volatile Sunni districts is based on the stubborn repetition of a single word: La, or No.

It was No to taking part in Iraq's historic elections last January and No in the constitution referendum. He is a firm No man on the continued presence of American troops. Such is his rejectionist record that the joke among Iraqis is that he would automatically decline a dinner invitation. But now, the man nicknamed Dr No is saying Yes.

Defying expectations, he has ended his boycott of the US-fostered political process and is campaigning in this week's elections for a new Iraqi government. [...]

The decision by the likes of Dr al Duleimi to embrace democracy, however tentatively, is a huge relief to coalition officials, who hope that some of the energy being channelled into Iraq's Sunni-led insurgency will now be diverted into peaceful politics. His Sunni Family party, along with several other Sunni coalitions, could win up to 25 per cent of the seats when the polls open on Thursday.

It is also a tacit admission by some Sunnis that their previous tactic of boycotting the elections in the hope of derailing the process entirely was a mistake, leaving the group that ruled absolutely under Saddam Hussein virtually powerless.


The question is whether they remain engaged if they don't win tha kind of representation.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:30 PM

SLEEPING UNDER THE BLANKET OF THE FREEDOM WE PROVIDE:

EU concealed deal with US to allow 'rendition' flights (Justin Stares in Brussels and Philip Sherwell in Washington, 11/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

The European Union secretly allowed the United States to use transit facilities on European soil to transport "criminals" in 2003, according to a previously unpublished document. The revelation contradicts repeated EU denials that it knew of "rendition" flights by the CIA. [...]

The minutes of the Athens meeting on January 22, 2003, were written by the then Greek presidency of the EU after the talks with a US delegation headed by a justice department official. EU officials confirmed that a full account was circulated to all member governments, and would have been sent to the Home Office.

The document, entitled New Transatlantic Agenda, EU-US meeting on Justice and Home Affairs, details the subjects discussed by the 31 people present. The agenda included the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking and extradition agreements.

According to the full version, "Both sides agreed on areas where co-operation could be improved [inter alia] the exchange of data between border management services, increased use of European transit facilities to support the return of criminal/ inadmissible aliens, co-ordination with regard to false documents training and improving the co-operation in removals."


After decades of enabling them by fighting their wars for them, this can hardly surprise anyone.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:34 PM

DANGER ZONE:

Cameron propels Tories to poll lead (Daily Mail, 10th December 2005)

David Cameron has propelled the Tories into a lead over Labour, according to two opinion polls.

In an ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph 37% of people said they would vote Conservative if there was a general election tomorrow. Labour was on 35% with the Liberal Democrats on 21%.

When asked how they would vote if the election was between Mr Cameron's Conservatives and a Labour Party led by Gordon Brown, the Tory figure rises to 40%, with Labour on 37% and the Lib Dems, 18%.

Another poll by the Sunday Times has produced similar findings. The YouGov poll for the paper puts the Tories now at 37%, two points up on last month, with Labour down one on 36%. The Lib Dems are on 18%.


The Tories obviously have a lot of heavy lifting to do before they actually win an election, but a loss would likely be as catastrophic for Labour as Bill Clinton's retirement was for the Democrats, because the impetus for Third Way policies appears to similarly exist only at the very top of the Party. It's just a more natural fit for a conservative party because the Left is generally satisfied with the Second Way, even if it doesn't work.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:31 PM

THE LONELINESS OF THE LIBERTARIANS:

PATRIOT Unbound: Not even flubbed terror cases can dent law's appeal (Jeff A. Taylor, 12/09/05, Reason)

Following his 2003 indictment for aiding terrorists, Sami al-Arian was the poster child for the USA PATRIOT Act. The former University of South Florida professor was a staple of former Attorney General John Ashcroft's testimony before Congress on PATRIOT and in the speeches of U.S. Attorneys across the nation. Al-Arian even turned up in a Department of Justice handbook on how to prosecute terrorism charges.

Yet on Tuesday, after five months of testimony in which the defense did not mount a defense, al-Arian and his co-defendants were found not guilty of most charges, with the jury deadlocked on a few more. Unless the government opts to retry and wins on those counts, the PATRIOT Act will have utterly missed its target down in Tampa.

Nonetheless, on Thursday congressional leaders agreed to extend the PATRIOT Act for four more years, essentially unchanged. Evidently PATRIOT is working for them.


Poor Mr. Taylor, he reads all the right blogs and just knows folks must hate the Patriot Act, and then the Administration, Congress and the American people embrace it anyway....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:28 PM

A HEALTHY METRIC:

Citizens Turn Over 'Butcher of Ramadi' to Iraqi, U.S. Troops (American Forces Press Service, Dec. 9, 2005)

The terrorist known as "the Butcher of Ramadi" was detained today, turned in by local citizens in the provincial capital of Iraq's Anbar province, U.S. military officials in Iraq reported.

Amir Khalaf Fanus -- listed third on a "high-value individuals" list of terrorists wanted by the 28th Infantry Division's 2nd Brigade Combat Team -- was wanted for criminal activities including murder and kidnapping. Ramadi citizens brought him to an Iraqi and U.S. forces military base in Ramadi, where he was taken into custody.

Fanus was well known for his crimes against the local populace. He is the highest-ranking al Qaeda in Iraq member to be turned in to Iraqi and U.S. officials by local citizens.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:24 PM

EL:ECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES...EVEN RIGGED ONES:

Staff Opinions Banned In Voting Rights Cases: Criticism of Justice Dept.'s Rights Division Grows (Dan Eggen, December 10, 2005, Washington Post)

The Justice Department has barred staff attorneys from offering recommendations in major Voting Rights Act cases, marking a significant change in the procedures meant to insulate such decisions from politics, congressional aides and current and former employees familiar with the issue said.

By which they mean that it's meant to empower the permanent self-interested bureaucracy at the expense of the electorate.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:54 PM

THREEFER?:

Former Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who challenged LBJ, dies at 89 (FREDERIC J. FROMMER, 12/10/05, Associated Press)

Former Minnesota Sen. Eugene J. McCarthy, whose insurgent campaign toppled a sitting president in 1968 and forced the Democratic Party to take seriously his message against the Vietnam War, died Saturday. He was 89.

McCarthy died in his sleep at assisted living home in the Georgetown neighborhood where he had lived for the past few years, said his son, Michael.

Eugene McCarthy challenged President Lyndon B. Johnson for the 1968 Democratic nomination during growing debate over the Vietnam War. The challenge led to Johnson's withdrawal from the race.

The former college professor, who ran for president five times in all, was in some ways an atypical politician, a man with a witty, erudite speaking style who wrote poetry in his spare time and was the author of several books.

"He was thoughtful and he was principled and he was compassionate and he had a good sense of humor," his son said. [...]

In McCarthy's 1998 book, "No-Fault Politics," editor Keith C. Burris described McCarthy in the introduction as "a Catholic committed to social justice but a skeptic about reform, about do-gooders, about the power of the state and the competence of government, and about the liberal reliance upon material cures for social problems."

McCarthy was born March 29, 1916, in Watkins, a central Minnesota town of about 750. He earned degrees from St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., and the University of Minnesota.

He was a teacher, a civilian War Department employee and college economics and sociology instructor before turning to politics. He once spent a year in a monastery.

He was elected to the House in 1948. Ten years later he was elected to the Senate and re-elected in 1964. McCarthy left the Senate in 1970 and devoted much of his time to writing poetry, essays and books. [...]

The bad times, Eugene McCarthy said, began with America's increased involvement in the Vietnam War and the simultaneous failure of some of Johnson's Great Society social programs.

Instead of giving people a chance to earn a living, McCarthy said, the Great Society "became affirmative action and more welfare. It was an admission the New Deal had failed or fallen."


His best line came at the expense of Mitt Romney's Dad, who said that he'd been "brainwashed" by generals on a Vietnam visit and that's why he'd supported the war: "Brainwashed? A light rinse would have done."
Pathbreaking Comedian Richard Pryor Dies (JEREMIAH MARQUEZ, 12/10/05, Associated Press)
Richard Pryor, the groundbreaking comedian whose profanely personal insights into race relations and modern life made him one of Hollywood's biggest black stars, died of a heart attack Saturday. He was 65.

Pryor died shortly before 8 a.m. after being taken to a hospital from his home in the San Fernando Valley, said his business manager, Karen Finch. He had been ill for years with multiple sclerosis, a degenerative disease of the nervous system. [...]

Pryor once marveled "that I live in racist America and I'm uneducated, yet a lot of people love me and like what I do, and I can make a living from it. You can't do much better than that."


'Michael Jackson in serious condition' (Ynet, 12/10/05)
According to the report, associates of the Jackson family reported to the Santa Barbara police in Los Angeles that the singer had recently taken an overdose consisting of Demerol and Jack Daniels.
Except that it's impossible to imagine Jack is his drink of choice. Chambord & Demerol we'd buy.


MORE:
RICHARD PRYOR | 1940-2005: Richard Pryor; a Groundbreaking, Anguished Comedian (Lynell George, December 11, 2005, LA Times)

At one point the highest-paid black performer in the entertainment industry, the lauded but misfortune-dogged comedian inadvertently became a de facto role model: a lone wolf figure to whom many an up-and-coming comic from Eddie Murphy and Chris Rock to Robin Williams and Richard Belzer have paid homage. Pryor kicked stand-up humor into a brand new realm.

"I've been trying to figure out the analogies to what Richard Pryor meant, and the closest I can come to is Miles Davis," said Reginald Hudlin, the film and TV director and president of entertainment for Black Entertainment Television. "There's music before Miles Davis, and there's music after Miles Davis. And Richard Pryor is that same kind of person.

"Every new piece kind of transformed the game," Hudlin said. "He was a culturally transcendent hero. His influence is bigger than black comedy; it's bigger than comedy. He was a cultural giant."

Comedian Keenen Ivory Wayans once said: "Richard Pryor is the groundbreaker." He "showed us that you can be black and have a black voice and be successful."

Pryor had a history both bizarre and grim: self-inflicted burns (1980), a heart attack (1990) and marathon drug and alcohol use (that he finally kicked in the 1990s). Yet he somehow — often miraculously, it seemed — continued on, even after being diagnosed in 1986 with multiple sclerosis, a disease that robbed him of his trademark physical presence.


Former Senator Eugene McCarthy Dies at 89 (FRANCIS X. CLINES, 12/10/05, NY Times)
He was a disarming stump presence as he mixed a wry tone and a hard, existential edge in challenging the White House, the Pentagon and the superpower swagger of modern politicians.

As an acid-tongued campaigner, Mr. McCarthy was sometimes a puzzlement, veering from inspired speechifying to moody languishing. But he was the singular candidate of the Vietnam War protest who served up politics and poetry, theology and baseball in a blend that beguiled the "Clean for Gene" legions who flocked to his insurgent's call.

"We do not need presidents who are bigger than the country, but rather ones who speak for it and support it," he told them. His candor delighted supporters, yet some were troubled by the diffidence that marked his public persona.

"I'm kind of an accidental instrument, really," he said, "through which I hope that the judgment and the will of this nation can be expressed."

Typically, he only frustrated his followers when he allowed that he was at least "willing" to be president and, yes, might even be an "adequate" one. Questions arose about his passion on the campaign as he built a reputation as an unapologetic contrarian.

In his 1968 challenge and for decades thereafter, Mr. McCarthy played the self-outcast of the Democratic Party, even shunning Jimmy Carter to endorse Ronald Reagan, the Republican candidate for president in 1980. He became a chronic presidential campaigner himself, in 1972, 1976 and the last time in 1988, 18 years gone from the Senate, when he endorsed trade protectionism, the vast Star Wars space defense theory and, most passionately, the junking of the two-party Establishment whose rules he came to despise.

"It's much easier for me to understand politicians who don't walk away from it," he explained at the age of 71 as he once more knew he could not win but ran anyway, hectoring the latest Beltway incumbents. He stayed busy writing poetry and books about the decline of American politics, and kept his eye on Washington from his farmhouse in bucolic Rappahannock County, Va., 70 miles to the west, on 14 acres set amid the Blue Ridge Mountains.

"I think he has a rejection wish," Maurice Rosenblatt, a Washington lobbyist who was a longtime friend, once said of the senator's perplexing mix of quixotic impulse and lethal hesitancy. "He wants to reject others and be rejected by them."

But others, conceding his quirks, rated Mr. McCarthy the one stand-up, cant-free politician of their generation. "Besides his conscience, there is his civility," Joe Flaherty wrote in the antiwar heyday of the Village Voice. [...]

Mr. McCarthy, an old semi-pro baseball player, liked to burnish a kind of knuckleball oddness. In one of his own later poems, "Lament for an Aging Politician," he wrote:

I have left Act I, for involution
And Act II. There, mired in complexity
I cannot write Act III.

He identified simplistic partisanship as the ultimate enemy in the domestic strife of the Vietnam War. Invoking Whitman's call to human goodness - "Arouse! for you must justify me" - candidate McCarthy's basic message to Americans was Daniel Webster's dictum to never "give up to party what was meant for mankind." As crowds rallied to him, he promised no new deals or frontiers. Rather, he slowed his baritone for a plain definition of patriotism: "To serve one's country not in submission but to serve it in truth."

He showed more passion as contrarian than as dogged campaigner. At the 1960 Democratic National Convention, Senator McCarthy showed that speaker's fire so longed for by his later followers when he boldly nominated Adlai E. Stevenson, a twice-defeated candidate for president, one more time despite - or because of - John F. Kennedy's lock on the nomination. "Do not reject this man who made us all proud to be Democrats," rang Mr. McCarthy's electrifying loser's plea.

As a senator, Mr. McCarthy was an unabashed liberal unafraid to take on Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin and his alarmist warnings about the Communist menace. More often, as he restlessly paced the backs of committee rooms or brought a tome to read during hearings, Eugene McCarthy was viewed by peers as something of a ruminator and a curmudgeon.

Yet he was the one who dared to step forward and bell the White House cat when other Democrats would only complain. Grasping the unpopularity of the deepening war, he sought to make a divisive party issue of it, announcing his primary candidacy against President Johnson, a fellow Democrat, in the hope of building pressure for a policy change.

"There comes a time when an honorable man simply has to raise the flag," declared the senator, a onetime novice monk whose political role model was Sir Thomas More, the English statesman martyred in resisting Henry VIII's seizure of church power.

Mocked by Johnson loyalists as a mere "footnote in history," Senator McCarthy prevailed well enough in his time to observe, after driving President Johnson into retreat, "I think we can say with Churchill, 'But what a footnote!'."


EUGENE J. MCCARTHY | 1916-2005: Eugene McCarthy; Candidacy Inspired Antiwar Movement (Art Pine, December 11, 2005, LA Times)
"McCarthy essentially knocked Johnson out of the race," Georgetown University history professor Michael Kazin, coauthor of "America Divided: The Civil War of the 1960s," told The Times on Saturday. "McCarthy made it politically palatable to start moving toward ending the war." [...]

[H]istorians regard his 1968 candidacy as a turning point: a campaign that focused Americans' previously scattered opposition to the war and pushed successive administrations to try to extricate U.S. forces from Southeast Asia. It also stands as one of the most vivid examples of successful grass-roots activism in U.S. politics.

It also helped inspire an overhaul of the political process, particularly within the Democratic Party. After antiwar demonstrations disrupted the 1968 Democratic National Convention, damaging the party politically, Democratic leaders revamped party rules to pare back the power of political professionals to determine candidates and platforms.

"It opened the way for major changes in the party that pushed it toward the left and enabled Republicans to capture the White House through most of the next several elections," said Marshall Wittmann, a 1968 McCarthy volunteer and now a senior fellow at the centrist Democratic Leadership Council in Washington.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:48 PM

YOU DON'T BECOME A MINORITY PARTY BY CHANCE:

Democratic Implosion: Can the party of the people be saved from itself? (Victor Davis Hanson, 12/09/05, National Review)

Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Congressman Murtha represent the Democratic mainstream. And that’s the problem. None of them can be characterized as embracing the Michael Moore/Cindy Sheehan fringe, and none are even prone to the wacky grandstanding of Jimmy Carter or Barbara Boxer.

Yet what we get from the national chairman, the former presidential candidate, and the new popular icon — on the verge of the third and final election in Iraq — is a de facto admission that we are losing and must leave.

In the background, old Vietnam-era themes provide the chorus for the growing antiwar sentiment: apparent disdain for the Iraqis, mirroring the way that liberals pooh-poohed anti-Communist Eastern Europeans, Cubans, and Vietnamese; endemic pessimism that does not match the rapidly evolving events on the ground; and political opportunity that an American embarrassment abroad might reverse a long-term and ongoing unfavorable political realignment at home.

When Saddam was removed in a brilliant three-week campaign, few anticipated that the subsequent effort to craft democracy in his wake would evolve into a conflict for the very heart of the Middle East. Most feared that postbellum Afghanistan would be the harder task — given the wealthier and more secular nature of Iraqi society.

Instead the war, as wars almost always do, has morphed into something quite different than expected — a regional referendum on Lebanon, the future of Syria, reform movements in the Gulf and Egypt, about-faces in Pakistan and Libya, and continued pressure on a soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. And despite the heartbreak of 2,100 deaths, we are not just winning in Iraq, but on the verge of something far larger, and more permanent: not a return to the ancient caliphate or another dictatorship, but the real chance for the birth of a new Middle East that takes its place at last among responsible nations.

All that was impossible to envision without the prior American removal of Saddam Hussein — now reduced to a pathetic deposed tyrant, railing against his victims and in his misery calling those “terrorists” who did not give him clean underwear.


Listening to decent Democrats object that no one in the leadership of the Party actually represents its mainstream suggests why they're headed back to permanent 40% status.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:44 PM

WAR BROUGHT:

I was sure that children would not want to be told that this old lady was Lucy': The question of who inspired CS Lewis to create the fantasy world of Narnia has remained a mystery for decades. Now, 55 years on, Nigel Farndale talks to Jill Freud who, as a wartime evacuee, provided the spark for his best-selling classic. As Hollywood's £75m version comes out, she tells her extraordinary story for the first time (Nigel Farndale, 11/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

In a yawning, book-lined drawing room in Marylebone, central London, I am left to browse a file of letters written during the war years by CS Lewis to "My dear June". The "June" referred to is Jill Freud, the now 78-year-old wife of Sir Clement, who has disappeared into the kitchen to make a pot of tea.

In 1944, she was June Flewett, a London convent girl who had been evacuated to Lewis's house in Oxford to escape the Blitz. She was also the inspiration for Lucy Pevensie, the girl who walks through the wardrobe full of fur coats and into the snowflakes of Narnia. The premiere of Hollywood's £75million The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was held in London on Wednesday, and Lady Freud had been asked to attend. She had also been asked to fly to America for the premiere there but, as she says in a crisp voice: "I was sure children wouldn't want to be told that this old lady is Lucy." Besides, she has, until now, declined all newspaper requests to discuss her extraordinary childhood. [...]

Her family lived in Barnes, south-west London, where her father was the senior classics master at St Paul's school. She and her two sisters - she was the middle one - were evacuated on September 1, 1939. "London was in a state of high alert," she recalls. "Gas masks were being issued, trenches dug and windows crossed with tape. My sister, then 14, was nearly expelled for waving to a soldier out of the convent window. She just thought it was the patriotic thing to do."

Lady Freud remembers standing on the station platform in her overcoat, with her haversack containing two school books and a change of clothes, and saying goodbye to her mother and five-year-old sister Diana, who was being evacuated with her kindergarten class to Wales, where she was to stay for the duration of the war, seeing her mother only twice. "Diana grew up thinking she had been rejected by my mother, that was the tragedy," she says. "But what could my mother do? It was the worst day of her life. She was only given 24 hours to decide."

At first, June was billeted with a retired Oxford tutor but he died after a few months and she moved in with three ageing spinsters. "They had been Lewis Carroll's 'girls'. As children they had gone up and down the Cherwell in his punt while he told them stories. In their drawing room, they had a lot of games and toys which he had made for them. We would be allowed to play with them on Sundays. They would be worth a fortune now."

In 1942, June was interviewed by Janie Moore, "Mrs Moore", CS Lewis's "adoptive mother" - his real mother having died of cancer when he was nine. Lewis was 43, Mrs Moore 26 years his senior. They were probably lovers at first, then partners who played the role of mother and son for the sake of propriety.

"They lived together as mother and son," Lady Freud recalls, "but I don't think that was the relationship". She raises her eyebrows significantly. "I knew nothing about any of that at the time. She was Irish and had been very beautiful, very dynamic. Jack had fought alongside her son, Paddy, in the First World War and had promised he would look after his mother if Paddy was killed. Well, Paddy was killed."

Jack and Minto, as he called Mrs Moore, had lived together in Oxford since 1920. There were no children in the house until they started taking in evacuees at the start of the war. Lewis once wrote: "I never appreciated children till the war brought them to me."

What, I ask, were her first impressions of him? "Oh, I loved him. Loved him, of course I did. I was in the kitchen helping Mrs Moore with the hen food when I first met him. I turned round and knew this was something momentous. Jack was naturally very gregarious, he liked exchanging ideas. He enjoyed the pub, and walking.

"I had read the Screwtape Letters and, being a good little Catholic at that time, his famous book Christian Behaviour, but I didn't know then that Jack Lewis was CS Lewis. I had no idea. Two weeks later I saw his books on the shelf, then I made the connection. I realised that this man I was staying with was my literary hero.

"I didn't know where to put myself. I couldn't look at him or speak to him for about a week because I knew from reading his books that he understood human nature horribly well and I just thought, 'He will know all my faults, all my nasty little foibles'. I felt completely exposed. I got over it, of course."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:38 PM

WHAT HEART?:

Spielberg’s Munich Massacre (Jason Maoz, 12/7/2005, Jewish Press)

As the Monitor noted back in July, “alarm bells went off like crazy when Steven Spielberg hired Tony Kushner last year to rewrite the script of a movie about Israel’s clandestine — and lethal — response to the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics.”

The Monitor found cause for concern because Kushner is a radical leftist whose views on the Middle East are hardly distinguishable from the hateful screeds found on the most rabidly anti-Israel websites.

In an interview with the Times of London, Kushner declared: “I deplore the brutal and illegal tactics of the Israeli Defense Forces in the occupied territories. I deplore the occupation, the forced evacuations, the settlements, the refugee camps, the whole shameful history of the dreadful suffering of the Palestinian people; Jews, of all people, with our history of suffering, should refuse to treat our fellow human beings like that.”

Kushner, the Monitor pointed out, co-edited, along with the equally far-left Alisa Solomon, an appalling volume called Wrestling With Zion: Progressives Jewish-American Responses to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. The Forward`s Ami Eden wrote of that book: “... reading [it] takes you to an alternative universe, where the Israel of today has reoccupied Palestinian territories and is adopting harsh security measures — but not in response to a Palestinian-launched intifada bent on blowing up babies on buses. Instead, Israel’s presence in the territories today is primarily the product of — Kushner and Solomon’s words — ‘Ariel Sharon’s mad, bloody dream of Greater Israel, which he and his comrades of the radical Israeli right have pursued for decades.’ ”

And Kushner, the Monitor noted, had said, “I think the founding of the State of Israel was for the Jewish people a historical, moral, political calamity.... I wish modern Israel hadn’t been born.”

“This,” the Monitor concluded, “is the twisted creature to whom Steven Spielberg has entrusted the script of a movie that will affect the public perception of Israel — in the U.S. and around the world — for years to come.”


Apparently they were right to worry, Hits (Leon Wieseltier, 12.09.05, New Republic)
The screenplay is substantially the work of Tony Kushner, whose hand is easily recognizable in the crudely schematic quality of the drama, and also in something more. The film has no place in its heart for Israel. I do not mean that it wishes Israel ill; not at all. But it cannot imagine any reason for Israel beyond the harshness of the world to the Jews. "The world has been rough with you," the oracular gourmand godfather of an underground anarchist family, a ludicrous character plummily played by Michael Lonsdale, tells Avner Kauffman, the Israeli team leader. "It is right to respond roughly to such treatment." Avner's mother, whose family was destroyed by the Nazis, preaches this about the Jewish state: "We had to take this, because no one was going to give it to us. Whatever it took, whatever it takes." Zionism, in this film, is just anti-anti-Semitism. The necessity of the Jewish state is acknowledged, but necessity is a very weak form of legitimacy. There are two kinds of Israelis in Munich: cruel Israelis with remorse and cruel Israelis without remorse. One of the Israeli killers recalls a midrash about God's compassion for the Egyptians drowning in the Red Sea, and keeps on killing. Another one of the Israeli killers protests that "Jews don't do wrong because our enemies do wrong. ... We're supposed to be righteous," and keeps on killing.

All this is consistent with Tony Kushner's view that Zionism, as he told Ori Nir of Haaretz last year, was "not the right answer," and that the creation of Israel was "a mistake," and that "establishing a state means f***ing people over." (If he really seeks to understand Middle Eastern terrorism, he might ponder the extent to which statelessness, too, can mean f***ing people over.) When Avner's reckoning with his deeds takes him to the verge of a breakdown, he joins his wife and child in Brooklyn and refuses to return to Israel, as if decency is impossible there. No, Kushner is not an anti-Semite, nor a self-hating Jew, nor any of those other insults that burnish his notion of himself as an American Jewish dissident (he is one of those people who never speaks, but only speaks out). He is just a perfectly doctrinaire progressive. And the progressive Jewish playwright Tony Kushner's image of Israel oddly brings to mind the reactionary Jewish playwright David Mamet's image of Israel: For both of them, its essence is power.


Perhaps you have to be as smart as Leon Weiseltier to get why it isn't self-hatred?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:19 AM

AND ONE WAS ON C-SPAN (via Rick Turley):

Margaret Cho: Dingbat (Mark Gauvreau Judge, 12/6/2005, American Spectator)

What's the difference between the Paul Wellstone funeral and a performance by Margaret Cho, comedian?

In parts, the Wellstone funeral was funny.

And no, I don't say that because I'm a conservative and Cho is a... well, what? Calling her a communist implies that there is a coherent ideology in her routine -- that she has a plan, a vision that propels her rage. But Cho is the absolute final, exhausted point of liberalism, its cold, bitter dead end -- a resentful, repetitive death rattle. Cho is fueled by hatred of everything conservative. It's a mystery what she actually believes in. Oh yeah -- being gay isn't a choice, and George Bush and the pope are evil hypocrites. Aside from that, who knows?


Don't you just assume she's pretending to be gay in order to salvage something of her career?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:15 AM

HOW MANY TROOPS WOULD IT TAKE TO REPRESS THE ENTIRE COUNTRYSIDE?:


Protesters in China Said to Be Killed
: Police allegedly open fire on farmers seeking compensation for seized land and cordon off the village. State media and government are silent. (Mark Magnier, December 10, 2005, LA Times)

Heavily armed riot police tightened their grip on a village in southern Guangdong province today after fatally shooting residents earlier in the week who were protesting a power project, villagers and human rights groups said. [...]

Residents said they were told by power plant managers that a substantial sum had been paid to local officials to distribute to farmers losing land, but that it was never passed on to them. Work on the $743-million project started a year ago. The two units are scheduled for completion by 2007.

"Without land, we have no income," said Jiang, a tomato farmer with three children. "Thousands of police are all around our village. The kids' school has been shut and our family is holed up in the house."

"The brother of my friend was shot dead," said Cai, an 18-year-old resident, in a telephone interview. "He was 21. His parents, brother and sister knelt crying in front of police. They've been crying for days."

Some villagers said they hoped the central government would act against local corrupt officials.

"The police have total authority, they can surround villages or do whatever they want to isolate people," said Wu Guoguang, a professor at Canada's University of Victoria and a pro-reform government aide prior to the Tiananmen massacre. "Why would they do something so radical as to kill people?"

Human rights activists called for an independent investigation and said the incident underscored the need for reform of China's property rules, a source of enormous local frustration.

Technically, all property still belongs to the state. Corrupt officials often exploit this to seize land that farmers have tilled for generations, then turn around and sell it to developers.

"Courts are not the answer because there's no real law for property," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "It's a recipe for major problems."

Residents said the police who opened fired Tuesday appeared to be from the area, but reinforcements sent later were outsiders equipped with armor, shields and machine guns. Experts said it was unclear whether local police had panicked and exceeded their authority, or whether there had been a policy shift by the central government.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:03 AM

SIX INCHES OF SNOW, BUT THE STOVE IS HOT:

A Tejada-for-Ramirez Trade Might Not Be Far-Fetched (Jorge Arangure Jr., December 10, 2005, Washington Post)

In private conversations on Friday between the Orioles and Miguel Tejada's representatives, the shortstop's trade demand first surfaced and Baltimore, according to one team source, has begun listening to offers for their superstar. The Boston Red Sox, likely offering Manny Ramirez, could be a suitor, and the idea of a Tejada for Ramirez deal has not been dismissed by Baltimore. Several teams have already expressed interest but Boston may be the best fit.

"It is a logical suggestion," one team official said of the Tejada-for-Ramirez possibility. "It does seem unlikely. But who knows?" [...]

The Red Sox have already made overtures, and Angelos said he wouldn't have a problem trading Tejada to an American League East team if that's what the front office desired.


Nomar can play Left.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:50 AM

TURNING JAPANESE? I REALLY THINK SO:

Bush Likens Iraqi Action to Transition in '40's Japan (DAVID E. SANGER, 12/10/05, NY Times)

President Bush suggested Friday that history will vindicate his decision to invade Iraq, saying he believed that a half century from now, it will be regarded as important a transition for the world as the democratization of Japan was after World War II.

"I'm absolutely convinced that some day, 50 or 60 years from now, an American president will be speaking to an audience saying, 'Thank goodness a generation of Americans rose to the challenge and helped people be liberated from tyranny,' " Mr. Bush said. " 'Democracy spread and the world is more peaceful for it.'"


It'll obviously be more important, having reformed Islam and liberalized the entire Middle East instead of changing just one insular island nation.

MORE:
President's Remarks at Mark Kennedy '06 and Minnesota Republican Party Victory Reception (President George W. Bush, Hilton Minneapolis Hotel, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 12/09/05)

You know, I recently went to the Far East, as you may know, and visited with my friend, Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan. He's a good fellow, and he's a good friend. It struck me then, like it has in previous times, about how ironic it is in a way that the son of an 18-year-old Navy fighter pilot who fought the Japanese is now talking peace with the leader of a country that was our sworn enemy. Think about that for a minute. Sixty years ago, a lot of folks, a lot of your relatives, signed up to fight an enemy that attacked us. By the way, we lost more people on September the 11th than we did when Pearl Harbor was bombed. And a lot of people went and fought, and there was a lot of death and destruction. And yet, 60 years later -- which seems like a long time when you're 59 -- (laughter) -- but it's really not all that long in the march of history -- I'm talking with Prime Minister Koizumi about how to keep the peace. So something happened between the time that my dad and your relatives signed up in World War II, and I'm talking peace with Koizumi. And what happened was Japan became a democracy.

These are historic times. We have an obligation and a duty to protect the American people. And we'll do just that. That's why Mark Kennedy needs to be in the United States Senate. And we have an opportunity -- (applause) -- and we have an historic opportunity to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. I'm absolutely convinced that some day, 50 or 60 years from now, an American President will be speaking to an audience saying, thank goodness a generation of Americans rose to the challenge and helped people be liberated from tyranny; democracy spread, and the world is more peaceful for it. (Applause.)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:45 AM

OUTLASTED ANOTHER ONE:

U.S., Under Fire, Eases Its Stance in Climate Talks (ANDREW C. REVKIN, 12/10/05, NY Times)

The United States dropped its opposition early Saturday morning to nonbinding talks on addressing global warming after a few words were adjusted in the text of statements that, 24 hours earlier, prompted a top American official to walk out on negotiations. [...]

The United States and China, the world's current and projected leaders in greenhouse gas emissions, still refused to agree to mandatory steps to curtail the emissions as the talks drew toward a close early Saturday. [...]

The walkout, by Harlan L. Watson, the chief American negotiator here, came Friday, shortly after midnight, on what was to have been the last day of the talks, during which the administration has been repeatedly assailed by the leaders of other wealthy industrialized nations for refusing to negotiate to advance the goals of that treaty, and in which former President Bill Clinton chided both sides for lack of flexibility.

At a closed session of about 50 delegates, Dr. Watson objected to the proposed title of a statement calling for long-term international cooperation to carry out the 1992 climate treaty, participants said. He then got up from the table and departed. [...]

In the end, though, some adjustments of wording - including a shift from "mechanisms" to the softer word "opportunities" in one statement - ended the dispute.

In Washington, Adam Ereli, a State Department spokesman, said the administration was determined to achieve greenhouse-gas reductions not through binding limits but through long-term work to develop cleaner technologies.

"If you want to talk about global consciousness," he said, "I'd say there's one country that is focused on action, that is focused on dialogue, that is focused on cooperation, and that is focused on helping the developing world, and that's the United States."

There were still a few more details involving Russia that were being worked on, but delegates and participants among the 9,000 people in the halls were confident the overall deal would hold.

The amount of progress is still achingly slow, many environmentalist say. The world's major sources of greenhouse emissions - the United States, big developing countries like China and India, and a bloc led by Europe and Japan - remain divided over how to proceed under both the 1992 treaty and the Kyoto Protocol, an addendum that took effect this year.

The original treaty - since ratified by 189 nations, including the United States - has no binding restrictions. The Kyoto pact does impose mandatory limits on industrialized nations, but they do not apply to developing nations, including China and India. The United States and Australia have rejected that pact.

On Friday, countries bound by the Kyoto Protocol were close to agreeing on a plan to negotiate a new set of targets and timetables for cutting emissions after its terms expire.

But under pressure from some countries already having trouble meeting Kyoto targets, the language included no specific year for ending talks on next steps, instead indicating that parties would "aim to complete" work "as soon as possible."


Let them talk all they want so long as we don't surrender any national sovereignty.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:40 AM

THE PRO-AMERICAN SKUNK AT THE DEMOCRAT GARDEN PARTY:

Lieberman's Pro-War Views Concern Dems (ANDREW MIGA, December 10, 2005, Associated Press)

Sen. Joe Lieberman's staunch stay-the-course defense of President Bush's Iraq policies isn't winning him any friends among fellow Democrats.

Lieberman's pro-war views may be winning him praise from a grateful White House, but some Democratic colleagues see him as undercutting their party's efforts to wrest control of Congress from the GOP next fall.

"He's doing damage to the ability of Democrats to wage a national campaign," said Ken Dautrich, a University of Connecticut public policy professor. "It's Lieberman being Lieberman. And it's frustrating for people trying to put a Democratic strategy together."


How dare he put his country above partisan politics?


MORE:
Joe Republican?: Why President Bush loves Sen. Lieberman. (John Dickerson, Dec. 9, 2005, Slate)

Bush hasn't just cherry-picked Lieberman's complimentary remarks about Iraq policy. The president has also embraced Lieberman's criticism. He said the senator was correct to charge that "mistakes had been made" in the prosecution of the war. That's just a flicker of candor, but it's new for the president. The old Bush would have tweezed the good bits from Lieberman and pretended the criticisms didn't exist. Today's embattled Bush is trying to show those who doubt him that he sees things clearly. Embracing Lieberman's criticisms, however gingerly, helps Bush show that he's awake without looking like he's caving to political pressure from lefty partisans.

Lieberman benefits by the association as well. He gets to do a McCain. He has a free pass to candor. He can beat up President Bush and praise him—both help his image. As with McCain, Lieberman's showy acts of centrism inspire the hatred of the ideological core of his party. Lieberman rattled their blogs when he preached recently: "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more years. We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril."

Lieberman is running for a fourth term in 2006, but angering liberals in his party won't hurt much. He's popular and has no real opponent. His former rival Lowell Weicker, whom he beat in 1988 before Weicker jumped from the GOP to become an independent, is mulling a challenge, but that's more a nuisance than a competitive threat.

Unlike McCain, Lieberman isn't going to be able to translate his maverick status into national electoral success.


Lieberman Wins Republican Friends, Democratic Enemies With Support for War (Shailagh Murray, 12/10/05, Washington Post)
Lieberman's contrarian behavior is not out of character -- he is far more hawkish than the majority of Democrats, and he has vigorously backed invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein from the beginning. But the latest defense of Bush and his stinging salvos at some in his own party have infuriated Democrats, who say he is undercutting their effort to forge a consensus on the war and draw clear distinctions with Republicans before the 2006 elections.

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is troubled by Lieberman's comments, Reid's aides said. "I've talked to Senator Lieberman, and unfortunately he is at a different place on Iraq than the majority of the American people," Reid said yesterday.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters this week that "I completely disagree" with Lieberman. She added: "I believe that we have a responsibility to speak out if we think that the course of action that our country is on is not making the American people safer, making our military stronger and making the region more stable."

Liberal political groups, including Democracy for America and MoveOn.org, are considering ways to retaliate, including backing a challenge to Lieberman in next year's Democratic primary. Former senator and Connecticut governor Lowell P. Weicker Jr., an opponent of the war, has vowed to run as an independent, absent a strong Democratic or Republican challenge to Lieberman.


Remember how the President was castigated for not buttering Jim Jeffords scones back in '01 and blamed for him bolting the Party? What doi Democrats think they're doing by openly attacking Mr. Lieberman, who actually has better job offers than junior senator of a permanent minority?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:01 AM

GOTTA BE IN IT TO WIN IT:

Hollywood Revival?: Christians keep Hollywood profitable (the Editors, 12/10/05, National Catholic Register)

That’s what Barbara Nicolosi, who teaches Christians the art of screenwriting, told Godspy, an online magazine, in a recent interview.

“A Christian project saved the global box office from 2001 to 2003 with Tolkien’s trilogy, The Lord of the Rings. Then another Christian project, The Passion of the Christ, saved the global cineplexes in 2004. And yet another Christian story is going to save the entertainment industry this year with C.S. Lewis’ The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.”

That’s the movie that opens Dec. 9 and is based on the novel by Christian apologist C.S. Lewis, the 20th-century Anglican author who brought many people into the Catholic Church, though he never joined them.

Nicolosi is right, but there’s more: Christian audiences have always proved Hollywood’s most lucrative.

Look at the highest grossing films of all time (adjusted for inflation).Three of the top 10 have Catholic themes: The Sound of Music, The Ten Commandments and The Exorcist. Half of the top 10 are family films.

The list of the top 100 is also full of surprises. Ben Hur comes in ahead of huge blockbusters like Return of the Jedi and Jurassic Park. The Bells of St. Mary’s beats Return of the King and Spider-Man 2. And the amount of money taken in by The Passion of the Christ beats the legendary success of Revenge of the Sith, Harry Potter and the first two Lord of the Rings movies.


Once Christians got over their contempt for politics--largely through the efforts of guys like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson -- they transformed the political culture. Next in line are academia and the arts.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

WILLINGNESS:

Into the Wonder: You won't understand the genius of C. S. Lewis's literary criticism, satire, science fiction, and theological essays until you spend time in Narnia. (Alan Jacobs, 12/09/2005, Christianity Today)

I want to suggest that Lewis's willingness to be enchanted held together the various strands of his life: his delight in laughter, his willingness to accept a world made by a good and loving God, and his willingness to submit to the charms of a wonderful story. What is "secretly present in what he said about anything" is an openness to delight, to the sense that there's more to the world than meets the jaundiced eye, to the possibility that anything could happen to someone who's ready to meet anything.

For someone with eyes to see and the courage to explore, even an old wardrobe full of musty coats could become the doorway to another world.

After all the Narnia books were done, Lewis wrote an essay in which he explained that the stories began when he started "seeing pictures in [his] head"—or rather, when he started paying attention to pictures he had been seeing all along, since the "picture of a Faun carrying an umbrella and parcels in a snowy wood," which we find near the beginning of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, first entered his head when he was 16 years old. It was only when he was about 40 that he said to himself, "Let's try to make a story about it."

As we have seen, it was a particularly trying time in his life when he wrote the first Narnia tale. Yet something—some instinctively strong response to the offer of enchantment, perhaps made all the more strong because of his difficult circumstances—made him start writing, even though he "had very little idea how the story would go."

What made him write this way, and why it is such a good thing that he did—these are hard topics to talk about without seeming sentimental. Yet they are necessary topics. In most children, but in relatively few adults, we see a willingness to be delighted to the point of self-abandonment. This free and full gift of oneself to a story is what produces the state of enchantment. Why do we lose the ability to give ourselves in this way? Perhaps adolescence introduces the fear of being deceived, the fear of being caught believing in what others have ceased to believe. To be naive, to be gullible—these are the great humiliations of adolescence.

Lewis never seems to have been fully possessed by this fear, though he felt it at times. "When I was 10, I read fairy stories in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am 50, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."

It was Richard Wagner's vast landscapes of heroic myth that captured Lewis above all, and the gentler "Faerie" world of the English imagination, from Spenser to Tennyson, William Morris, and George MacDonald. He once wrote that stories which sounded "the horns of Elfland" constituted "that kind of literature to which my allegiance was given the moment I could choose books for myself." It was perhaps inevitable that he would become a scholar of medieval and Renaissance literature, and that his first work of fiction would be an elaborate allegory based on Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. He consumed works of fantasy and then science fiction (in which genre he would write his first novels). It was not likely that such an open mind would remain an atheist long, though Lewis did hold out as an unbeliever until nearly 30.

Lewis remained, in this particular sense, childlike, that is, able to receive pleasure from the kinds of stories that tend to give pleasure to children. Ruth Pitter, a poet and close friend of Lewis's, wrote, "His whole life was oriented and motivated by an almost uniquely persisting child's sense of glory and of nightmare. The adult events were received into a medium as pliable as wax, wide open to the glory and equally vulnerable, with a man's strength to feel it all, and a great scholar's and writer's skills to express and interpret."

Surely Lewis would have said that when we can no longer be "wide open to the glory," we have lost not just our childlikeness, but also something near the core of our humanity. Those who will never be fooled can never be delighted, because without self-forgetfulness there can be no delight, and this is a great and grievous loss.


It's always amusing that the secular think closing themselves off in such a manner and concentrating thoroughly on the self marks their ultimate victory.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

A REASONABLE MAN:

Roger Shattuck, Scholar, Is Dead at 82 (DOUGLAS MARTIN, 12/10/05, NY Times)

Roger Shattuck, a polyglot scholar and writer whose many subjects ranged from the emergence of modernism to whether some knowledge might be too dangerous to know, died on Thursday at his home in Lincoln, Vt. He was 82.

The cause was prostate cancer, his daughter Patricia said.

Mr. Shattuck's scholarly contributions included writing three books on Marcel Proust, one of which won a National Book Award in 1975. His intellectual journey included a groundbreaking work on the rise of the avant-garde in France in the decades preceding World War I and a provocative examination of the famed "Wild Boy of Aveyron" as a study of how humans develop intelligence. In all, he wrote 16 books, including six translations.

In his later decades, Mr. Shattuck became a caustic, if often witty, opponent of postmodern trends in the study and teaching of literature, including deconstructionism and semiotics, which he contended stripped literature of its intellectual, moral and human environment. In particular, he lamented that the literary world increasingly failed to celebrate the works of classic writers. [...]

Roger Whitney Shattuck was born in Manhattan on Aug. 20, 1923. His father was a successful physician with a brownstone on the East Side.

At Yale, he floundered in a pre-med program, then interrupted college to enlist in the Army Air Force and become a pilot in a combat cargo squadron in the Pacific. He flew a B-25 over Hiroshima a few weeks after the atomic bomb was dropped.

He ruminated about this in his 1996 book "Forbidden Knowledge: From Prometheus to Pornography." He wrote that although the bomb's ending of the war probably saved his life, it raised the question of whether it embodied a knowledge so horrific that it meant man no longer controlled his fate.

The book used myth, literature and other sources to question whether there were some things man was better off not knowing. These ranged from the threat genetic engineering posed to natural selection to what he deemed the violent pornography of Marquis de Sade, whom other writers were lionizing as a great author.

The book provoked a storm of protest, but Mr. Shattuck stopped well short of advocating censorship. He suggested a "wise agnosticism" and the setting of reasonable limits.

In The New York Times, Richard Bernstein called the book a creed to live by.

"The edifice trembles here and there," he wrote, "but it is nonetheless a fine structure, full of dark passages and richly furnished rooms."


Forbidden Knowledge is terrific and his Proust criticism is better than the source material.



December 9, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:38 PM

ISN'T THAT, LEFT OUT IN THE WARM?:

US out in the cold at world climate talks (Charles Clover, 10/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Delegates representing 180 countries at a UN conference committed themselves to speed up climate change measures agreed in the 1997 Kyoto treaty.

But the Americans - who have refused to ratify Kyoto over fears that it will damage its economy - staged a walk-out and refused to agree to a new era of talks to find a successor to the treaty, which runs out in 2012. [...]

Harlan Watson, the US chief negotiator, blamed his decision to walk out on a speech by Paul Martin, the Canadian prime minister.

Mr Martin called for "the reluctant countries including the United States" to listen to the "global conscience".

The sticking point for Mr Watson was the word "dialogue" used in the Canadian chairman's text. He said this amounted to the opening of negotiations on a new treaty, which America had said it would not accept.

He is reported to have said: "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it is a duck," before stalking out. [...]

The conference agreed under the Kyoto treaty - which the US has not ratified so cannot veto - to have compliance mechanisms forcing countries to face financial penalties if they do not meet their prescribed carbon reduction targets.


Bad enough to be party to the WTO, which at least serves good ends, but any president who signed away US sovereignty in this manner would deserve to be impeached.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 8:25 PM

MULTILATERALISM MEANS NEVER HAVING TO GO TO WAR

Spare us the wreaths (Saul Singer, Jerusalem Post, December 8th, 2005)

Still, the question remains, why is little Israel being left to fight the world's war? The answer is not just that life's unfair. The real answer is that the enlightened post-modern European refusal to lift a finger - let alone a gun - to defend itself is consigning us all to a dark age of terrorism and war.

The irony here is that it is precisely those who claim to believe most in a borderless world ruled by international law who are ushering in a new Hobbesian era. How is one to explain Europe's obsession with the United Nations on the one hand, and its emasculation of the principles on which that organization was founded?

If Europe, through the UN and in partnership with the US, simply followed the UN Charter, we would be living in a very different world today. That Charter (Ch. 1, Art. 1, Para. 1, first sentence) states the UN's purpose: "To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace..." (emphasis added).

Does this ring any bells? Is there a state that is a greater threat to international peace than Iran? How much terrorism does a state have to sponsor, how many member states does it have to threaten with destruction, and how far does it have to get in obtaining the ultimate means to carry out such threats before the collective obligations of free nations under the Charter are remembered?

The nations that wrap themselves most tightly in international law are actually those responsible for turning that law, and its aspirations for the world, into a dead letter. As in the case of Iraq, by refusing to join the US in effective non-military collective action against Iran, Europe is making military action or an Iranian victory inevitable.

It is in this context that I found it difficult to watch European ambassadors placing a wreath on the spot where a suicide bomber killed five Israelis, including 38-year-old Eliya Rozen, outside a mall in Netanya. On Tuesday, at his wife's funeral, Gadi Rozen spoke of their three childrens' questions when he told them their mother was dead. Roi, the five-year-old asked, "Who will be my mother?"

What wreath will these ambassadors lay if Israel gets hit by a nuclear weapon? Or if Israelis are killed in a war to destroy Iran's nuclear program? Or if 9/11s continue to multiply, including in Europe, because al-Qaida enjoys the tailwind that a nuclear Iran would bring?

Perhaps it is pointless to appeal to European sympathies for Israel when these same nations won't even defend themselves. Most bizarre, however, is that Europe, by refusing to impose draconian sanctions on Iran, is guaranteeing either a huge victory for the terror network or military action by the US or Israel. In other words, under the cloak of international law, Europe is bringing either the aggression of its enemies or unilateralist defensive actions of exactly the sort it claims to most want to prevent.

Those diplomats, no doubt, had the best of intentions. But with all due respect, spare us the wreaths. Join us and defend yourselves. We are not your hired hitmen; don't depend on us to save you. Take your beloved international law seriously and throw the book at Iran.



Posted by Peter Burnet at 7:52 PM

SUNRISE, SUNSET

Britain Retires 1950's Double-Decker Buses (Jill Lawless, Globe and Mail, December 9th, 2005)

After half a century, London's red Routemaster buses are rattling into retirement.

Thousands of fans said farewell to the hop-on, hop-off buses yesterday, the last full day of regular service for the icon that has been the subject of thousands of tourists' photographs and postcards.

Transport authorities are withdrawing the blunt-nosed double-decker from its last route -- the 159 from Marble Arch to Streatham Hill -- today. The final Routemaster was to leave central London just after noon, bound south of the Thames to a bus garage in Brixton.

"My experience of London is diminished by their passing," said Travis Elborough, author of the Routemaster book The Bus We Loved.

The next thing you know, they’ll be enclosing the commons.


Posted by David Cohen at 6:18 PM

SO, NOW HE SUPPORTS THE WAR AGAIN?

Real Security in a Post-9/11 World [Prepared Remarks] (John F. Kerry, Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations, 12/8/05)

And democratic values and openness should be championed not simply as western values but as the universal values that they are.

Democratization is not a crusade.

If it is seen as the result of an army marching through Muslim lands it will fail.

But more importantly, that's not the way democracy works.

Democracy spreads with patient but firm determination, led by individuals of courage who dream of a better day for their country.

Viktor Yushchenko had that dream in Ukraine.

Hamid Karzai had that dream in Afghanistan.

And Lech Walesa had that dream in Poland.

We need to create the conditions where this dream can become a reality in the Arab world.

Brothers Judd blog readers will recognize immediately that Senator Kerry is here endorsing the war but I'll give Lech Welesa the last word:

In Solidarity: The Polish people, hungry for justice, preferred "cowboys" over Communists (Lech Walesa, Opinionjournal.com, 7/11/04)

When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally. Why? Because we owe him our liberty. This can't be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989.

Poles fought for their freedom for so many years that they hold in special esteem those who backed them in their struggle. Support was the test of friendship. President Reagan was such a friend. His policy of aiding democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe in the dark days of the Cold War meant a lot to us. We knew he believed in a few simple principles such as human rights, democracy and civil society. He was someone who was convinced that the citizen is not for the state, but vice-versa, and that freedom is an innate right.

I often wondered why Ronald Reagan did this, taking the risks he did, in supporting us at Solidarity, as well as dissident movements in other countries behind the Iron Curtain, while pushing a defense buildup that pushed the Soviet economy over the brink. Let's remember that it was a time of recession in the U.S. and a time when the American public was more interested in their own domestic affairs. It took a leader with a vision to convince them that there are greater things worth fighting for. Did he seek any profit in such a policy? Though our freedom movements were in line with the foreign policy of the United States, I doubt it.


Posted by David Cohen at 5:40 PM

ALERT THE RED CROSS

Iraq defendant gripes about cigarettes, food (Reuters, 12/8/05)

A co-defendant in the trial of
Saddam Hussein complained on Wednesday about the quality of cigarettes the U.S. military gave him while in custody.

Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Saddam's former intelligence chief and one of his most feared sidekicks, also said the food was bad and he was not given blankets. He lost 18 kilos in just two months in captivity, he complained.

"We were detained by one of the wealthiest countries in the world, yet it was only after four months in detention that they gave me cigarettes," said Barzan, charged with crimes against humanity.

"And then they were of the worst quality in the world."

Unlike almost all the other blather about how the US is mistreating prisoners, Mr. al-Tikriti, a prisoner of war entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention, has a compelling case:
Convention III. Chapter II. Quarters, Food and Clothing of Prisoners of War

Art. 26. The basic daily food rations shall be sufficient in quantity, quality and variety to keep prisoners of war in good health and to prevent loss of weight or the development of nutritional deficiencies. Account shall also be taken of the habitual diet of the prisoners. . . .

Sufficient drinking water shall be supplied to prisoners of war. The use of tobacco shall be permitted.

Art. 28. Canteens shall be installed in all camps, where prisoners of war may procure foodstuffs, soap and tobacco and ordinary articles in daily use. The tariff shall never be in excess of local market prices.

For the first time, I'm ashamed to be an American.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:49 PM

PASSING THE TORCH?:

Lieberman meets with Rumsfeld amid retirement speculation (ANDREW MIGA, December 8, 2005, Associated Press)

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld hosted Sen. Joe Lieberman for a breakfast meeting Thursday amid speculation that the Connecticut Democrat could be in line to succeed him.

Lieberman, who has emerged as President Bush's staunchest Democratic defender on the Iraq war, has bucked his party and been a vocal advocate for Bush's Iraq policies.

He was tight-lipped about the 7:30 a.m. meeting with Rumsfeld and Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.
May as well get the new SecDef up to speed.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:43 PM

EVIL IS AS EVIL HONORS:

Castro the 'Lennonist' (BBC, 12/09/05)

The Cuban President, Fidel Castro, has paid homage to John Lennon at the unveiling of a statue of the late pop singer in Havana. [...]

President Castro praised Lennon as a revolutionary, whose thinking and ideas made him great.


They deserve each other.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:30 PM

VOTER MOTOR:

US edges towards Iraq troop reductions (AFX, 12/09/05)

he US military has delayed sending a combat brigade to Iraq and put another on standby in what may indicate a scaling back of troop levels after next week's elections. [...]

Rumsfeld said decisions on deeper cuts could come within weeks of the elections.

'Things could happen very rapidly,' he said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:09 PM

THEIR SUPREMACY IS THE PROBLEM:

'NY Times' Sunday Preview: Conservative Blogs Rock! (E&P Staff, December 09, 2005, Editor & Publisher)

In an argument sure to be challenged in certain sectors of the blogosphere, a story in The New York Times magazine coming up this Sunday declares that conservative blogs continue to best liberal blogs in political and electoral influence.

The title of the piece by Michael Crowley in the magazine’s 5th Annual Year in Ideas cover package says it all: “Conservative Blogs Are More Effective.” [...]

In fact, Crowley admits that his argument for conservative blog supremacy may seem “counterintuitive,” noting the Howard Dean phenomenon in early 2004 and heavy Web traffic numbers for liberal blogs such as DailyKos. (He does not mention that studies of online traffic show that, overall, there are more highly-popular liberal blogs than conservative ones.) But he explains that “Democrats say there’s a key difference between liberals and conservatives online. Liberals use the Web to air ideas and vent grievances with one another, often ripping into Democratic leaders….Conservatives, by contrast, skillfully use the Web to provide maximum benefit for their issues and candidates.”


It's not that the Left wing blogs are less effective than the Right, -- which are actually just libertarian blogs not conservative -- but that where they are effective in advancing their views and causes it's deadly for the Democratic Party. Howard Dean's rise is the most obvious example, but the rising tide of anti-American anti-war fervor in the caucus seems to be mostly fed by the very margins of the Left, like Cindy Sheehan and the blogs. Following the lead of the Left blogs is a sure-fire recipe for permanent minority status and the Democrats, amazingly enough, seem inclined to follow. The two major "blog victories" on the Right have been equally counterproductive -- replacing the experienced Trent Lott with the neophyte Bill Frist and Harriet Miers with Samuel Alito -- but they're rather minor seeming with the party firmly controlling the entire government and the public agenda.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:51 PM

LET'S NOT BLAME THE VICTIMS (via John Resnick):

He puked his guts up? Nice.. (Erik Kirschbaum, 12/09/05, Reuters)

The British embassy in Germany launched a new website for the 2006 World Cup on Friday that includes handy German phrases for England fans, such as "He was sick as a parrot" or "He puked his guts up."

The website (www.britishembassyworldcup.com) is designed to help the estimated 100,000 English fans expected to travel to Germany for the 32-team tournament that starts in Munich on June 9 and concludes with the July 9 final in Berlin.

"Germany will be hosting the world's biggest party and it will make a great job of it," said British Ambassador Peter Torry in a statement announcing the new website ahead of Friday's draw in Leipzig, 200 km (120 miles) south of Berlin.


The next person to sit through a soccer game without puking his guts up will be the first.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:14 PM

WELL, WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT PLAYLIST IS PAINFUL:

Disco Inferno (MOUSTAFA BAYOUMI, December 26, 2005, The Nation)

Disco isn't dead. It has gone to war.

And it's everywhere: Afghanistan, Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, anywhere touched by the "war on terror." In Afghanistan, Zakim Shah, a 20-year-old Afghan farmer, was forced to stay awake while in American custody by soldiers blasting music and shouting at him. Shah told the New York Times that after enduring the pain of music, "he grew so exhausted...that he vomited." In Guantánamo Bay, Eminem, Britney Spears, Limp Bizkit, Rage Against the Machine, Metallica (again) and Bruce Springsteen ("Born in the USA") have been played at mind-numbing volumes, sometimes for stretches of up to fourteen hours, at detainees. And at Abu Ghraib, Saddam Salah al-Rawi, a 29-year-old Iraqi, told a similar story. For no reason, over a period of four months, he was hooded, beaten, stripped, urinated on and lashed to his cell door by his hands and feet. He also talked about music becoming a weapon. "There was a stereo inside the cell," he said, "with a sound so loud I couldn't sleep. I stayed like that for twenty-three hours."

Whatever the playlist--usually heavy metal or hip-hop but sometimes, bizarrely, Barney the Dinosaur's "I Love You" or selections from Sesame Street--the music is pumped at detainees with such brutality to unravel them without laying so much as a feather on their bodies. The mind is another story, and blasting loud music at captives has become part of what has now entered our lexicon as "torture lite." Torture lite is a calculated combination of psychological and physical means of coercion that stop short of causing death and pose little risk that telltale physical marks will be left behind, but that nonetheless can cause extreme psychological trauma. It's designed to deprive the victim of sleep and to cause massive sensory overstimulation, and it has been shown in different situations to be psychologically unbearable.

Clearly, torture music is an assault on human rights.


If I recall correctly (an unlikelihood), it was Cliff van Zandt who told the story on Frontline's Waco episode about the feds bringing out their loud music, which is pro forma in such stand-offs. But then David Koresh brought out this monster sound system that he used for probably similar reasons and totally overrode them, driving the agents crazy mad and contributing to the ugly denouement.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:29 AM

WHO'D THEY THINK THEY WERE KILLING?:

Dutch 'suicide consultant' jailed (Geraldine Coughlan, BBC News)

A Dutch court has sentenced a man calling himself a "suicide consultant" to a year in jail for helping a mentally ill woman to end her life.

Euthanasists prey on depressed people--the elderly, sick, and disabled, No use acting surprised about it.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:20 AM

OBLIGATORY BUCHANAN COMPARISON:

IS GEORGE BUSH THE WORST PRESIDENT -- EVER? (Richard Reeves, Dec 2, 2005)

What do you think he concludes?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:16 AM

COMEDY AND THE IDEA OF GOOD CITIZENSHIP:

An Essay on Comedy (George Meredith, 1897)

Now, to look about us in the present time, I think it will be acknowledged that in neglecting the cultivation of the Comic idea, we are losing the aid of a powerful auxiliar. You see Folly perpetually sliding into new shapes in a society possessed of wealth and leisure, with many whims, many strange ailments and strange doctors. Plenty of common-sense is in the world to thrust her back when she pretends to empire. But the first-born of common-sense, the vigilant Comic, which is the genius of thoughtful laughter, which would readily extinguish her at the outset, is not serving as a public advocate.

You will have noticed the disposition of common-sense, under pressure of some pertinacious piece of light-headedness, to grow impatient and angry. That is a sign of the absence, or at least of the dormancy, of the Comic idea. For Folly is the natural prey of the Comic, known to it in all her transformations, in every disguise; and it is with the springing delight of hawk over heron, hound after fox, that it gives her chase, never fretting, never tiring, sure of having her, allowing her no rest.

Contempt is a sentiment that cannot be entertained by comic intelligence. What is it but an excuse to be idly minded, or personally lofty, or comfortably narrow, not perfectly humane? If we do not feign when we say that we despise Folly, we shut the brain. There is a disdainful attitude in the presence of Folly, partaking of the foolishness to Comic perception: and anger is not much less foolish than disdain. The struggle we have to conduct is essence against essence. Let no one doubt of the sequel when this emanation of what is firmest in us is launched to strike down the daughter of Unreason and Sentimentalism: such being Folly's parentage, when it is respectable.of employing Johnsonian polysyllables to treat of the infinitely little. And it really may be humorous, of a kind, yet it will miss the point by going too much round about it. [...]

Dulness, insensible to the Comic, has the privilege of arousing it; and the laying of a dull finger on matters of human life is the surest method of establishing electrical communications with a battery of laughter--where the Comic idea is prevalent.

But if the Comic idea prevailed with us, and we had an Aristophanes to barb and wing it, we should be breathing air of Athens. Prosers now pouring forth on us like public fountains would be cut short in the street and left blinking, dumb as pillar-posts, with letters thrust into their mouths. We should throw off incubus, our dreadful familiar--by some called boredom--whom it is our present humiliation to be just alive enough to loathe, never quick enough to foil. There would be a bright and positive, clear Hellenic perception of facts. The vapours of Unreason and Sentimentalism would be blown away before they were productive. Where would Pessimist and Optimist be? They would in any case have a diminished audience.
Yet possibly the change of despots, from good-natured old obtuseness to keen-edged intelligence, which is by nature merciless, would be more than we could bear. The rupture of the link between dull people, consisting in the fraternal agreement that something is too clever for them, and a shot beyond them, is not to be thought of lightly; for, slender though the link may seem, it is equivalent to a cement forming a concrete of dense cohesion, very desirable in the estimation of the statesman.

A political Aristophanes, taking advantage of his lyrical Bacchic licence, was found too much for political Athens. I would not ask to have him revived, but that the sharp light of such a spirit as his might be with us to strike now and then on public affairs, public themes, to make them spin along more briskly.

He hated with the politician's fervour the sophist who corrupted simplicity of thought, the poet who destroyed purity of style, the demagogue, 'the saw-toothed monster,' who, as he conceived, chicaned
the mob, and he held his own against them by strength of laughter, until fines, the curtailing of his Comic licence in the chorus, and ultimately the ruin of Athens, which could no longer support the expense of the chorus, threw him altogether on dialogue, and brought him under the law. After the catastrophe, the poet, who had ever been gazing back at the men of Marathon and Salamis, must have felt that he had foreseen it; and that he was wise when he pleaded for peace, and derided military coxcombry, and the captious old creature Demus, we can admit. He had the Comic poet's gift of common-sense--
which does not always include political intelligence; yet his political tendency raised him above the Old Comedy turn for uproarious farce. He abused Socrates, but Xenophon, the disciple of Socrates, by his trained rhetoric saved the Ten Thousand. Aristophanes might say that if his warnings had been followed there would have been no such thing as a mercenary Greek expedition under Cyrus. Athens, however, was on a landslip, falling; none could arrest it. To gaze back, to uphold the old times, was a most natural conservatism, and fruitless. The aloe had bloomed. Whether right or wrong in his politics and his criticisms, and bearing in mind the instruments he played on and the audience he had to win, there is an idea in his comedies: it is the Idea of Good Citizenship. [...]

Taking them generally, the English public are most in sympathy with this primitive Aristophanic comedy, wherein the comic is capped by the grotesque, irony tips the wit, and satire is a naked sword. They have the basis of the Comic in them: an esteem for common- sense. They cordially dislike the reverse of it. They have a rich laugh, though it is not the gros rire of the Gaul tossing gros sel, nor the polished Frenchman's mentally digestive laugh. And if they have now, like a monarch with a troop of dwarfs, too many jesters kicking the dictionary about, to let them reflect that they are dull, occasionally, like the pensive monarch surprising himself with an idea of an idea of his own, they look so. And they are given to looking in the glass. They must see that something ails them. How much even the better order of them will endure, without a thought of the defensive, when the person afflicting them is protected from
satire, we read in Memoirs of a Preceding Age, where the vulgarly tyrannous hostess of a great house of reception shuffled the guests and played them like a pack of cards, with her exact estimate of the
strength of each one printed on them: and still this house continued to be the most popular in England; nor did the lady ever appear in print or on the boards as the comic type that she was.

It has been suggested that they have not yet spiritually comprehended the signification of living in society; for who are cheerfuller, brisker of wit, in the fields, and as explorers, colonisers, backwoodsmen? They are happy in rough exercise, and also in complete repose. The intermediate condition, when they are called upon to talk to one another, upon other than affairs of business or their hobbies, reveals them wearing a curious look of vacancy, as it were the socket of an eye wanting. The Comic is perpetually springing up in social life, and, it oppresses them from not being perceived. [...]

In our prose literature we have had delightful Comic writers. Besides Fielding and Goldsmith, there is Miss Austen, whose Emma and Mr. Elton might walk straight into a comedy, were the plot arranged for them. Galt's neglected novels have some characters and strokes of shrewd comedy. In our poetic literature the comic is delicate and graceful above the touch of Italian and French. Generally, however, the English elect excel in satire, and they are noble humourists. The national disposition is for hard-hitting, with a
moral purpose to sanction it; or for a rosy, sometimes a larmoyant, geniality, not unmanly in its verging upon tenderness, and with a singular attraction for thick-headedness, to decorate it with asses' ears and the most beautiful sylvan haloes. But the Comic is a different spirit.

You may estimate your capacity for Comic perception by being able to detect the ridicule of them you love, without loving them less: and more by being able to see yourself somewhat ridiculous in dear eyes, and accepting the correction their image of you proposes.

Each one of an affectionate couple may be willing, as we say, to die for the other, yet unwilling to utter the agreeable word at the right moment; but if the wits were sufficiently quick for them to perceive that they are in a comic situation, as affectionate couples must be when they quarrel, they would not wait for the moon or the almanac, or a Dorine, to bring back the flood-tide of tender feelings, that they should join hands and lips.

If you detect the ridicule, and your kindliness is chilled by it, you are slipping into the grasp of Satire.

If instead of falling foul of the ridiculous person with a satiric rod, to make him writhe and shriek aloud, you prefer to sting him under a semi-caress, by which he shall in his anguish be rendered dubious whether indeed anything has hurt him, you are an engine of Irony.

If you laugh all round him, tumble him, roll him about, deal him a smack, and drop a tear on him, own his likeness to you and yours to your neighbour, spare him as little as you shun, pity him as much as you expose, it is a spirit of Humour that is moving you.

The Comic, which is the perceptive, is the governing spirit, awakening and giving aim to these powers of laughter, but it is not to be confounded with them: it enfolds a thinner form of them, differing from satire, in not sharply driving into the quivering sensibilities, and from humour, in not comforting them and tucking them up, or indicating a broader than the range of this bustling world to them. [...]

Incidents of a kind casting ridicule on our unfortunate nature instead of our conventional life, provoke derisive laughter, which thwarts the Comic idea. But derision is foiled by the play of the intellect. Most of doubtful causes in contest are open to Comic interpretation, and any intellectual pleading of a doubtful cause contains germs of an Idea of Comedy.

The laughter of satire is a blow in the back or the face. The laughter of Comedy is impersonal and of unrivalled politeness, nearer a smile; often no more than a smile. It laughs through the mind, for the mind directs it; and it might be called the humour of the mind.

One excellent test of the civilization of a country, as I have said, I take to be the flourishing of the Comic idea and Comedy; and the test of true Comedy is that it shall awaken thoughtful laughter.

If you believe that our civilization is founded in common-sense (and it is the first condition of sanity to believe it), you will, when contemplating men, discern a Spirit overhead; not more heavenly than the light flashed upward from glassy surfaces, but luminous and watchful; never shooting beyond them, nor lagging in the rear; so closely attached to them that it may be taken for a slavish reflex, until its features are studied. It has the sage's brows, and the sunny malice of a faun lurks at the corners of the half-closed lips drawn in an idle wariness of half tension. That slim feasting smile, shaped like the long-bow, was once a big round satyr's laugh, that flung up the brows like a fortress lifted by gunpowder. The laugh will come again, but it will be of the order of the smile, finely tempered, showing sunlight of the mind, mental richness rather than noisy enormity. Its common aspect is one of unsolicitous observation, as if surveying a full field and having leisure to dart on its chosen morsels, without any fluttering eagerness. Men's future upon earth does not attract it; their honesty and shapeliness in the present does; and whenever they wax out of proportion, overblown, affected, pretentious, bombastical, hypocritical, pedantic, fantastically delicate; whenever it sees them self-deceived or hoodwinked, given to run riot in idolatries, drifting into vanities, congregating in absurdities, planning short-sightedly, plotting dementedly; whenever they are at variance with
their professions, and violate the unwritten but perceptible laws binding them in consideration one to another; whenever they offend sound reason, fair justice; are false in humility or mined with conceit, individually, or in the bulk--the Spirit overhead will look humanely malign and cast an oblique light on them, followed by volleys of silvery laughter. That is the Comic Spirit.

Not to distinguish it is to be bull-blind to the spiritual, and to deny the existence of a mind of man where minds of men are in working conjunction.

You must, as I have said, believe that our state of society is founded in common-sense, otherwise you will not be struck by the contrasts the Comic Spirit perceives, or have it to look to for your consolation. You will, in fact, be standing in that peculiar oblique beam of light, yourself illuminated to the general eye as the very object of chase and doomed quarry of the thing obscure to you. But to feel its presence and to see it is your assurance that many sane and solid minds are with you in what you are experiencing: and this of itself spares you the pain of satirical heat, and the bitter craving to strike heavy blows.


We find here both the reason that all comedy is conservative and the source of the Left's derangement. Conservatives, understanding the world to be Fallen and Man to be inherently flawed, are reconciled to reality, are unoffended when men act like mere mortals and life reveals its myriad imperfections. Not expecting Utopia, the conservative views life as a comedy.

Liberals, on the other hand, imagine life and man to be perfectable, indeed imagine a perfect past, and therefore perceive life as a tragedy. Estranged from reality they can't help but find life a torment. Of course, we on the Right find that hilarious and love them all the more for it....


MORE:
The Mad King and the Crazy Left (Timothy Birdnow, December 10th, 2005, American Thinker)

To understand why the radical fringe is so at odds with reality, it is necessary to understand the philosophical underpinnings of what they believe. There are numerous intellectual influences at the core of the modern Left, and each of these contribute to the final architecture of the asylum that is Liberalism. We need to look at a few of them to get the general idea.

1. Man Is Inherently Good

Rousseau is the primary originator of the modern version of this belief. This concept is at odds with the Christian worldview, which holds that Man has a fallen nature, and will sink to the level of barbarism if his appetites are not constrained.

This particular view of mna as originally perfect has a number of consequences; the Anti-Americanism often displayed by the left stems from the belief that our system is corrupting to the individual, and must be destroyed to free Man to realize his potential. Remember the students chanting “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ has gotta go!”? The idea here is that our civilization is at the root of suffering and evil, and by ridding ourselves of it we will be free to be righteous.

Radical Environmentalism is another consequence of this particular concept. Many Environmentalists believe that a return to a state of nature will be a return to paradise, and they seek to dismantle our industrial society so that Man can be freed of the pollution of Civilization, and can return to a mythical agrarian Eden. They disagree with Hobbes, who pointed out that life in a state of nature is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short“. They prefer to believe in a Golden Age, which can return if industrialism is ended.

Socialism, likewise, is an economic philosophy based on the belief in Man’s inherent goodness. The theory is that, if freed from the tyranny of economic self-reliance, the individual will work diligently for the common good, and thus the artificial barriers of class and wealth will disappear. With the proper social context, the goodness inherent in people will blossom, and the State will wither away as each shares his labor and his means with his neighbor.

The welfare state is an incremental approach to this, and the fact that we have witnessed disastrous consequences as a result dampens the liberal’s enthusiasm nary a wit; the left clings doggedly to this particular bit of folly, in violation of all reason. I believe it was Ben Franklin who said that the definition of insanity is attempting the same thing over and over, while expecting different results.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:28 AM

INSTEAD OF WASTING TIME HATING EVANGELICALS....:

Jewish Babies (Ben J. Wattenberg, Jeremy Kadden, December 2005, First Things)

While most Jews in America have few children, the Jews of New Square have many: at least six children per woman, and possibly even more, a rate among the highest on earth.

This is not unique to New Square. It is found wherever there are Haredi Jews, all over the world, and there is evidence to suggest the trend is unprecedented in Jewish history. Until the 1950s, official demographic information about Jewish birthrates was difficult to come by. Yet it appears that in the immediate aftermath of World War II, American Haredim were probably having in the range of two to four children per woman, much like their non-Haredi counterparts. But most demographers believe that in the 1970s the situation began to change dramatically. Since then, the Jewish community has broken into two distinct groups.

On the one hand are groups like the Haredim, whose birth rates have climbed to extremely high rates. At their current pace, the Haredi population could theoretically double or even triple in each generation.

On the other hand are the non-Haredi Jews, where the opposite seems to have occurred. Their fertility has fallen steadily to very low levels, with estimates ranging from 1.4 to 1.9 children per woman. Despite surveys that show their desire to have more children, American Jewish women in their thirties are nearly twice as likely to be childless as their non-Jewish counterparts. This part of the Jewish community is also considerably older than the surrounding population: The average Jewish age is forty-two, compared with just thirty-five for the United States as a whole.

Not a single major Jewish organization is working directly to reverse these trends. [...]

Some Jews do not consider birthrate to be a grave problem. It's the quality, not the quantity, that should concern us, some say. In their view, a dedicated minority is far better for the long-term health of the Jewish people than a large group of people who are indifferent to their people's survival. "Less is more," they say. Unfortunately, though, less is really less. Fewer people means less funding for schools, nursing homes, synagogues, and community centers. Fewer people means fewer educators, organizers, and rabbis. It could also lead to decreased power in Washington and decreased support for Israel.

What then is to be done? Some have suggested subsidies, particularly in the form of lower Jewish day-school tuition. However, many scholars disagree, arguing that tuition breaks and other subsidies would do little to encourage higher birthrates. With an ideology of reproduction, subsidies and tuition breaks would help. But among the vast majority of Jews there is no such ideology.

Indeed, the data from Europe and America about "paying people to have more children" through government subsidies and tax breaks are not encouraging. The Europeans have offered all kinds of tax breaks, child allowances, and government programs aimed at encouraging more children. And yet, despite all this, the average European fertility rate is 1.4, an all-time low, with no sign of reversal. Steven Bayme, the director of the department of "Contemporary Jewish Life" at the American Jewish Committee, reports that in the mid-1980s, a broad coalition of Jewish organizations came together to discuss Jewish birthrates. They all favored higher fertility, but there was a problem: How could it be encouraged? After much debate and discussion, the group decided that the best way to attack the problem was through the pulpit. They recommended that rabbis speak to their congregations about the need for more children, setting a tone among the congregations that would hopefully be just as effective as tuition breaks or day care.

But even that bargain-rate recommendation faced stiff opposition, says Bayme.


If most Jews weren't liberal Democrats and thuis captives of the teachers unions they'd be more likely to address this existential issue by supporting school choice.


Posted by kevin_whited at 10:25 AM

CHECKING IN ON THE 'MUSLIM STREET'

Protest against Bangladesh bombs (BBC News, 12/09/2005)

Hundreds of Muslims in Bangladesh have protested against recent suicide bombings blamed on Islamic militants.

The protests were organised by the country's leading Muslim clerics, who have denounced the attacks as against the tenets of Islam.

It comes a day after a suicide bomb attack killed at least six people in northern Bangladesh.

At least 25 people have been killed in a series of bombings across Bangladesh this year.

The main demonstration took place at the Baitul Mukarram national mosque in Dhaka after Friday prayers.

It is a duty for all Muslims to stand up against those who are killing in the name of Islam
Cleric Obaidul Haq

"Islam prohibits suicide bombings. These bombers are enemies of Islam," the chief cleric, Obaidul Haq, told worshippers.

"It is a duty for all Muslims to stand up against those who are killing people in the name of Islam," he said.

The "Muslim street" rising up against terror bombings?

That doesn't seem to be getting much play in the American press. Maybe they're convinced this story is really a plant by Rumsfeld/Rove?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:13 AM

WOOFTANG'S GOT COMP:

Rick Turley sends the following:

Pork in Chili Verde

Serving suggestion: Spoon into warm flour tortillas and garnish with cilantro and Mexican cheese and maybe a squirt of lime. If you have access to fresh masa, homemade corn tortillas would be a great choice.

Ingredients
4 pounds pork shoulder or pork stew meat* cut into 1 inch pieces
4 poblano peppers
3 pounds tomatillos, husked and washed
1 large white onion, thickly sliced
6 cloves garlic
2 serrano or jalapeno peppers
4 cups, more or less, chicken stock
Salt to taste

Ingredients, Optional
chipotle peppers in adobo sauce, to taste
1 tsp. cumin (better if toasted briefly)

Equipment
Dutch oven with lid

Directions
• Turn oven on to broil.
• Put pork into Dutch oven with chicken stock and begin bringing up to simmer. Chicken stock should cover pork by several inches.
• Char poblanos on grill or over gas stove until fairly black. Put into mixing bowl and cover for five minutes. Scrape off blackened skin, remove seeds and chop into small dice.
• Place tomatillos, onion slices, garlic cloves and serranos on a large jellyroll pan (to catch juices) and put under broiler until tomatillos have blackened areas. Turn tomatillos over and blacken the other side. Everything else should also be a bit charred. Remove from broiler and skin garlic cloves. Do not remove tomatillo skins.
• Empty jellyroll pan into food processor, scraping out all of the liquid. Add a little liquid to pan, if necessary, to get the brown bits. Pulse until smooth. Pour into Dutch oven with pork and chicken stock.
• Bring Dutch oven to a slow simmer, cover partially and cook for at least 2 hours – 3 is better. Add more stock, if required, if it cooks off too quickly. Stir occasionally to prevent sticking. The final consistency should be that of a very thick stew and pork is tender.
• Adjust for salt and serve.

Note: To save time, the charring of the vegetables could be omitted but a lot of the flavor complexity would be lost. I try to sneak in a few minced chipotles for additional smokiness and heat but my better half does not tolerate the heat well.

* Do not use tenderloin or loin as they are not fatty enough for long cooking.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:08 AM

JUST WAIT'LL THE DOW BREAKS 11,000:

Candidates Welcome Bush: Despite Dip in Polls, He's Like a Magnet for GOP Money (Jim VandeHei, 12/09/05, Washington Post)

Bush, who smashed fundraising records in back-to-back presidential triumphs, has helped raise more than $50 million this year. He is planning to greatly intensify his political efforts for Republican members of Congress in next year's midterm elections, aides said.

The willingness of candidates to enlist Bush's help suggests that even in a season of discontent, the president retains some powerful political assets, ones that could help him improve his fortunes on Capitol Hill and beyond. [...]

Even Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), who often opposes Bush on policy issues, said he would "welcome him" in his district: "I know he would be controversial, but he is the president and he is a friend."

This is good news for Bush, GOP strategists say. One barometer of presidential popularity is the eagerness of candidates to appear with the chief executive. In 1994, only a few Democratic candidates were willing to appear with Bill Clinton -- foreshadowing then-Rep. Newt Gingrich's "Republican Revolution" in the midterm elections that fall. On the other hand, even during his second-term sex scandal and impeachment, there were still plenty of Democrats eager for Clinton's help in fundraising.

Bush has never been radioactive with conservative contributors. As long as he remains a financial draw, Bush will retain considerable leverage over GOP lawmakers who determine the fate of his agenda.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:00 AM

IT'S NEARING UNANIMITY:

Pomeroy to Howard Dean: Shut up (MARY CLARE JALONICK, 12/09/05, Associated Press)

North Dakota Rep. Earl Pomeroy is accusing Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean of overstepping his bounds, saying the former presidential candidate should not give up on the war in Iraq.

On Monday, Dean likened the war in Iraq to Vietnam and said, "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong."

"My words to Howard Dean are simple - shut up," Pomeroy told WDAY Radio in North Dakota on Thursday.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:00 AM

MCCAIN SUPPLIES THE VOTES & JEB THE PLATFORM:

Florida Legislature Passes Governor's Managed-Care Medicaid Bill (John-Thor Dahlburg, December 9, 2005, LA Times)

Florida lawmakers Thursday approved ambitious changes in the state's Medicaid program that call for beneficiaries to contract with private companies that would determine what healthcare, and how much of it, they received.

In what could become a model for other states plagued by increases in Medicaid costs, Gov. Jeb Bush wants the program that serves 2.2 million poor, disabled and elderly Floridians to be run more like a private insurance plan. Basics are required by the federal government, but the insurer would decide the level and duration of additional coverage.

"What the Legislature has done today is the single biggest change and the boldest reform since the beginning of Medicaid," Bush said.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:57 AM

SURE, GRANDMA'S FIRST ACT WAS VAGRANCY, BUT THAT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT.... (via Paul Cella):

The American Way: What does it mean that your first act on entering a country is breaking its laws? (Peggy Noonan, December 8, 2005, Opinion Journal)

I recently found out through one of her daughters that my grandmother spent her first night in America on a park bench in downtown Manhattan. She had made her way from Ireland to Ellis Island, and a cousin was to meet the ship. It was about 1920. The cousin didn't show. So Mary Dorian, age roughly 20, all alone, with no connections and no relatives interested enough to remember her arrival in the new world, spent her first night in America alone on a bench, in the dark, in a strange country. Later she found her way to Brooklyn and became a bathroom attendant at the big Abraham & Straus department store on Fulton Street. (It's now a Macy's. I buy Christmas gifts there.)

Two generations after my grandmother arrived, I was in the Oval Office of the American president saying, "I think you oughta." And amazingly enough he was listening.

In two generations. Two.

What a country.


That despite our grandparents trying to keep the dang Catholics out of the country....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:37 AM

WORKED SO WELL IN JAPAN:

Tech Development A French Resolution (Peter S. Goodman, December 9, 2005, Washington Post)

The notion of a notoriously bureaucratic French government stage-managing innovations in the high-tech sector -- typically known for fierce competition and a libertarian ethos -- seems paradoxical. But in France, business remains a risk-averse activity in which industry looks to the government for succor. Proponents say this is precisely what makes the initiative necessary: France has proven skilled at research but weak at transforming ideas into money -- a step requiring government orchestration.

"In France, we have a lot of people who know a lot about high-tech, but they are not really put together," said George Kayanakis, chief executive of ASK, a Cannes maker of computerized tickets that is helping make electronic labels used to track inventory worldwide. "The Frenchman doesn't really like to gather. You need to have somebody who tells you, 'You have to get together.' You have to have a project that is fully approved by everybody, with all the details worked out and no risk for anybody."

Through the Competitive Poles program, the government hopes to create more than 84,000 jobs nationwide in three years and about 200,000 jobs over the next decade.

But even if the roughly 1,000 tech companies of the region can be knit together, a key question confronts the initiative and the future of the French economy: In a country in which a labor contract can be as binding as a marriage and in which steep corporate taxes fund a generous welfare state, will government incentives spur companies to hire significant numbers of people?

In France, firing workers is highly restricted and often subject to legal challenge. The national unemployment rate sits at about 10 percent, and 20 percent among those in their 20s. Economists say the greatest impediment to job growth is the reluctance of managers to take on new workers lest they get stuck with exorbitant, long-term bills for unproductive employees.

Moreover, some argue that France's continued nurturing of the welfare state -- the labor protections plus the social benefits and high taxes needed to fund them -- conflicts with efforts to make the country more competitive as it grapples with unemployment and the continued flow of investment to lower-cost countries such as Romania, Poland and China. Taxes to fund state-run pensions, medical care and other social services amount to nearly half of wage costs, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

France "is afraid to adapt to globalization," said Guillaume Sarkozy, president of a Paris textile firm, Tissage de Picardie, and head of the Industrial Textiles Union, a trade group. "The old model has to be changed."

He complained about a regime that taxes him based on the number of looms he operates, a disincentive to expand. He bemoaned a flood of inexpensive goods from China, India and Pakistan. He might have been able to adjust had he cut his workforce to lower costs, he said, but the labor code made that impossible. This year, he filed bankruptcy.

"We've invested in new machinery," he said. "We have trained our people, improved our design. I don't know what we can do better."

In many ways, France remains a monument to the virtues of resisting change.


Of course, these days the monument bears an eternal flame....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:26 AM

EVERYONE SINGING FROM THE SAME HYMNAL:

Sunnis appeal for release of four Christian humanitarian workers kidnapped in Iraq (Patrick Quinn, December 9, 2005, Associated Press)

Prominent Sunni Arab clerics and residents of a Baghdad neighborhood where four kidnapped Christian humanitarian workers had aided people appealed Friday for their release a day before a deadline set by their abductors to kill them.

Sunni Arab clerics also took the opportunity of Friday prayers to urge a big Sunni turnout in the Dec. 15 elections, saying that voting was a "religious duty'' that could hasten the departure of American troops.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:18 AM

ON THE OTHER HAND, IT WILL WIN HIM A VISIT FROM DAVID DUKE:

Germany summons Iran envoy over Holocaust remarks (Louis Charbonneau, 09 Dec 2005, Reuters)

The German Foreign Ministry said on Friday it had summoned Iran's ambassador to protest against suggestions by Iran's president that the Holocaust might not have happened and that Israel should be moved to Europe.

Ministry spokesman Martin Jaeger said at a government news conference the decision to deliver a formal protest to Iran's envoy in Berlin was meant to show that Berlin was taking the president's comments very seriously.

"We have summoned the Iranian ambassador," Jaeger told reporters. "When one summons an ambassador, then you signal the start of something in diplomacy, that there are grounds for serious discussion."


Yielding the moral highground to the Germans on the Holocaust is an impressive screwup even for a nutjob.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:14 AM

A PARTY THAT GETS 30% OF THE VOTE NEEDS TO ALIENATE ITS CORE:

Cameron in rush to make party changes (Rachel Sylvester and Alice Thomson, 09/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

David Cameron intends to stamp his authority on the Conservatives by pushing ahead quickly with controversial changes.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Francis Maude, the reappointed Tory chairman, says that the new leader's resounding victory this week gave him an "overwhelming mandate" to change the party, to make it "fit for the 21st century".

Plans include the introduction of positive action to encourage the selection of more women candidates, the creation of a new disciplinary panel and scrapping the week-long annual conference.

Mr Maude's blueprint for reform will put him on a collision course with some traditionalists, who fear it will over-centralise power and alienate core supporters.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:55 AM

THERE'S TOM KEAN'S FIRST AD:

New Jersey's New Senator (NY Times, 12/09/05)

As a candidate, New Jersey's governor-elect, Jon Corzine, talked a lot about setting a higher standard for ethics in government. But off the stump, he has cozied up to the Democratic political bosses who are very much part of the problem. In his choice of someone to replace him in the Senate, Mr. Corzine had an opportunity to demonstrate which side of his campaign was real. The answer came yesterday, and it was disappointing. [...]

Most recently, Mr. Menendez has failed to answer questions about his relationship with Kay LiCausi, a young former aide of his. He has helped her get hundreds of thousands of dollars in lobbying contracts and political consulting work. Mr. Menendez says there is a line between his personal and public lives. But New Jersey voters have a right to wonder why that line seems to exist only to protect politicians from questioning, and never deters them from mixing their private relationships with their official duties.

The last elected governor, James McGreevey, had to resign over such a situation. And Mr. Corzine got involved with the head of a union representing state workers, then forgave her a loan of more than $400,000 when the relationship ended. Besides all this, there have been 75 corruption indictments in New Jersey over the last four years. The public has a right to yearn for a break from the past, and Mr. Menendez does not represent a clean slate.


The GOP should start running this now.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:49 AM

THE PRO-NORTH SOUTH:

Gap between allies widens over N. Korea (Choe Sang-Hun, DECEMBER 8, 2005, International Herald Tribune

A long-running disagreement between the United States and South Korea over how to deal with North Korea widened publicly Thursday, when international human rights advocates gathered for a high-profile conference here and called for the overthrow of the North Korean government. [...]

The U.S. enthusiasm for the conference and South Korean coolness followed a sharp and direct exchange between officials of the two governments.

On Wednesday, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea, Alexander Vershbow, called North Korea a "very repressive" and "criminal regime" that trades in illicit drugs and runs "concentration camps for political prisoners." These charges have been repeatedly stressed recently among hawks in Washington who favor a tough, confrontational policy toward North Korea.

In an unusually quick response, South Korea, which favors a conciliatory approach to the North, articulated what amounted to a public rebuke, apparently fearing that Vershbow's comments might derail the multinational talks on ending the North Korean nuclear weapons program.

What do they think the North is really like?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:33 AM

THE BREAKING OF THE PARTIES:

Lib Dems urge Kennedy to consider Tory pact (Tania Branigan and Julian Glover, December 9, 2005, The Guardian)

Leading Liberal Democrat MPs are calling on Charles Kennedy to consider working with the Conservatives in a future hung parliament, as part of a strategy to deal with David Cameron's arrival as Tory leader.

The Conservative transition is also adding to pressure on Mr Kennedy's position, with senior Lib Dems discussing whether he could be persuaded to stand down well before the next general election. While Mr Kennedy remains popular with the public, many MPs fear the party is drifting when it should raise its game to challenge a Tory resurgence.

They believe that disappointing results against the Tories in May, a patchy performance and the election of Mr Cameron - a young family man promising to offer liberal, moderate opposition to the government - have undermined him.


The last thing a country needs is three Third Way parties.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:22 AM

OH, MY STARS AND GARTERS...:

Tejada asks out; are stars aligning? (Gordon Edes, December 9, 2005, Boston Globe)

If Andy Marte, the 22-year-old slugging third base prospect the Sox acquired from Atlanta, is as good as the Sox believe, it could represent a great leap forward, even if Marte begins next season in Pawtucket, which is the plan for now.

And almost providentially, even as the Sox' brass were flying back to Boston last night, a possible solution to the Manny dilemma may have dropped out of the sky. Orioles shortstop Miguel Tejada, claiming to be unhappy with the lack of progress the Orioles have made in putting together a winner, wants to be traded.

Mercy! On the same day the Sox trade their shortstop, arguably the best shortstop in the game might be available, a former American League MVP who drove in 150 runs in 2004 and comes as close to offering fair value in a potential Ramírez swap as anyone out there. And here's what makes it imperative for the Sox, who were already discussing the possibility yesterday, to do everything they can to make this happen: Even the dollars make sense. The Orioles owe Tejada $48 million on the six-year, $72 million contract he signed before the '04 season. The Sox owe Ramírez $57 million.

Replace Ramírez with Tejada, and the Sox become the best team in baseball. The only thing more obvious than his talent is Tejada's burning desire to win. Even his most ardent supporters can't say the same about Ramírez.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:12 AM

A TRUTH TOO PAINFUL TO FACE--DEMOCRATS NEED TO BUY A "W":

Blair Game (E. J. Dionne Jr., December 9, 2005, Washington Post)

In democratic countries, the true mark of a politician's triumph is not whether he transforms his own political party. It's whether he forces the opposition to renovate itself and become tweedledum to mimic his own success as tweedledee.

Thus did British Prime Minister Tony Blair this week earn his place in the Politicians' Hall of Fame. In electing the flashy, moderate, bike-riding 39-year-old David Cameron as its leader, the opposition Conservative Party decided it would draw its slogan in the next election from the venerable rock band The Who: "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

Cameron himself underscored his deep desire to be like Tony in his first boffo appearance in the House of Commons on Wednesday. Cameron declared of Blair: "He was the future once." The line brought down the house, and it made Cameron's essential point: If Blair won because he was fresh and non-ideological, it was time for British voters to toss out the old model and bring in the new. But they were merely being asked to buy a cooler, updated version of the same product.


Were he not blinded by BDS, Mr. Dionne might take away from this that just as the GOP had to nominate a Clintonesque figure to take back the presidency, so too must Democrats find a Bushesque replacement for the current president. The Third Way reins supreme and whichever party is most closely identified with it--personalizing/privatizing the social safety net--is governing in the UK, the US, Japan, and Australia.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:08 AM

POUND STERLING:

A Winter Wonderland: Those Who Don't Believe in Fantasy Will Thaw at 'Chronicles of Narnia' (Stephen Hunter, December 9, 2005, Washington Post)

Andrew Adamson's sterling version of "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe," the perdurable C.S. Lewis classic of children's fantasy, is well told, handsome, stirring and loads of fun. [...]

Taken at face value, "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" decodes into a kind of dashing view of colonialism for the pre-pubescent set, an empire-and-faith fable set in a fantasy world whose relation to the real one will be, for adults, its most fascinating element. For kids, the pleasure will be in some of the best special effects of the year. And for both, the overarching endearment will be a narrative that speeds through its two-hour-plus running time.

The movie has attracted some pre-release pub because it is famously a "Christian allegory." And yes, it's true, Lewis was a well-known adult convert to Anglicanism (from the intellectual's fashionable atheism) who wrote much about his faith in God. Maybe too much; some find him a bully on the subject. Whatever, it is true that the plot he engineered for the first of his seven "Chronicles of Narnia" reenacts the march to Golgotha, the ugliness enacted thereupon, and the good news three days hence, when someone powerful arises and gives hope to a death-haunted world. However, in the role of Jesus Christ is a lion named Aslan who, no matter how holy he may be, is still a lion, and when he paws an enemy to the ground, he then bites its head off. That's pure big carnivore and a long way from Christ's admonition to turn the other cheek.

The fantasy seems just as, if not more, plumped up with symbols of that other modern religion, the state. You can feel Lewis the professional writer cleverly pandering to his readership of patriotic, well-educated middle-class English adolescents of the '50s. It's a veddy British Isles kind of thing, with a lord of all being the majestic lion, symbol of Britain on the royal shield, along with the unicorn, the heraldic symbol of Scotland, and then the unicorn shows up as a steed upon which a valiant young knight charges into battle. Lions and unicorns, oh my! There are so many other Britishisms it's almost unsporting (and certainly dull) to list them all, from landscape to culture to gear to weather. It climaxes in a giant, linchpin-of-history battle so familiar to the Brits, as they rarely lost one (the Spanish Armada, Trafalgar, Waterloo, Battle of Britain). But more important, there's a kind of empire assumption underlying it all.

The movie is really another in a long line of unquestioning colonial morale-raisers, so necessary for the maintenance of empire, circa 1950, when the book was published: It's about the arrival in a troubled land (Narnia, in whose syllables may be heard a faint echo of "Britannia") of white Britons of noble visage, pale beauty and steely bearing in the middle of a war of darker creatures. Our boys and girls immediately move to center stage -- indeed, it turns out that their coming has been foretold -- and they are quickly appointed to leadership positions. The boys get to be knights, the girls princesses, every British boy and girl's fantasy. Thus elevated, they lead the darker masses in battle to victory, and stay behind to rule magnificently and justly. Talk about Kipling's White Man's burden!


MORE:
Tempted: A bigger but still faithful 'Narnia' (Ty Burr, December 9, 2005, Boston Globe)

Take a deep breath and relax. Aslan doesn't spout blood from his paws or perform the miracle of the loaves and (talking) fishes. Nor have the Pevensie children been outfitted with iPods and Big Gulps in an attempt to woo the Nickelodeon demographic.

''The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe -- the first in what production partners Disney and Walden Media pray will be an ongoing franchise -- arrives as a solid, reasonably close cinematic approximation of C.S. Lewis's beloved children's book.


Lions and Witches and Wardrobes — Oh My!: The fusty, frostbitten pleasures of The Chronicles of Narnia (ELLA TAYLOR, 12/09/05, LA Weekly)
While pundits and the press witter on about whether C.S. Lewis’ ageless tales of Narnia are too Christian, or not Christian enough, or the wrong kind of Christian, children the world over will yawn politely and read on. I must have devoured The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe at least 10 times while growing up in an aggressively Anglican culture, and it never once occurred to me that Aslan the super-lion died the death of Christ and was similarly resurrected. Nor would it have bothered my little Jewish soul had someone set me straight. The thrill of Narnia is all about a fusty old closet that turns out to be full of frostbitten foliage and possibility, in which your drab brown life, with all its vague fears and longings, gives way to a sparkling white alternate universe where kids just like you take tea with those of cloven hoof and warm brown pelt; where good and evil (give or take the odd Judas within your midst) are more cleanly defined and divided than ever they are in life; and where freshly minted heroes do battle to defrost the world for freedom.

Lewis may never have mastered fantasy like his friend and rival J.R.R. Tolkien, whose Lord of the Rings was a special-effects bonanza waiting to happen. But Lewis understood far more clearly that character drives even the most supernatural of stories, and Shrek’s Andrew Adamson, who has never made a live-action movie until now, honors that old-fashioned insight while proving himself a fine director of flesh-and-blood kids to boot.


Lewis Scholars Laud ‘Narnia’: Pre-screening Produces Academic Praise (Leah Acker, December 09, 2005, Grove City College)
Grove City College’s pre-screening of “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe” on Dec. 8 proved C.S.Lewis wrote more than a children’s story. Along with about 800 college students, several Lewis scholars viewed the film and analyzed Disney’s adaptation.

Experts praised the film as true to Lewis’ book and, in parts, even stronger.


Two Wars of Good and Evil (A. O. SCOTT, 12/09/05, NY Times)
It has never been a secret that C. S. Lewis, who taught that subject and others at Oxford for many years, composed his great cycle of seven children's fantasy novels with the New Testament in mind and with some of the literary traditions it inspired close at hand. To the millions since the 1950's for whom the books have been a source of childhood enchantment, Lewis's religious intentions have either been obvious, invisible or beside the point.

Which is part of the appeal of allegory, as he well knew. It is a symbolic mode, not a literal one - there are, after all, no talking beavers in the Bible - and it constructs distinct levels of meaning among which readers travel of their own free will. An allegorical world is both a reflection of the real one and a reality unto itself, as Lewis's heroes, the four Pevensie children, come to discover. The story of Aslan's sacrifice and resurrection may remind some readers (and now viewers) of what they learned in Sunday school, but others, Christian or not, will be perfectly happy to let what happens in Narnia stay in Narnia.

The supposed controversy over the religious content of "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" may be overhyped, but a particular question of faith nonetheless hovers around the movie, which was produced by Walden Media and distributed by Disney. Anyone who grew up with the Narnia books is likely to be concerned less with Lewis's beliefs than with the filmmakers' fidelity to his work, which was idiosyncratic and imperfect in ways that may not easily lend themselves to appropriation by the shiny and hyperkinetic machinery of mass visual fantasy. But if a few liberties have been taken here and there, as is inevitable in the transition from page to screen, the spirit of the book is very much intact.

The movie, directed by Andrew Adamson, does not achieve the sublimity of, say, Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy (which had the advantage of working from a richer allegory by an even more learned Oxford don), but it does use available technology to capture both the mythic power of Lewis's tale and, even better, its charm.


The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by Andrew Adamson (Bill Wichterman, Townhall)
As a die-hard C.S. Lewis fan, I was ready to be disappointed by The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I knew Walden Media intended to make a movie that faithfully portrayed Lewis’s 1950 classic children’s story, but I wasn’t sure they could pull it off.

I doubted a film could capture the fantasy world of Narnia with its fauns and centaurs, dryads, talking beavers, and a lion incarnating the maker of the universe. I expected Hollywood’s insatiable desire to be “edgy” to propel the film into the violent and macabre, inappropriate for the school-aged kids for whom Lewis wrote his masterpieces. And most importantly, I doubted that the essential story of betrayal, sacrificial love, and redemption would survive Hollywood censors.

I was very wrong. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is magnificent.


With reviews this uniformly good, this flick's going to be a huge success.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:01 AM

THE PRC VS THE CHINESE:

Chinese Police Kill Villagers During Two-Day Land Protest (Edward Cody, December 9, 2005, Washington Post)

Paramilitary police and anti-riot units opened fire with pistols and automatic rifles Tuesday night and Wednesday night on farmers and fishermen who had attacked them with gasoline bombs and explosive charges, according to residents of this small coastal village.

The sustained volleys of gunfire, unprecedented in a wave of peasant uprisings over the last two years in China, killed between 10 and 20 villagers and injured more, according to the residents. The count was uncertain, they said, because a number of villagers could not be located after the confrontations.

The tough response by black-clad riot troops and People's Armed Police in camouflage fatigues deviated sharply from previous government tactics against the spreading unrest in Chinese villages and industrial suburbs. As far as is known, authorities put down all previous riots using truncheons and tear gas, but without firearms.

This time, according to a witness, police responded to villagers throwing explosives by firing "very rapid bursts of gunfire" over a period of several hours both nights. Some villagers reported seeing police carrying AK-47 assault rifles, one of the Chinese military's standard-issue weapons.


Younger folk sometimes ask with wonder how it's possible that all of the intelligence agencies, academia, and the MSM were taken by surprise when the USSR collapsed exactly as Reagan and Solzhenitsyn had said it inevitably would. Well, pick up a paper today and you'll see the whole dynamic playing out again. For every one story about the centrifugal forces that are tearing China apart you'll find five or ten about how they're destined to be our next superpower peer.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:53 AM

THIS ONE ISN'T COVERED IN THE LITTLE RED BOOK:

Copper holds strong against China (Asia Times, 12/09/05)

China's reserve agency sold much less copper than planned in its fourth public auction on December 7, leading analysts to doubt the effectiveness of the agency's attempt to drive down the metal's price at a time when it is at a historical high in the London market. [...]

Observers say that China has attempted to reduce the price of copper in an effort to limit the potential losses stemming from the activities of alleged "rogue trader" Liu Qibing, who was said to have taken large "short" positions in copper earlier in the year in a belief that the price would soon fall. Liu is believed to be in police custody in China, but it remains unclear whether the government will honor his contracts, which come due December 21.

Honoring the contracts would require delivering large quantities of metal to London Metal Exchange warehouses by the contract date, and would produce large financial losses at the current market price; whereas not honoring them would have serious and unpredictable consequences, possibly limiting China's future ability to participate fully in global commodity markets.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:50 AM

NOT THAT THEY AREN'T ALREADY OVERSTRETCHED:

Ageing population 'will strain NHS resources' (SocietyGuardian.co.uk, December 9, 2005)

The huge rise in the number of older people in the UK over the next 30 years will place a great strain on the NHS, researchers warned today.

The estimated 53% increase in over 65s between 2001 and 2031 will increase both financial and workload pressures on the health service with more demand for treatment for chronic conditions such as heart disease, according to healthcare researchers Dr Foster.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:42 AM

CITIES HAVE LONG SINCE SERVED THEIR PURPOSE:

Sprawling into controversy: Professor and author Robert Bruegmann is defying conventional wisdom with his claim that suburban creep is both an ancient phenomenon and a beneficial one. (Scott Timberg, December 9, 2005, LA Times)

Professor and author Robert Bruegmann is defying conventional wisdom with his claim that suburban creep is both an ancient phenomenon and a beneficial one.At first glance, Robert Bruegmann — a childless academic whose modernist apartment building sits in a dense, upscale Chicago neighborhood — seems like the kind of guy who'd hate the suburbs. His peers and predecessors have, for decades, decried the unplanned, low-density, auto-dependent growth of shopping malls and subdivisions.

But he's emerging as the unlikely champion of what we've called, at least since the 1950s, "sprawl." His counterintuitive new book, "Sprawl: A Compact History," charts the spreading of cities as far back as 1st century Rome — and finds the process not just deeply natural but often beneficial for people, societies and even cities.

The Boston Globe has called Bruegmann "the Jane Jacobs of suburbia," after the urban historian who celebrated the serendipitous, high-density warren of Greenwich Village and other old neighborhoods.

"Sprawl has been as evident in Europe as in America," he writes, "and can now be said to be the preferred settlement pattern everywhere in the world where there is a certain measure of affluence and where citizens have some choice in how they live." [...]

[W]hile the traffic, pollution and housing prices may dismay residents, Bruegmann insists that "the problem of Los Angeles is the problem of success: It's become so attractive that everyone wants to live there." And it's done this, he says, without paying the environmental and aesthetic price of more wide-open cities like Atlanta and Houston.

By contrast, he argues, the "smart growth" policies of Portland, Ore., have been ambiguous. Portland is eminently livable but has not reduced sprawl and remains a low-density city. As its density starts to climb, he says, housing prices are going up.

One of his most shocking assertions is that suburban spread helps cities and their urban centers: Look at the way immigrants and the poor moved out of Lower Manhattan, for instance, only to have the area later reborn as a chic living space for artists and young people. It wouldn't have happened, he argues, if the highways and houses beyond the city center hadn't siphoned off population, allowing these neighborhoods to be reborn.


Ideally you'll have most people, especially those with kids, move out of cities, which are anti-human constructs, and leave the cities to Richard Florida's anti-social creative class.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:12 AM

SHOULD HAVE HAD A FEMALE OFFICER SEARCH HIM:

Model is jailed for gun in pants (Wandsworth Guardian, 12/08/05)

A male model from Putney caught with a loaded gun in his underpants has been jailed for five years. [...]

Prosecuting, John Simmons said: "Police searched the occupants of the vehicle and this defendant seemed extremely nervous. He was asked if he had any objects on him that he shouldn't have.

"As a police officer searched his groin area he found a hard object."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

DANG THOSE ARCHIVES TO HELL! (via Robert Schwartz):

Oil 'will hit $100 by winter' (Heather Stewart, July 3, 2005, The Observer)

Oil prices could rocket to $100 within six months, plunging the world into an unprecedented fuel crisis, controversial Texan oil analyst Matt Simmons has warned.

After crude surged through $60 a barrel last week, nervous investors were pinning their hopes on a build-up in US oil-stocks to depress prices in the coming months.

But Simmons believes surging demand will keep prices bubbling well above $50. 'We could be at $100 by this winter. We have the biggest risk we have ever had of demand exceeding supply. We are now just about to face up to the biggest crisis we have ever had,' he said.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

"SOMETHING INTERESTING MIGHT BE HAPPENING":

Cameron must deal with hard cases too (Ferdinand Mount, 09/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Within 48 hours of being elected, David Cameron has cheered his party up immensely. Indeed, this cheering-up effect spread to several people I met who said they had never voted Conservative and probably never would, but they found it all surprisingly refreshing. And he has done it partly by changing the subject.

Instead of battering on remorselessly about tax, crime and immigration, he is switching the immediate focus to climate change, reading skills, work/life balance and social justice.

It is this change of subject that has unsettled Tony Blair and the Labour Party just as much as Cameron's more publicised offer to support the Government whenever he thinks it is doing the right thing.

Labour is nonplussed, just as the Conservatives were when they first had to confront Blair. "Same old Tories," chunters Ian McCartney, the Labour Party chairman, in his daily e-mail to me (I am beginning to find political junk mail almost as annoying and implausible as the ads for cheap Rolexes and Viagra).

But they don't sound like the same old Tories, and the wider public has sensed this, rather quicker, I fancy, than many newspapers, especially the Murdoch press, which seems oddly grudging and hesitant.

This has been the story throughout the Cameron campaign. Far from him being a media creation, many voices in the media have been rather slower to cotton on that something interesting might be happening than were the supposed old fogeys in the constituencies.


Five years on most folks haven't even figured out the thoroughly transparent George Bush yet.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

BUT THE BONOBOS PLAYED WITH BOTH (via Robert Schwartz):

Monkeys mimic kids in toy selections (United Press International, 12/08/05)

A Texas A&M study suggests biological pre-wiring determines why boys and girls enjoy playing with different types of toys, not sociological factors.

Psychologist Gerianne Alexander says it's commonly believed boys and girls learn what types of toys they should like based solely on society's expectations. But she says her research brings that into question. [...]

She and Melissa Hines of the University of London found monkeys' toy preferences are consistent along gender lines as those of human children. Young male monkeys enjoyed playing with model cars and young female monkeys preferred dolls.

"Masculine toys and feminine toys," Alexander says, "are clearly categories constructed by people. However, our finding that male and female vervet monkeys show similar preferences for these toys as boys and girls do, suggests that what makes a 'boy toy' and a 'girl toy' is more than just what society dictates -- it suggests that there may be perceptual cues that attract males or females to particular objects such as toys."


Who's gonna tell the chicks on the Harvard faculty?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

HAVE WE LEARNED NOTHING FROM THE MILOSEVIC FIASCO?:

He scared us for decades, now all I see is a skinny old man in a cage: One of the Iraqi journalists selected to translate Saddam Hussein's trial gives a personal account of coming face to face with the brutal dictator who ruled by fear (Ali Hamdani, 12/09/05, Times of London)

I WAS told I would be only 30ft from Saddam Hussein, the closest I have ever been to the dictator who owned my life for three decades. But in the event, all I can see across the courtroom is a skinny old man sitting in a cage.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

RETURNING THE CONSEQUENCES TO ACTIONS:

NHS may not treat smokers, drinkers or obese (Celia Hall, 09/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

People who are grossly overweight, who smoke heavily or drink excessively could be denied surgery or drugs following a decision by a Government agency yesterday.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) which advises on the clinical and cost effectiveness of treatments for the NHS, said that in some cases the "self-inflicted" nature of an illness should be taken into account.

But the report bars any discrimination against patients on grounds of age alone.


You don't have a choice about growing old, the rest is avoidable.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

THEY'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING TO KEEP UP WITH PATRICK HENRY:

A Catholic Renaissance at Princeton (George Weigel, November 23, 2005, THE CATHOLIC DIFFERENCE)

Having taught James Madison at the College of New Jersey (as Princeton was then known), the Rev. John Witherspoon has a claim to the honorable title, "Grandfather of the U.S. Constitution." What, I wonder, would a good Presbyterian Scotsman like Witherspoon make of the fact that Princeton University Chapel now has a Blessed Sacrament chapel, complete with tabernacle and icon of Our Lady of Guadalupe?

Some might imagine the good reverend spinning in his grave at an impressive rate of r.p.m.'s. I think he'd be pleased, once he got over the initial shock. For Princeton's vibrant Catholic community is, today, at the center of the enterprise to which John Witherspoon dedicated his life: the dialogue of faith and reason in the service of democracy and human freedom. If you're a student looking for an intellectually challenging education and a Catholic community whole-heartedly committed to the new evangelization, or if you're a parent looking for such a school for your son or daughter, you could do far worse than look at Princeton. Indeed, you'd be far better off with Princeton than with several high-priced institutions whose Catholicism is vestigial at best. [...]

Thanks to the efforts of Princeton's unembarrassed Catholics, the Department of Religion will offer a for-credit course next spring, "Recent Catholic Thought from Vatican II to John Paul II," which will be taught by the distinguished Lutheran theologian, Robert Jensen. Those same students and alumni have created a new campus club, the Anscombe Society (named for the late English Catholic philosopher), to defend marriage, promote pre-marital chastity, advance a pro-woman feminism, and, as one of the organizers put it, "defend male and female as distinct and complementary." The Princeton pro-life group recently sponsored the first interfaith Respect Life service in Princeton Chapel, featuring luminaries like Father Richard Neuhaus and Rabbi David Novak, as well as an evangelical pastor and an imam.

You won't find any of these things, alas, on too many putatively Catholic campuses; but you'll find them at Princeton.


Being perceived as the most religion-friendly Ivy would convey a significant recruiting advantage.


December 8, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:50 PM

THEY WERN'T EVEN COUNTING ON GREENSPAN BEING STUCK IN THE '70S:

U.S.: Why Economic Growth Is Galloping (James C. Cooper & Kathleen Madigan, 12/08/05, Business Week)

For all of 2005, real GDP is on track to expand by 3.7%.

That's a bit higher than the 3.5% projected by the economists surveyed by BusinessWeek at the end of 2004. But what's more revealing is that the consensus forecast was predicated on oil prices slipping back to $39 per barrel by now and the Federal Reserve hiking its target for the federal funds rate to only 3.4% by yearend. Instead, oil remains well above $55 and fed funds have already reached 4%, with more hikes on the way.

So why has the economy performed above expectations amid unexpected developments? The main explanation seems to be that, despite the Fed's desire to tighten monetary conditions, consumers and businesses, on average, still have access to cash, whether through cheap borrowing, better income and profit growth, or rising housing and stock market wealth. Accommodative financial conditions are proving to be the economy's Peyton Manning, quarterbacking the steady forward movement in demand.

Attractive bond yields, a rising stock market, robust profit growth, and, thanks to the recent fall in oil prices, more household buying power are allowing consumers and businesses to spend. Since nothing in the outlook suggests any sharp reversal in these stimulative trends, the economy should enter 2006 with much more momentum than seemed likely only a few months ago.


Especially impressive because those real interest rates have been pushed above historic averages while the Fed fights non-existent inflation.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:39 PM

FIRST CLASS, COACH, OR MARTYR TO INCOMPETENCE CLASS?

As Iranians mourn crash victims, questions over decision to fly: The crash of a military plane Tuesday killed 106 people, including 68 journalists. (Scott Peterson, 12/09/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

[E]ven as the dead were officially declared "martyrs" after the crash Tuesday - in which an aging Iranian Air Force plane crashed into an apartment block immediately after takeoff - the media have raised questions about whether the plane should ever have taken off.

The plane, which was carrying journalists to cover military maneuvers in the southern port city of Chabahar, was delayed more than six hours. Hamshahri newspaper reported Wednesday that one of its photographers had called his wife during the delay, and told her there were technical problems, so the pilot had refused to fly.

Officials deny that, but the circumstances of takeoff remain unclear, and have sparked a surge of speculation about carelessness by authorities.


Folks'll gladly die for lots of wacky stuff, but the call to die for the cause of grotesque government incompetence tends to be a tough sell.

MORE:
Jet Slides Off Chicago Runway; Boy Dies (CARLA K. JOHNSON, December 9, 2005, The Associated Press)

A jetliner trying to land in heavy snow slid off a runway, crashed through a fence and slid into a busy street, hitting one vehicle and pinning another beneath it. A 6-year-old boy was killed.

At least 10 people were injured, authorities said. Eight people of the injured were on the ground. Two passengers on the plane suffered minor injuries, Aviation Department spokeswoman Wendy Abrams said. [...]


The airport area had 7 inches of snow, but Abrams said runway conditions at the time were acceptable.


Here's a question for someone smarter than I to answer: isn't Islam's problem that those who died in the plane crash in Iran are assumed to be martyrs as opposed to the American assumption of res ipsa loquitor?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:37 PM

AS THE SUN SETS ON THE NEOCON EMPIRE:

US seeks to hand reconstruction over to Iraqis: US trumpets economic and social progress in Iraq: More than 2,000 projects have been completed. (Howard LaFranchi, 12/09/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

First the White House outlined a strategy of building up Iraq's security forces as the ticket home for US troops. Now the US is promoting a parallel vision that calls for progressively turning over control of US-funded development projects, worth about $21 billion, to Iraqis.

"As Iraqis develop their security capabilities, we will reduce our military presence," said Daniel Speckhard, director of the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office at a media briefing here Thursday. "We will see that same transition in our reconstruction program ... from one heavily dominated by the United States to one increasingly under Iraqi control."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:33 PM

WHAT'S THE METRIC CONVERSION FOR 15 MINUTES?:

'I feel I'm carrying the world on my shoulders': After Cindy Sheehan's son died in Iraq, her protest outside Bush's Texas ranch became a symbol of opposition to the war. Duncan Campbell joins her as she brings her campaign to Britain (Duncan Campbell, December 9, 2005, The Guardian)

"This is the 21st century - killing is barbaric," she says on a taxi ride from Heathrow into central London, having just flown in from New York. "I don't buy into the fact that George Bush and Tony Blair can't be called terrorists because they are elected officials. This occupation of Iraq is killing innocent people by the thousand."

Cindy, who has three surviving children, is weary. She's had to cram her six-foot frame into economy class for the trip, and, besides, her life has become an exhausting series of meetings, rallies, interviews, speeches and anti-war campaigning.


The British Left will be only too happy to indulge her delusions of grandeur and if she heads on to Syria she can hang out with George Galloway and David Duke.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:04 PM

OH, NO, HE DOESN'T...:

Howard leaves door open for broad tax cuts (news.com.au, December 09, 2005)

JOHN Howard has joined the chorus for more tax cuts at the next Budget, despite Peter Costello's attempts to keep a lid on speculation of further relief.
Leaving the door open for across-the-board cuts, Mr Howard said Australians want tax relief, not reform and any money available in a healthy budget should be returned to the public through tax cuts.

"And in returning it to the public we don't just focus on a small section of the public, we try and focus as far as possible on everybody," he told Southern Cross radio.


...I'm not letting W reclaim the Third Way lead...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:39 PM

WHAT AN ALLY DOES:

SDF mission in Iraq extended; June exit planned (KANAKO TAKAHARA, 12/09/05, Japan Times)

The government formally endorsed a revised plan Thursday to extend the Ground Self-Defense Force's humanitarian mission in Samawah, southern Iraq, for another year while at the same time signaling the troops' withdrawal by next summer. [...]

The Iraqi Embassy in Japan and British Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed the Japanese government's decision Thursday to extend the mission of the Self-Defense Forces in Iraq.

Blair sent a message to Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, saying he "warmly" welcomes the extended mission, knowing that the "decision cannot have been easy."

Jordanian King Abdullah II and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi agreed Thursday to continue cooperating on Iraq's reconstruction, Foreign Ministry officials said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:17 PM

CHALK UP ANOTHER WIN FOR THE LAME DUCK:

House, Senate reach deal on renewing Patriot Act (Associated Press, December 8, 2005)

House and Senate negotiators reached an agreement Thursday to extend the USA Patriot Act, the government's premier anti-terrorism law, before it expires at the end of the month. But a Democratic senator threatened a filibuster to block the compromise.

"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms,'' said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who was the only senator to vote against the original version of the Patriot Act. [...]

Also to be extended for four years are standards for monitoring "lone wolf'' terrorists who may be operating independent of a foreign agent or power. While not part of the Patriot Act, officials considered that along with the Patriot Act provisions.

The Republican-controlled House had been pushing for those provisions to stay in effect as long as a decade, but negotiators decided to go with the GOP-controlled Senate's suggestion.

Most of the Patriot Act would become permanent under the reauthorization.

The White House applauded the agreement.


Even Karl Rove can't have enough control of Democrat brains to force them to filibuster the Patriot Act.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:06 PM

BRUSHING UP FOR A CNN GIG?:

Gerhard brushes up on his English (in Wales) (Nick Britten, 08/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

When Gerhard Schröder, the former German chancellor, decided to visit Britain to improve his language skills, he should have chosen to brush up on his geography.

Keen to better his English, Mr Schröder ended up on a course in the middle of the Welsh countryside.

He enrolled for private tuition at Park House, run by Charles and Ann Jackson, who for 20 years have been helping anyone from students to high-powered businessmen.


sadly we should probably experct him, like Gorbachev, to look to cash in here on his retirement.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:02 PM

YEAH, BUT THAT'S THE GOOD BIAS (via Bob Tremblay):

PBS Continues Probe into Biased Film (Wendy McElroy, December 06, 2005, Fox News)

On Nov. 29, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting issued a report on the Public Broadcasting Service documentary "Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories." (The CPB oversees the tax-funding and content of PBS.)

The documentary, which addressed domestic violence and children, is accused of being anti-father, factually inaccurate and politically motivated. Using the words "slanted" and "no hint of balance," in the report, CPB Ombudsman Ken A. Bode concluded, "The producers apparently do not subscribe to the idea that an argument can be made more convincing by giving the other side a fair presentation."

Bode wondered whether PBS had been used as "the launching pad for a very partisan effort to drive public policy and law." If so, the documentary violates PBS' mission statement to be non-partisan and "provide multiple viewpoints."


Fun to listen to the Left whine about Republicans taking over CPB, since their real complaint isn't that it'll be politicized but that their own politics won't dominate.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:56 PM

IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE 500K TIED UP IN MY HOUSE & RETIREMENT I'D SAVE A LITTLE:

Less-Than-Zero-Savings? Don't Believe It: The real numbers explain why consumers continue to buy. (Michael K. Evans, December 01, 2005, Industry Week)

ecently the Federal Reserve Board issued an important working paper, co-authored by none other than Alan Greenspan himself. It estimates "gross equity extraction" from homes on a quarterly basis from 1990 to the present. As I read through the numbers, they suggest that the personal savings rate is about 9%, not less than zero.

They are not the only numbers we can look at. The U.S. Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a comprehensive consumer expenditure survey on an annual basis. The personal saving rate, calculated from that survey, increased from 3% in 2000 to a whopping 12% in 2003, the latest year for which data are available. I don't think the saving rate is that high, but the point is that the BEA measure of personal saving is far from the only measure available, and in my opinion is irrelevant.

How could there be such a mammoth difference in the federal government estimates of the personal saving rate? To a certain extent, it is caused by different methodology to determine consumption. The main difference occurs in housing. Suppose, for example, that the typical mortgage rate declined from 7% to 5%, and many homeowners refinanced. They would then spend less on their mortgage payments, which would leave more money for either other purchases or an increase in saving. Note that this development is independent of the extraction of home equity, which increases the actual cash saving rate even more.

The Fed's paper has gone far to resolve the conundrum that consumers keep buying other goods and services at the same rate even when energy prices rise and even though the personal saving rate is reportedly negative. The personal saving rate is nothing of the sort. It is probably about 10% when refinancing at lower rates and extraction of home equity are taken into account.


Which still ignores your 401k/IRA.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:43 PM

OUTLASTED ANOTHER ONE:

Israel's Likud Finds Itself in a Free Fall: For decades, the party has dominated politics. But Sharon's departure has led to a humbling turnabout for the powerhouse movement. (Laura King, December 8, 2005, LA Times)

Not so long ago, any politician from Israel's conservative Likud Party could count on a consistently warm reception in the country's open-air produce markets. The cramped rows of stalls heaped with fresh tomatoes and fragrant spices had been the movement's heartland for as long as anyone could remember.

So when Uzi Landau, then a contender for the Likud leadership, toured a Tel Aviv market recently, he had reason to hope for the usual friendly meet-and-greet with vendors. Instead, he found himself heckled and booed.

"You wrecked the Likud!" a fruit seller shouted. "It's a shipwreck!" yelled a fishmonger.


Recall the neocon insistence that any departure on the part of the President from Likud's refusal to surrender any territory to the Palestinians was unacceptable?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:41 PM

BIG JOEMENTUM:

Rummy exit rumored; Lieberman eyed for job (THOMAS M. DEFRANK and KENNETH R. BAZINET, 12/08/05, NY DAILY NEWS )

White House officials are telling associates they expect Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to quit early next year, once a new government is formed in Iraq, sources said yesterday.

Rumsfeld's deputy, Gordon England, is the inside contender to replace him, but there's also speculation that Sen. Joe Lieberman - a Democrat who ran against Bush-Cheney in the 2000 election - might become top guy at the Pentagon.


And the GOP gets the Senate seat...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:18 PM

'COURSE HE ISN'T SAFE:

REVIEW: of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe (Jeffrey Overstreet, 11/18/05, Christianity Today)

Those who don't know the book won't find anything amiss. Those who do will realize that Adamson's excisions do more than just quicken the pace—they change the nature of important characters.

The beavers, vividly voiced by Ray Winstone and Dawn French, are a cartoonish but likeable pair. But they're robbed of significant lines that build our apprehension of meeting Aslan and help us understand his kingship. The book's devotees will be dismayed to find that Mr. Beaver is denied his famous speech about Aslan's power and authority: "Who said anything about safe? 'Course he isn't safe. But he's good. He's the King, I tell you." [....]

It is a shame to have lost any of Wardrobe's wonderful resonance. But in spite of some grave errors in judgment, Adamson's film is still an admirable success. Let's keep things in perspective: It was once rumored that other filmmakers were moving the story from London to present-day L.A. after an earthquake, casting Janet Jackson as Narnia's Witch, and packing Narnia's streets with wisecracking critters à la Madagascar. Adamson and company should be commended for respecting Lewis's imagination as much as they did.

Lewis described a story's sequence of events as "a net whereby to catch something else." While Aslan's intimidating power and glory has escaped them, the filmmakers have "caught" the essence of The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe. And they've blessed the holiday season with a first-class family film that will stand tall after Lewis's detractors have spent their feeble arrows.

With its story of a savior who suffered the consequences for others' sins, and whose power proved greater even than death, this meaningful myth reflects rays of hope into a culture paralyzed by the chill of unbelief, where many really would prefer a winter without a Christmas.

MORE:
Hollywood turns a page: The movie company behind 'The Chronicles of Narnia' views films as a powerful tool for inspiring kids to read. (Gloria Goodale, 12/09/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

Micheal Flaherty is a man on a mission, one that began humbly enough, with an ice-filled sink in a blue-collar suburb of Boston. Mr. Flaherty, now president of Walden Media, the unconventional film company behind "The Chronicles of Narnia," was teaching a weekend exam prep class for poor students. "The real challenge there was to get their attention on a Saturday morning," he says of that day in 1997.

The sub-zero water played a key role when he realized the kids would spark to topics they already liked. "Titanic" fever was raging at the multiplexes as he was struggling to bring a science section to life. One of his pupils wanted to know just how cold that ocean was and plunged his arm in that chilly sink. From there, the class headed to a museum and then the library for more books about the tragic event.


Inklings of immortality: Oxford provided CS Lewis and his illustrious colleagues with inspiration for their fantasy worlds. (Max Davidson, 03/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)
Where did Narnia come from?

The question is susceptible to so many answers that it is probably foolish to pose it. But one of the answers, surely, must be the wartime Oxford in which Lewis and his fellow Inklings lived.

It must have been an odd, twilight world, with so many young men away at the war. The pre-war rituals of tutorials and toasted crumpets and punting on the river must have seemed arid; while the horror stories emerging from Nazi Europe would have been unbearable to a sensitive man like Lewis.

He was a devout Christian, though not a pacifist, and joined the Home Guard, with which he tramped around the city with a rifle, following the bidding of the local Captain Mainwarings. Was he a Sergeant Wilson or a Private Godfrey? A bit of both, no doubt.

More significantly, he placed his large house in Headington at the disposal of children who were being evacuated from London. Never having married or had children of his own, he enjoyed their company more than he expected. One of them, a small girl, took an interest in one of his wardrobes and asked if she could go inside it...

While Hitler was laying waste Europe, a writer associated with academic books about literature and theology turned his thoughts to strange new worlds, where goodness could be triumphant.


The Roar Over C.S. Lewis's Otherworldly Lion: For 'The Chronicles of Narnia,' Buzz of Biblical Proportions (William Booth, 12/08/05, Washington Post)
A timeless fantasy about talking beavers, friendly fauns and a mystical lion named Aslan? Or insidious militaristic propaganda cunningly used to inoculate innocents with rigid Christian dogma penned by a pervy pipe-puffing Oxford prig who actually didn't very much like little children and might have slept with a woman old enough to be his mother? When he wasn't drinking. In pubs. With J.R.R. Tolkien.

"C.S. Lewis, Superstar." That's the December cover of Christianity Today (which compares the deceased scholar of medieval poetry, seriously, to Elvis). David Bruce, the founder of the faith and pop culture Web site Hollywood Jesus, writes, "God is speaking to this culture through its mythical movies." With a stream of teaching aids and Sunday sermons, some evangelicals are hoping that "Narnia" will do for tots and tweeners what "The Passion of the Christ" did for adults.

Or not. Philip Pullman, author of the "His Dark Materials" trilogy of children's fantasies, describes "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" as "a peevish blend of racist, misogynistic and reactionary prejudice."

"Here in Narnia," writes Polly Toynbee in the Guardian newspaper, "is the perfect Republican, muscular Christianity for America -- that warped, distorted neo-fascist strain that thinks might is proof of right."

So what is it?


Ummm...Christianity is evil and Americans are fascists?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:05 PM

ALGER HISS IS DEAD:

GOP supports Bolton threat (Stephen Dinan, December 8, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Congressional Republicans said they support Ambassador John R. Bolton's threat to block the U.N. budget unless it adopts reforms, and they are ready to back him up if changes aren't made.

"Whatever it takes," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican. "We desperately need to reform that body." [...]

Should Mr. Bolton be foiled, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, will see what Congress can do to give Mr. Bolton extra tools to force reform, said Frist spokeswoman Amy Call.

"As Frist understands it, Bolton is not trying to shut the U.N. down, but simply spur it into action so that it can be a more effective institution," she said. "If the U.N. doesn't take action, we anticipate the Congress will increasingly involve itself in this issue as well."


Not to put too fine a point on it, but if it doesn't serve our interests why have it?



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:59 PM

SELF-REFERENCE ALERT:

'You were the future once' (George Jones, 08/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

David Cameron passed his first test as Conservative leader yesterday when he staked his claim to represent the future during an assured confrontation with Tony Blair in the Commons.

He delighted Tory MPs by accusing Mr Blair of being "stuck in the past" and suggesting that New Labour was running out of steam.

"I want to talk about the future," he told the Prime Minister, adding: "He was the future once." [...]

With his pregnant wife Samantha watching from the public gallery, he offered Mr Blair the support of the Conservatives in pushing through his school reforms, which are bitterly opposed by many Labour backbenchers.

By highlighting areas of agreement with the Prime Minister, he hopes to press his claim to be the true "heir of Blair" and to brand Gordon Brown, his likely opponent at the next election, as the roadblock to reform.

"With our support, the Prime Minister knows there is no danger of losing these reforms in a parliamentary vote, so he can afford to be as bold as he wants to be," Mr Cameron said.


For those who are concerned that we're such wonkish shut-ins that it must drive our families crazy--The Wife came home from her workout last night and said that since there was thankfully no one else in the room she got to turn to C-SPAN2 and watch Question Time while she rode the stationary bike.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:39 PM

IT'S BEGINNING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE CHRISTMAS...:

House Passes 3 Tax Cuts, Plans a 4th: Cost Would Outstrip Recent Action on Deficit (Jonathan Weisman, December 8, 2005, Washington Post)

The House passed three separate tax cuts yesterday and plans to approve a fourth today, trimming the federal revenue by $94.5 billion over five years -- nearly double the budget savings that Republicans muscled through the House last month.

GOP leaders portray the tax bills -- for the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast, affluent investors, U.S. troops serving in Iraq and taxpayers who otherwise would be hit by the alternative minimum tax -- as vital to keeping the economy rolling. [...]

But some budget analysts say the flourish of tax cutting badly undermines the recent shows of fiscal discipline. Last month's budget-cutting bill would save $50 billion over five years by imposing new fees on Medicaid recipients, trimming the food stamp rolls, squeezing student lenders and cutting federal child support enforcement.


Just keep cutting and then you can seek balance at a lower level.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:31 PM

SERVES ONE:

Recipe of the week: Chocolate chunk pecan pie (Chicago Tribune, 12/08/05)

Ingredients:
2 unbaked 9-inch pie shells or 1 unbaked 10-inch deep-dish pie shell
2 cups pecan halves
6 ounces semi-sweet chocolate
3 Tbsps. flour
1 cup firmly packed brown sugar
1 1/2 sticks (3/4 cup) unsalted butter, softened
5 large eggs, room temperature
3/4 cup light or dark corn syrup
1/4 cup molasses
1 Tbsp. coffee liqueur
1 tsp. vanilla
1/2 tsp. salt

1. Heat oven to 400 degrees; place pie shells in greased pie pans. Prick crust's bottom and sides with fork in 9 places. Bake 10 minutes; remove from oven. Cool completely.

2. Meanwhile, reduce oven to 325 degrees. Spread the pecans in a single layer on a baking sheet; bake until lightly toasted, about 10 minutes. Cool 10 minutes. Increase oven temperature to 350 degrees. Break nuts into small pieces; transfer to a large bowl.

3. Chop the chocolate into 1/2-inch pieces; add to bowl. Add the flour; stir until pecans and chocolate pieces are well coated.

4. Cream the brown sugar and butter in a large bowl with a mixer on medium-high speed until light and fluffy. Add the eggs one at a time, beating to incorporate each before adding the next. Add the corn syrup, molasses, liqueur, vanilla and salt; beat until smooth, about 1 minute.

5. Pour mixture over the chocolate and pecans, stirring to combine; pour filling evenly into pie shells. Transfer to the lower oven shelf. Bake until filling is nearly set in the center, 55 minutes for 9-inch pies or 1 hour, 10 minutes for the 10-inch pie. Cool. Serve warm or at room temperature.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:15 PM

EXACTLY HOW COULD THE WoT BE GOING ANY BETTER?:

Musharraf for Islamic renaissance (Daily Times, 12/08/05)

President General Pervez Musharraf on Wednesday urged Muslim leaders to work out a strategy for an Islamic renaissance, recommended mandatory contributions by each member state for a common science and technology fund and asked extremists to shun violence.

“From this holy city of peace and tolerance, I appeal to all extremists in our society to see reason, and shun the path of violence,” Gen Musharraf said in his speech at the Third Extraordinary Summit of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

“Senseless acts of terrorism committed by a handful of misguided individuals while claiming to act in the name of Islam have maligned our noble faith of peace, tolerance and compassion … We must condemn and reject all forces of terrorism and extremism, banning organisations which preach hate and violence. We must promote the Islamic values of tolerance and moderation,” he said. The president said most Islamic societies remained far removed from the expanding frontiers of knowledge, education, science and technology. Any dreams of progress on these fronts would remain unfulfilled if not fully backed by collective will and adequate financial resources, he said. [...]

Gen Musharraf urged Muslim leaders to pursue transparent and accountable governance, develop human resources by investing more in education, and promote full respect of human rights as enjoined by Islam, especially the rights of women and children.

The Muslim world needed quickly to break out from its “stagnation of centuries”. The OIC summit at Putrajaya was “a summit of reflection; Mecca must be a summit of decision and action,” Gen Musharraf said. [...]

Earlier in the day, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah appealed to Muslim leaders to unite and tackle extremists make greater educational efforts to promote tolerance. “We do not have the luxury of blaming others for our own problems. It is high time we addressed our national and regional problems with courage, sincerity and openness,” said Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish secretary general of the OIC.


OIC Sets New Target: Dialogue and Human Rights (Salih Boztas, Zaman, Cihan News Agency, Anadolu News Agency (aa), December 08, 2005, zaman.com)
Convening at the Saudi city of Mecca, the Organization of Islamic Conference has set a 10-year action plan to break down prejudice.

In the frame of the road map, the organization will contribute to inter-religious and inter-faith dialogue, as well as to the protection of human rights, and the rapprochement of religious sects will be prioritized. The OIC summit that began at Safa Palace on Wednesday will focus on the road map. A declaration, on which foreign ministers made the final touches the other night, was signed by 57 member countries. Since Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer did not attend the meeting, Turkish Speaker of Parliament Bulent Arinc and Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul represent Turkey at the summit. A more precise explanation of the religion, as well as participation in the process of inter-civilization dialogue, was among the decisions reached. “This is a great transformation,” all participants agreed on about these decisions. Saudi Arabia, hosting the summit, termed these experiences as a “return to fundamentals”.


In Iraq, Signs of Political Evolution: Parties That Shunned January Vote Are Now Embracing the Process (Jonathan Finer, December 8, 2005, Washington Post)
As Iraqis nationwide prepare to go to the polls for the third time this year on Dec. 15 -- this time for a new parliament -- candidates and political parties of all stripes are embracing politics, Iraqi style, as never before and showing increasing sophistication about the electoral process, according to campaign specialists, party officials and candidates here.

"It is like night and day from 10 months ago in terms of level of participation and political awareness," said a Canadian election specialist with the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, a group affiliated with the U.S. Democratic Party that is working to ease Iraq's transition to democracy. The institute, which has provided free campaign training to more than 100 Iraqi parties and describes its programs as nonpartisan, granted a reporter access to its employees and training sessions on the condition that no one on its staff be named.

Evidence of political evolution is plastered all over Baghdad's normally drab concrete blast walls and hung on lampposts at nearly every major intersection: large, colorful, graphically appealing posters conveying a wide variety of punchy messages.

Television and radio airwaves are replete with slick advertisements costing anywhere from $1,250 per minute on al-Sumariya, a Lebanon-based satellite station focused on Iraq, to $5,000 per minute on al-Arabiya, a network based in the United Arab Emirates that is popular across the Arab world.

In one 30-second spot, a smartly dressed and smiling Allawi -- normally known for his brusque demeanor -- is shown seated on a stool in a dimly lit studio. "My faith is in Iraq," he tells the camera, to underscore his secularism.

Even the arrival of American-style negative campaigning is evidence of a growing political sophistication, the election trainers said.


The degree of change involved in the adoption of Western standards as the measure of the health of their culture can hardly be overstated.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:53 AM

APPLES ROASTING ON AN OPEN FIRE....:

The allure of grilled apples: Forget chestnuts, try apples roasting on an open fire (Rob Kasper, 12/08/05, Baltimore Sun)

Apples smell so good on the barbecue grill that I find myself cooking them there even in these darker, colder months. [...]

Smoke-roasted apples

Servings: 4

Ingredients:
4 large sweet apples, such as Honey Crisps
1/2 lemon
5 Tbsps. butter at room temperature
5 Tbsps. brown sugar
5 Tbsps. ground nuts or graham-cracker crumbs
1/2 tsp. grated lemon zest
1/2 tsp. ground cinnamon
1/4 tsp. grated nutmeg
1/2 tsp. ground cloves
1/4 cup raisins
1 tsp. vanilla extract
1 Tbsp. rum (optional)

1. Cut a thin slice off the bottom and top of each apple, so it can stand upright without wobbling. Using a paring knife, cut out the stem end and remove the inverted cone.

2. Using a melon baller or a sturdy 1-teaspoon measuring spoon, scoop out the core and seeds. Rub the cut bottoms and tops with the cut side of the lemon to prevent browning. Squeeze a few drops of juice into the cavities.

3. Prepare the filling: Beat the butter and brown sugar in a mixing bowl with a wooden spoon. Beat in the nuts, lemon zest, cinnamon, nutmeg, cloves, raisins, rum, if using, and vanilla.

4. Spoon the mixture into the apples and loosely place the caps on top. Arrange the apples in a lightly greased foil pan.

5. Set up the grill for indirect grilling.

6. When ready to cook, place the pan with apples in the center of the grate, away from the heat. If using a charcoal grill, toss wood chips onto coals.

7. Cover the grill and smoke-roast the apples until nicely browned and soft on the sides, 40 minutes to 1 hour. Serve at once.

-- From "How to Grill: The Complete Illustrated Book of Barbecue Techniques" by Steven Raichlen, published by Workman Publishing Co. Inc.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:50 AM

WHY WE'RE NO LONGER THEISTS IN NEW ENGLAND:

Red Sox deal Renteria to Braves for Marte (ESPN.com, 12/08/05)

The Braves and Red Sox have agreed on a deal that would ship shortstop Edgar Renteria to Atlanta in exchange for Braves third-base prospect Andy Marte, ESPN's Peter Gammons has learned.

Unbelievably good trade, so long as they aren't just using him to get Julio Lugo.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:45 AM

OR WOOFTANG PUFF AS THE KIDS SAY:

A bowl of Mexican soul: Vibrant with color and flavor, tortilla soup can be a revelation (Regina Schrambling, 12/08/05, Los Angeles Times)

Classic tortilla soup, the way you'd find it in Mexico City, is simply good chicken broth combined with roasted tomatoes, onion, garlic, chiles and tortillas, cut into strips and fried. It's wonderfully satisfying, "a sort of soul food soup," as Mexican cooking authority Diana Kennedy puts it.

In California, it's often made with a tomato base thickened with ground tortillas, but there are variations throughout the country, such as a bean soup enriched with crunchy strips of fried tortillas.

"To be really authentic, the soup should have only a little white onion, raw not cooked, blended with roasted tomato," says Kennedy, speaking from her home near Zitácuaro in the state of Michoacán.

The blend is fried, "to intensify the flavor," she says. "Then it goes into the broth." In addition to chile and tortillas, the soup ought to include epazote. "A tortilla soup without epazote is not worth eating, to my mind. But I'm a purist," she says. [...]

Café Verde tortilla soup

Total time: 55 minutes
Serves: 4

Note: From Café Verde in Pasadena. Look for ground dried ancho chiles (sometimes labeled pasillo) in the spice section of selected markets, especially Latino markets.

Ingredients:
2 Roma tomatoes
1/2 large white onion, peeled
6 whole corn tortillas, plus 2 more cut into thin strips and fried for garnish
2 dried ancho chiles
2 Tbsps. olive oil
2 cloves garlic
1 bay leaf
1/2 cup cilantro leaves
2 cups tomato juice
1 cup vegetable stock, or more to taste
1 quart water
1 1/4 tsps. salt
1/4 tsp. white pepper
1/2 tsp. ground dried ancho chiles, or more to taste
1/2 cup sour cream

1. In batches, on a grill or rack (such as a cooling rack) over an open stovetop flame, roast the tomatoes, onion and whole tortillas until lightly spotted with brown, then roast the chiles for a few seconds (after which they'll start to burn). Break the tortillas into pieces.

2. Heat the olive oil in a medium saucepan. Add the garlic cloves and sauté over medium-low heat for 1 to 2 minutes. Add the tomatoes, breaking them up with a wooden spoon. Add the onion, chiles, tortilla pieces, bay leaf and cilantro. Cook for 10 minutes.

3. Add the tomato juice, stock and water. Bring the mixture to a boil, then reduce the heat and simmer 15 minutes.

4. Remove from the heat and, using a blending wand or blender, purée the mixture, in batches if necessary, until smooth. Strain the mixture through a sieve, pressing on the solids; discard the solids.

5. Return the soup to the cleaned pan and add salt, white pepper and ground chile. Rewarm the soup; if it seems too thick, stir in additional stock or water. Garnish with fried tortilla strips and sour cream.


Wolfgang Puck actually markets a pretty darn good Tortilla Soup and it's ready in 3 minutes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:06 AM

ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (via Kevin Whited):

US and Peru end trade impasse with agreement (Hal Weitzman, December 7 2005, Financial Times)

The US and Peru struck a wide-ranging trade agreement on Wednesday after 18 months of talks that had been mired in disagreements over agricultural and intellectual property issues.

“An agreement with Peru is a key building block in our strategy to advance free trade within our hemisphere,” said Rob Portman, the US Trade Representative, after announcing the deal in Washington alongside Alfredo Ferrero, Peru’s trade and tourism minister.

Peru had been negotiating with the US as part of a wider deal that was to have included Colombia and Ecuador, although Peruvian negotiators had always said they would be prepared to go ahead alone. When talks with all three countries broke down at the end of last month, Lima signalled it would press on unilaterally. [...]

“We hope to later bring in the other Andean countries, including Colombia and Ecuador,” Mr Portman said on Wednesday, although a senior US trade official said the negotiations would aim for “substance over speed”.



Posted by kevin_whited at 10:23 AM

A DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE?

Euthanasia bill skirts Jewish law (Tim Butcher, London Daily Telegraph, 12/08/2005)

Machines will perform euthanasia on terminally ill patients in Israel under legislation devised not to offend Jewish law, which forbids people taking human life.

A special timer will be fitted to a patient's respirator and will sound an alarm 12 hours before turning it off.

Normally, someone would override the alarm and keep the respirator turned on, but, if various stringent conditions are met, including the giving of consent by the patient or legal guardian, the alarm would not be overridden.

[snip]

Parliamentarians reached a solution after discussions with a 58-member panel of medical, religious and philosophical experts.

"The point was that it is wrong, under Jewish law, for a person's life to be taken by a person but, for a machine, it is acceptable," a parliamentary spokesman said. "A man would not be able to shorten human life, but a machine can."

Could anyone explain -- for us non-experts in medicine, religion, and philosophy -- how this mechanism "skirts" Jewish law, rather than simply ignoring it?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:23 AM

IS HE TRYING TO MAKE ABE FOXMAN'S HEAD EXPLODE?:

A 'Passion' for the Holocaust? (NATHAN BURSTEIN, Dec. 8, 2005, , THE JERUSALEM POST)

A production company owned by accused anti-Semite Mel Gibson is developing a TV miniseries about the Holocaust, The New York Times reported Tuesday. Con Artists Productions, Gibson's television production company, has been brought in by American TV network ABC to produce the miniseries, though Gibson's precise role in the project is not yet clear.

One of Hollywood's most bankable stars over the past two decades, Gibson ignited one of the film industry's most acrimonious controversies last year with The Passion of the Christ, a film some critics and Jewish groups accused of promoting anti-Semitic interpretations of Jesus' crucifixion. The controversy helped launch the film to massive box office success and makes Gibson's production company a surprise choice to produce the new miniseries, which will be based on the story of Flory A. Van Beek, a Dutch Jew who spent the Holocaust in hiding but lost family members in the Nazi camps. After surviving the sinking of a passenger liner torpedoed by a German submarine, Van Beek and her husband returned to Holland, where they spent three years in hiding with the help of three Christian families. [...]

[L]anguage was hardly the only distinctive feature of The Passion, which earned condemnation from the Anti-Defamation League and some religious scholars for its graphic rendering of Jesus' final hours on earth, during which he suffers gruesome beatings and is nailed to the cross with the seeming approval of his fellow Jews. Gibson denied any anti-Semitic intentions behind the film's production, saying that the script was written merely to provide viewers with an accurate sense of Jesus' suffering and martyrdom.

Opponents of the film criticized its portrayal of its Jewish characters and said they feared it would add to a resurgence in global anti-Semitism.


Happily, no one will care if this series leads to a resurgence in global anti-Germanism.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:43 AM

OTHER THAN THAT THINGS ARE GOING GREAT:

Scottish NHS 'is failing cancer patients' (Hélène Mulholland, December 8, 2005, The Guardian)

Scotland's health boards are unlikely to meet any of the targets they have been set for improving cancer treatment rates, despite being given extra funding, watchdogs revealed today.

As many as 53% of urgently-referred cancer patients in Scotland are having to wait longer than two months for treatment, according to the Audit Scotland report on the state of healthcare north of the border.


More money but NHS fails to recruit doctors (LOUISE GRAY, 12/08/05, The Scotsman)
TARGETS to recruit hundreds of extra doctors and thousands more nurses are unlikely to be met as the NHS struggles to make huge savings, Scotland's spending watchdog warned yesterday.

The European working-time directive, new training practices and the increasing age of staff means Scotland will need hundreds more doctors in the next few years.

But a report from Audit Scotland said it was "unlikely" sufficient consultants would be recruited in time and it would be difficult to find enough nurses.


So here's the question: if you set out today to try and destroy the health care system of the United States, wouldn't you adopt the kind of national health that Democrats insist we should have?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:36 AM

COMMON?:

Finding Uncommon Ground: Jews and Evangelicals explore the boundaries of their relationship at New York conference (Adam Dickter, 12/08/05, Jewish World Review)

Several Evangelical Christians struggled to accept Rabbi Poupko's pronouncement that the teaching of biblical prophets as understood by Jews applied only to the circumstances at the time and do not necessarily tell us anything about contemporary life.

In the initial session, two demographers presented survey data that illustrated how wide a gulf exists between the two communities, although perceptions of each other have improved. The University of Akron political scientist John Green compared statistics from 1996 to the present and found that a better mutual understanding of both groups had emerged as a result of growing exposure of Evangelicals to mainstream American society and better education.

Barry Kosmin of Trinity College in Hartford, Conn., found in his survey that 97 percent of Evangelicals agreed with the statement "G-d helps me," as opposed to just 34 percent of Jews and 71 percent of adults in general. Economically, the two groups were not found to be dissimilar; 73 percent of Jews and 75 percent of Evangelicals said they owned their own homes and 58 percent of Jews and 49 percent of Evangelicals were college graduates.

A majority of Jews, 56 percent, said they were Democrats while a majority of Evangelicals, 58 percent, identified as Republicans. "Clearly, Jews are literally and figuratively blue-state Americans while Evangelicals are red-state," said Kosmin. "The source of the gap lies in political and social reasons more than economics." Geographically, 47 percent of Evangelicals and 60 percent of Jews said they lived in suburbs.

In his comments, Jack Wertheimer, provost of JTS, noted that "the great asymmetry of these two different communities is at the heart of what this conference is all about. The Evangelical population is surging while the Jewish community is in decline. The Jewish community does not define itself as necessarily religious. "


What can even observant Jews have in common with secular "Jews"?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:27 AM

DID MUSSOLINI NOT GET JUSTICE?:

Along with trials, Iraq needs truth (Daniel Philpott, December 8, 2005, Boston Globe)

THE TRIAL of Saddam Hussein will likely result in his execution. Thus satisfied will be the Greek goddess of justice. Blind, with scales in her hand, she balances evil with justice, dollar for dollar, punishment equaling debts. It was her signature principle -- retributive justice -- that animated the trials of Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg, and trials following war, dictatorship, and genocide in Yugoslavia, East Germany, Greece, Argentina, and Rwanda. Only retribution for the ancient regime, claim the defenders of trials, can establish the rule of law in Iraq under its new Constitution.

But trials have their limitations. Politically they often backfire. Erich Honecker, the deposed premier of communist East Germany, arrived at his trial in the newly unified Germany pumping his fist in the air, decrying victors' justice -- and became more popular for it.

Trials rarely succeed in prosecuting more than a fraction of major perpetrators, even when they are lengthy and expensive. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has spent more than $1 billion over eight years to produce 20 convictions -- out of 125,000 alleged genocidaires awaiting trial. Political pressures frequently undermine verdicts. Due process, legal procedures, and adversarial incentives often hinder the public revelation of the truth about past injustices. Under pressure for a speedy execution, Saddam's prosecutors may exclude from their case his colossal massacres of Shi'ites and Kurds, thus inhibiting their public exposure.

Most of all, trials will contribute little to the chief US foreign policy goal of a stable, democratic regime. The persistent hindrance is hatred.


All you really need to know about these dog-and-pony show trials is that the ones who insist on them are the same folks who oppose changing such regimes in the first place.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:23 AM

WE'RE ALL CREATIONISTS NOW:

Team of scientists maps out 99% of dog genome (Gareth Cook, December 8, 2005, Boston Globe)

''It is a historic day in the relationship between man and dog," said Eric S. Lander at a press conference yesterday, as a pug and an Akita tussled in the back of the room at the Bayside Exposition Center, where a dog show was being set up. Lander is the director of the Broad Institute and the owner of two golden retrievers.

Scientists said that the dog also stands as a testament to the power of evolution -- and its importance -- at a time when some are challenging its teaching in public schools. [...]

Dogs themselves are a human creation, thought to have begun when people domesticated the wolf in East Asia.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

IT'S A SIN TO CRUSH A SHORTBREAD:

Castles, shortbread and whisky (Ethel G. Hofman, 12/08/05, Jewish World Review)

It's time to banish the myth that the signature Scottish dish is the scorned haggis. Glasgow, one of Scotland's largest cities, was recently rated by Conde Nast Traveller, (the bible of the travel industry), as the favorite UK destination for haute cuisine, culinary excellence and friendliness. The awards, which were voted for by readers of the magazine, ranked Glasgow as second in Britain, with only London delivering finer food, sans friendliness! [...]

CHOCOLATE SHORTBREAD TRUFFLES

These are usually served with coffee after dinner. Confectioners sugar may be substituted for cocoa powder. Store in an airtight container in a cool place, not the refrigerator

Makes 24

* 8 ounces good dark chocolate (eg. Ghirardellis), broken in small pieces.
* 6 tablespoons unsalted butter, cut in 6 pieces
* 1 1/4 cups finely crushed shortbread
* 1 tablespoon whisky
* 3 tablespoons unsweetened cocoa powder
* 1/4 teaspoon orange extract

Melt the chocolate and butter in the microwave, 1 1/2 minutes on High or until softened. Mix until thoroughly blended. Stir in whisky and orange extract. Add the shortbread crumbs. Mix well. Chill to firm up.

Shape heaping teaspoonfuls into balls. Roll in cocoa powder. Chill. Serve at room temperature.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

STALIN...CASTRO...HO...ORTEGA...ZARQAWI...:

Sleeping with the Enemy (James Webb, Spring 1997, American Enterprise)

It is difficult to explain to my children that in my teens and early twenties the most frequently heard voices of my peers were trying to destroy the foundations of American society, so that it might be rebuilt according to their own narcissistic notions. In retrospect it’s hard even for some of us who went through those times to understand how highly educated people—most of them spawned from the comforts of the upper-middle class—could have seriously advanced the destructive ideas that were in the air during the late ’60s and early ’70s. Even Congress was influenced by the virus.

After President Nixon resigned in August of 1974, that fall’s congressional elections brought 76 new Democrats to the House, and eight to the Senate. A preponderance of these freshmen had run on McGovernesque platforms. Many had been viewed as weak candidates before Nixon’s resignation, and some were glaringly unqualified, such as then-26-year-old Tom Downey of New York, who had never really held a job in his life and was still living at home with his mother.

This so-called Watergate Congress rode into town with an overriding mission that had become the rallying point of the American Left: to end all American assistance in any form to the besieged government of South Vietnam. Make no mistake—this was not the cry of a few years earlier to stop young Americans from dying. It had been two years since the last American soldiers left Vietnam, and fully four years since the last serious American casualty calls there.

For reasons that escape historical justification, even after America’s military withdrawal the Left continued to try to bring down the incipient South Vietnamese democracy. Future White House aide Harold Ickes and others at “Project Pursestrings”—assisted at one point by an ambitious young Bill Clinton—worked to cut off all congressional funding intended to help the South Vietnamese defend themselves. The Indochina Peace Coalition, run by David Dellinger and headlined by Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden, coordinated closely with Hanoi throughout 1973 and 1974, and barnstormed across America’s campuses, rallying students to the supposed evils of the South Vietnamese government. Congressional allies repeatedly added amendments to spending bills to end U.S. support of Vietnamese anti-Communists, precluding even air strikes to help South Vietnamese soldiers under attack by North Vietnamese units that were assisted by Soviet-bloc forces.

Then in early 1975 the Watergate Congress dealt non-Communist Indochina the final blow. The new Congress icily resisted President Gerald Ford’s January request for additional military aid to South Vietnam and Cambodia. This appropriation would have provided the beleaguered Cambodian and South Vietnamese militaries with ammunition, spare parts, and tactical weapons needed to continue their own defense. Despite the fact that the 1973 Paris Peace Accords called specifically for “unlimited military replacement aid” for South Vietnam, by March the House Democratic Caucus voted overwhelmingly, 189-49, against any additional military assistance to Vietnam or Cambodia.

The rhetoric of the antiwar Left during these debates was filled with condemnation of America’s war-torn allies, and promises of a better life for them under the Communism that was sure to follow. Then-Congressman Christopher Dodd typified the hopeless naiveté of his peers when he intoned that “calling the Lon Nol regime an ally is to debase the word.... The greatest gift our country can give to the Cambodian people is peace, not guns. And the best way to accomplish that goal is by ending military aid now.” Tom Downey, having become a foreign policy expert in the two months since being freed from his mother’s apron strings, pooh-poohed the coming Cambodian holocaust that would kill more than one-third of the country’s population, saying, “The administration has warned that if we leave there will be a bloodbath. But to warn of a new bloodbath is no justification for extending the current bloodbath.”

On the battlefields of Vietnam the elimination of all U.S. logistical support was stunning and unanticipated news. South Vietnamese commanders had been assured of material support as the American military withdrew—the same sort of aid the U.S. routinely provided allies from South Korea to West Germany—and of renewed U.S. air strikes if the North attacked the South in violation of the 1973 Paris Peace Accords. Now they were staring at a terrifyingly uncertain future, even as the Soviets continued to assist the Communist North.

As the shocked and demoralized South Vietnamese military sought to readjust its forces to cope with serious shortages, the newly refurbished North Vietnamese immediately launched a major offensive. Catching many units out of position, the North rolled down the countryside over a 55-day period. In the ensuing years I have interviewed South Vietnamese survivors of these battles, many of whom spent ten years and more in Communist concentration camps after the war. The litany is continuous: “I had no ammunition.” “I was down to three artillery rounds per tube per day.” “I had nothing to give my soldiers.” “I had to turn off my radio because I could no longer bear to hear their calls for help.”

The reaction in the United States to this debacle defines two distinct camps that continue to be identifiable in many of the issues we face today. For most of those who fought in Vietnam, and for their families, friends, and political compatriots, this was a dark and deeply depressing month. The faces we saw running in terror from the North Vietnamese assault were real and familiar, not simply video images. The bodies that fell like spinning snowflakes toward cruel deaths after having clung hopelessly to the outer parts of departing helicopters and aircraft may have been people we knew or tried to help. Even for those who had lost their faith in America’s ability to defeat the Communists, this was not the way it was supposed to end.

For those who had evaded the war and come of age believing our country was somehow evil, even as they romanticized the intentions of the Communists, these few weeks brought denials of their own responsibility in the debacle, armchair criticisms of the South Vietnamese military, or open celebrations. At the Georgetown University Law Center where I was a student, the North’s blatant discarding of the promises of peace and elections contained in the 1973 Paris Accords, followed by the rumbling of North Vietnamese tanks through the streets of Saigon, was treated by many as a cause for actual rejoicing.

Denial is rampant in 1997, but the truth is this end result was the very goal of the antiwar movement’s continuing efforts in the years after American withdrawal.


As always, we'd recommend Lewis Sorley's A Better War on the topic. But there's also a bit in George Crile's terrific book, Charlie Wilson's War, about CIA Director William Casey pleading with Congressman Wilson to help the Administration save the Contras from the Democrats:
[W]ilson quite bluntly explained that the Contra war was a lost cause. Clearly the director didn't understand what Nicaragua had come to mean to liberals in America. Influential leaders in every city in the country were agitated about the Agency's operations. Hundreds of Americans were actually working for the Sandanista government. Every Friday afternoon, they would gather in front of the U.S. embassy to protest the war, often joined by many more Americans visiting Nicaragua. [Tip] O'Neill's niece was in Managua, and housewives and ministers from Witness for Peace were going up to the border to symbolically interpose themselves between the Contra army and the Sandinistas. Reporters were flying in and out of the country filing dispatches about the Agency's hopelessly public covert operation.

All that was tame, Wilson told Casey, compared to the white passion that he was seeing close up from his Democratic colleagues. Even his close friend level-headed majority leader Jim Wright acted as if getting the CIA out of Nicaragua was his life's crusade. [...]

[Tony Coehlo, the Democratic whip] explained, "During the eighties we had a divided government. The Republicans controlled the Senate, and the only institution controlled by Democrats was the House. We were not just the opposition party, we were the opposition government."


They sure do make it hard to think of them as loyal Americans, nevermind sons of liberty.


December 7, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:17 PM

FLAVORS OF THIRD:

At last, a new liberal leader (Camilla Cavendish, 12/08/05, Times of London)

IF THE Conservative Party didn’t exist, would we need to invent it? Certainly not all its MPs seem to think so. Only a few days ago, one prominent Cameron-supporting MP told me that “you don’t really need us as long as Blair is in power”.

Sadly, he may be past his sell-by date though.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:29 PM

THE BROTHERS GET SHAFTED AGAIN:

Sources: Menendez tapped for U.S. Senate seat (Mark Preston, 12/0-7/05, CNN)

New Jersey Gov.-elect Jon Corzine will name Rep. Robert Menendez, chairman of the Democratic Caucus, as his successor in the U.S. Senate, multiple New Jersey Democratic sources told CNN Wednesday.

Menendez will serve the remaining year of Corzine's Senate term in 2006 while launching his own campaign for a full six-year term, the sources said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:39 PM

CHILDREN OF LIGHT:

Bush Observes Hanukkah Early (NEDRA PICKLER, 12/06/05, Associated Press)

Hanukkah does not start until Dec. 25 this year but it was observed early at the White House on Tuesday evening.

President Bush helped light a 38-inch gold and bronze menorah, which was loaned to the White House by the Park Synagogue of Cleveland. He said the nation is grateful to American troops of all faiths who are away from their families this holiday season.


President and Mrs. Bush Participate in Menorah Lighting Ceremony (President George W. Bush, Bookseller's Area, 12/06/05)
Welcome to the White House. Laura and I are glad you're here, and we're glad to be here to celebrate the festival of Hanukkah. Hanukkah begins later this month; it's a time to remember the story of a miracle once witnessed in the holy temple in Jerusalem.

More than 2,000 years ago, the ancient land of Israel was conquered, and Jewish people were forbidden to pray, observe their religious customs, or study the Torah. In response, a patriot named Judah Maccabee led a revolt against the enemy army. Their numbers were small, yet their courage in defense of their faith was powerful -- and they were triumphant.

When the Maccabees returned to reclaim their holy temple, the oil that should have lasted only one day instead burned for eight days. During Hanukkah, Jews across the world signify this miracle by lighting the menorah. This act commemorates the victory of freedom over oppression, and of hope shining through darkness. Today, that light still burns in Jewish homes and synagogues everywhere. And, today, that light will burn here in the White House.

Laura and I are honored to have a beautiful menorah here from Park Synagogue in Cleveland, Ohio. Rabbi Skoff, thank you very much for sharing it with us. I also want to thank Rabbi Barry Gelman for his prayer and thank him for his deep compassion. As he mentioned, he is the rabbi from the United Orthodox Synagogue in Houston, whose members did so much to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina. I want to thank the West Point Jewish Cadet Choir for being here with us this evening. Our nation is grateful to the American troops of all faiths who are serving our country around the world, and who are away from their families this holiday.

The word "Hanukkah" and the Hebrew word for education both come from the same root word that means "to dedicate." And earlier today, I met with some of the leaders from our nation's Jewish day schools. As educators who dedicate themselves to teaching the faith and to teaching, they are fulfilling the true lesson of Hanukkah every day of the year. Just as the Maccabees reclaimed their holy temple, these teachers help ensure that Jewish traditions are passed from generation to generation.

Tonight, as we prepare to light the candles, we are grateful for our freedoms as Americans, especially the freedom to worship. We are grateful that freedom is spreading to still new regions of the world, and we pray that those who still live in the darkness of tyranny will some day see the light of freedom.

And now I invite Rabbi Skoff and his daughter and family to join me for the symbolic lighting of the White House menorah. The honor is yours. Thank you.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:24 PM

RANDOMNESS IS A SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE:

JI 'near death' but still a threat (Patrick Walters, 08dec05, The Australian)

JEMAAH Islamiah is "virtually finished" as a strong terrorist network but Indonesia still faces the threat of random small-scale attacks by individuals.

Indonesian Defence Minister Juwono Sudarsono told The Australian in an exclusive interview that the number of committed terrorists in the country was estimated at no more than 150 to 200.

However, Dr Sudarsono said security authorities remained deeply concerned about the possibility of fresh attacks in the lead-up to Christmas.

And he emphasised the critical importance of strong economic growth in Indonesia and reducing poverty levels to help defeat terrorism by preventing young people from drifting towards the "misguided ideology" of extremism.

"As a tightly knit opposition network, I think it (JI) is virtually finished," Dr Sudarsono said.

"But the very randomness of these attacks, small-scale attacks, is still a potential danger."


The WoT is being won far more quickly than anyone could have imagined on 9-11, though some terrible attacks likely litter our future.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:35 PM

NOT YIELDING THE FUTURE:

President Discusses War on Terror and Rebuilding Iraq (President George W. Bush, Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, D.C., 12/07/05)

Today we mark the anniversary of a fateful day in American history. On December the 7th, 1941, our peaceful nation awoke to an attack plotted in secret, and executed without mercy. The strike on Pearl Harbor was the start of a long war for America -- a massive struggle against those who attacked us, and those who shared their destructive ambitions. Fortunately for all of us, a great generation of Americans was more than equal to the challenge. Our nation pulled together -- and despite setbacks and battlefield defeats, we did not waver in freedom's cause. With courage and determination, we won a war on two fronts: we liberated millions, we aided the rise of democracy in Europe and Asia we watched enemies become allies, and we laid the foundation of peace for generations.

On September the 11th, 2001, our nation awoke to another sudden attack. In the space of just 102 minutes, more Americans were killed than we lost at Pearl Harbor. Like generations before us, we accepted new responsibilities, and we confronted new dangers with firm resolve. Like generations before us, we're taking the fight to those who attacked us -- and those who share their murderous vision for future attacks. Like generations before us, we've faced setbacks on the path to victory -- yet we will fight this war without wavering. And like the generations before us, we will prevail.

Like earlier struggles for freedom, this war will take many turns, and the enemy must be defeated on every battlefront -- from the streets of Western cities, to the mountains of Afghanistan, to the tribal regions of Pakistan, to the islands of Southeast Asia and the Horn of Africa. Yet the terrorists have made it clear that Iraq is the central front in their war against humanity. So we must recognize Iraq as the central front in the war on terror.

Last week at the Naval Academy, I gave the first in a series of speeches outlining our strategy for victory in Iraq. I explained that our strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists and Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. We believe that, over time, most of this group will be persuaded to support a democratic Iraq led by a federal government that is strong enough to protect minority rights.

The Saddamists are former regime loyalists who harbor dreams of returning to power -- and they're trying to foment anti-democratic sentiment among the larger Sunni community. Yet they lack popular support -- and over time, they can be marginalized and defeated by security forces of a free Iraq.

The terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda are the smallest but most lethal group. Many are foreigners coming to fight freedom's progress in Iraq. They are led by a brutal terrorist named Zarqawi -- al Qaeda's chief of operations in Iraq -- who has pledged his allegiance to Osama bin Laden. The terrorists' stated objective is to drive U.S. and coalition forces out of Iraq and to gain control of the country. They would then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America, overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East, and try to establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain.

The terrorists in Iraq share the same ideology as the terrorists who struck the United States on September the 11th, blew up commuters in London and Madrid, and murdered tourists in Bali, killed workers in Riyadh, and slaughtered guests at a wedding in Amman, Jordan. This is an enemy without conscience -- they cannot be appeased. If we're not fighting and destroying the enemy in Iraq, they would not be leading the quiet lives of good citizens. They would be plotting and killing our citizens -- across the world and within our own borders. By fighting the terrorists in Iraq, we are confronting a direct threat to the American people -- and we will accept nothing less than complete victory.

We're pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq. Last week, my administration released a document called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." Our goal is victory -- and victory will be achieved when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can provide for the safety of their own citizens, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation.

Our strategy to achieve that victory has three elements. On the political side, we're helping the Iraqis build inclusive democratic institutions that will protect the interests of all Iraqis. We're working with the Iraqis to help them engage those who can be persuaded to join the new Iraq, and to marginalize those who never will. In two-and-a-half years, the Iraqi people have made amazing progress. They've gone from living under the boot of a brutal tyrant, to liberation, to free elections, to a democratic constitution. A week from tomorrow, they will go to the polls to elect a fully constitutional government that will lead them for the next four years. By helping Iraqis continue to build their democracy, we will gain an ally in the war on terror; by helping them build a democracy, we will inspire reformers from Damascus to Tehran; and by helping them build a democracy, we'll make the American people more secure.

On the security side, coalition and Iraqi security forces are on the offense against the enemy. We're clearing out areas controlled by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, leaving Iraqi forces to hold territory taken from the enemy, and following up with targeted reconstruction to help Iraqis rebuild their lives. And as we fight the terrorists, we're working to build capable and effective Iraqi security forces, so they can take the lead in the fight -- and eventually take responsibility for the safety and security of their citizens without major foreign assistance.

As Iraqi forces become more capable, they're taking responsibility for more and more Iraqi territory; we're transferring bases for their control, to take the fight to the enemy. That means American and coalition forces can concentrate on training Iraqis and hunting down high-value targets like Zarqawi.

On the economic side, we're helping the Iraqis rebuild their infrastructure, and reform their economy, and build the prosperity that will give all Iraqis a stake in a free and peaceful Iraq. In doing this, we have involved the United Nations, other international organizations, our coalition partners, and supportive regional states.

A week ago at the Naval Academy, I spoke about our efforts to train the Iraqi security forces. I described the changes we've made in the way these forces are trained and the resulting gains the Iraqi forces have made in the past year. Today, I'm going to talk about how we're working with those Iraqi forces and Iraq's leaders to improve security and restore order, to help Iraqis rebuild their cities, and to help the national government in Baghdad revitalize Iraq's infrastructure and economy.

Over the course of this war, we have learned that winning the battle for Iraqi cities is only the first step. We also have to win the "battle after the battle" -- by helping Iraqis consolidate their gains and keep the terrorists from returning. Used to be that after American troops cleared the terrorists out of a city and moved onto the next mission, there weren't enough forces, Iraqi forces, to hold the area. We found that after we left, the terrorists would re-enter the city, intimidate local leaders and police, and eventually retake control. This undermined the gains of our military, it thwarted our efforts to help Iraqis rebuild and led local residents to lose confidence in the process and in their leaders.

So we adjusted our approach. As improvements in training produced more capable Iraqi security forces, those forces have been able to better hold onto the cities we cleared out together. With help from our military and civilian personnel, the Iraqi government can then work with local leaders and residents to begin reconstruction -- with Iraqis leading the building efforts, and our coalition in a supporting role.

This approach is working. And today, I want to describe our actions in two cities where we have seen encouraging progress -- Najaf and Mosul.

The city of Najaf is located about 90 miles south of Baghdad, and it's the home to one of Shia Islam's holiest places, the Imam Ali Shrine. As a predominantly Shia city, Najaf suffered greatly during Saddam's rule. Virtually every element of infrastructure and basic services had been crippled by years of insufficient maintenance. In 1991, thousands of Najaf residents were killed during a brutal crackdown by the dictator. Our troops liberated Najaf in 2003 -- yet about a year later, the city fell under the sway of a radical and violent militia. Fighting in the streets damaged homes and businesses, and the local economy collapsed as visitors and pilgrims stopped coming to the shrine out of fear for their lives.

In the summer of 2004, we discussed the growing problem in Najaf with Iraq's political leaders -- and the coalition and Iraqi government decided to retake control of the city. And we did. Together, coalition and Iraqi forces routed out the militia in tough, urban fighting. It was an intense battle, our guys performed great, and so did the Iraqi forces. Together with the Iraqi government and the Shia clerical community, we forced the militia to abandon the shrine and return it to legitimate Iraqi authority. The militia forces agreed to disarm and leave Najaf.

As soon as the fighting in Najaf ended, targeted reconstruction moved forward. The Iraqi government played an active role, and so did our military commanders and diplomats and workers from the U.S. Agency for International Development. Together, they worked with Najaf's governor and other local officials to rebuild the local police force, repair residents' homes, refurbish schools, restore water and other essential services, reopen a soccer stadium, complete with new lights and fresh sod. Fifteen months later, new businesses and markets have opened in some of Najaf's poorest areas, religious pilgrims are visiting the city again, construction jobs are putting local residents back to work. One of the largest projects was the rebuilding of the Najaf Teaching Hospital, which had been looted and turned into a military fortress by the militia. Thanks to the efforts by Iraqi doctors and local leaders, and with the help of American personnel, the hospital is now open and capable of serving hundreds of patients each day.

Najaf is now in the hands of elected government officials. An elected provincial council is at work -- drafting plans to bring more tourism and commerce to the city. Political life has returned, and campaigns for the upcoming elections have begun, with different parties competing for the vote. The Iraqi police are now responsible for day-to-day security in Najaf. An Iraqi battalion has consumed [sic] control of the former American military base, and our forces are now about 40 minutes outside the city.

A U.S. Army sergeant explains our role this way: "We go down there if they call us. And that doesn't happen very often. Usually, we just stay out of their way." Residents of Najaf are also seeing visible progress -- and they have no intention of returning to the days of tyranny and terror. One man from Najaf put it this way: "Three years ago we were in ruins. One year ago we were fighting in the streets ... [Now] look at the people shopping and eating and not in fear."

There is still plenty of work left to be done in Najaf. Like most of Iraq, the reconstruction in Najaf has proceeded with fits and starts since liberation - it's been uneven. Sustaining electric power remains a major challenge -- and construction has begun on three new substations to help boost capacity. Because there is a shortage of clean water, new water treatment and sewage units are being installed. Security in Najaf has improved substantially, but threats remain. There are still kidnappings, and militias and armed gangs are exerting more influence than they should in a free society. Local leaders and Iraqi security forces are confronting these problems -- and we're helping them.

Another area that has seen tremendous gains is the ancient city of Mosul. Mosul is one of Iraq's largest cities, and it's the home of a diverse population of Sunni Arabs, Kurds, and other ethnic groups. Mosul is also the city where our troops brought justice to Saddam's sons in the summer of 2003. In the months after liberation, Mosul was relatively quiet -- and so we began to redeploy our forces elsewhere in the country. And when the terrorists and Saddamists infiltrated the city, the Iraqi police were not up to the task of stopping them. These thugs intimidated residents, and overwhelmed the police.

By late last year, terrorists and Saddamists had gained control of much of Mosul, and they launched a series of car bombings and ambushes -- including an attack on a coalition mess tent that killed 14 American service members. The terrorists and Saddamists killed innocent Iraqi civilians, and they left them in the streets with notes pinned to their bodies threatening others. American and Iraqi forces responded with a series of coordinated strikes on the most dangerous parts of the city. Together we killed, captured, and cleared out many of the terrorists and Saddamists -- and we helped the Iraqi police and legitimate political leaders regain control of the city. As the Iraqis have grown in strength and ability, they have taken more responsibility for Mosul's security -- and coalition forces have moved into a supporting role.

As security in Mosul improved, we began working with local leaders to accelerate reconstruction. Iraqis upgraded key roads and bridges over the Tigris River, rebuilt schools and hospitals, and started refurbishing the Mosul Airport. Police stations and firehouses were rebuilt, and Iraqis have made major improvements in the city's water and sewage network.

Mosul still faces real challenges. Like Najaf, Mosul's infrastructure was devastated during Saddam's reign. The city is still not receiving enough electricity, so Iraqis have a major new project underway to expand the Mosul power substation. Terrorist intimidation is still a concern. This past week, people hanging election posters were attacked and killed. Yet freedom is taking hold in Mosul, and residents are making their voices heard. Turnout in the -- for the October referendum was over 50 percent in the province where Mosul is located. That's more than triple the turnout in the January election. And there's heavy campaigning going on in Mosul for next week's election.

In places like Mosul and Najaf, residents are seeing tangible progress in their lives. They're gaining a personal stake in a peaceful future, and their confidence in Iraq's democracy is growing. The progress of these cities is being replicated across much of Iraq -- and more of Iraq's people are seeing the real benefits that a democratic society can bring.

Throughout Iraq, we're also seeing challenges common to young democracies. Corruption is a problem at both the national and local levels of the Iraqi government. We will not tolerate fraud -- so our embassy in Baghdad is helping to demand transparency and accountability for the money being invested in reconstruction. We've helped the Iraqi people establish institutions like a Commission on Public Integrity and a stronger Supreme Board of Audit to improve oversight of the rebuilding process. Listen, the Iraqi people expect money to be spent openly and honestly -- and so do the American people.

Another problem is the infiltration of militia groups into some Iraqi security forces -- especially the Iraqi police. We're helping Iraqis deal with this problem by embedding coalition transition teams in Iraqi units to mentor police and soldiers. We're also working with Iraq leaders at all levels of government to establish high standards for police recruiting. In a free Iraq, former militia members must shift their loyalty to the national government, and learn to operate under the rule of law.

As we help Iraq's leaders confront these challenges, we're also helping them rebuild a sound economy that will grow and deliver a better life for their people. Iraq is a nation with the potential for tremendous prosperity. The country has a young and educated workforce, they've got abundant land and water, and they have among the largest oil resources in the world. Yet for decades, Saddam Hussein used Iraq's wealth to enrich himself and a privileged few. As he built palaces, Saddam neglected the country's infrastructure. He ruined the economy, and he squandered the most valuable resource in Iraq -- the talent and the energy of the Iraqi people.

So we're helping the new Iraq government reverse decades of economic destruction, reinvigorate its economy, and make responsible reforms. We're helping Iraqis to rebuild their infrastructure and establish the institutions of a market economy. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong in Iraq. Our policies are aimed at unleashing the creativity of the Iraqi people.

Like our approach to training Iraqi security forces, our approach to helping Iraqis rebuild has changed and improved. When we started the reconstruction progress in the spring of 2003, our focus was on repairing and building large-scale infrastructure -- such as electrical plants and large water treatment facilities. We moved forward with some of those large projects, yet we found our approach was not meeting the priorities of the Iraqi people. In many places, especially those targeted by the terrorists and Saddamists, the most urgent needs were smaller, localized projects, such as sewer lines and city roads. Delivering visible progress to the Iraqi people required us to focus on projects that could be completed rapidly.

And so in consultation with the Iraqi government, we started using more resources to fund smaller, local projects that could deliver rapid, noticeable improvements, and offer an alternative to the destructive vision of the terrorists. We increased the amount of money our military commanders had at their disposal for flexible use. We worked with Iraqi leaders to provide more contracts directly to Iraqi firms. And by adapting our reconstruction efforts to meet needs on the ground, we're helping Iraqi leaders serve their people, and Iraqis are beginning to see that a free life will be a better life.

Reconstruction has not always gone as well as we had hoped, primarily because of the security challenges on the ground. Rebuilding a nation devastated by a dictator is a large undertaking. It's even harder when terrorists are trying to blow up that which the Iraqis are trying to build. The terrorists and Saddamists have been able to slow progress, but they haven't been able to stop it.

In the space of two-and-a-half years, we have helped Iraqis conduct nearly 3,000 renovation projects at schools, train more than 30,000 teachers, distribute more than 8 million textbooks, rebuild irrigation infrastructure to help more than 400,000 rural Iraqis, and improve drinking water for more than 3 million people.

Our coalition has helped Iraqis introduce a new currency, reopen their stock exchange, extend $21 million in micro-credit and small business loans to Iraqi entrepreneurs. As a result of these efforts and Iraq's newfound freedom, more than 30,000 new Iraqi businesses have registered since liberation. And according to a recent survey, more than three-quarters of Iraqi business owners anticipate growth in the national economy over the next two years.

This economic development and growth will be really important to addressing the high unemployment rate across parts of that country. Iraq's market-based reforms are gradually returning the proud country to the global economy. Iraqis have negotiated significant debt relief. And for the first time in 25 years, Iraq has completed an economic report card with the International Monetary Fund -- a signal to the world financial community that Iraqis are serious about reform and determined to take their rightful place in the world economy.

With all these improvements, we're helping the Iraqi government deliver meaningful change for the Iraqi people. This is another important blow against the Saddamists and the terrorists. Iraqis who were disillusioned with their situation are beginning to see a hopeful future for their country. Many who once questioned democracy are coming off the fence; they're choosing the side of freedom. This is quiet, steady progress. It doesn't always make the headlines in the evening news. But it's real, and it's important, and it is unmistakable to those who see it close up.

One of those who has seen that progress is Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. Senator Lieberman has traveled to Iraq four times in the past 17 months, and the article he wrote when he returned from his most recent trip provides a clear description of the situation on the ground. Here's what Senator Lieberman wrote -- Senator Lieberman wrote about the Iraq he saw: "Progress is visible and practical. There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraq hands than before." He describes an Iraqi poll showing that, "two-thirds [of Iraqis] say they are better off than they were under Saddam Hussein."

Senator Lieberman goes on, "Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes, we do. And it's important to make clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still, but has changed over the years." The Senator says that mistakes have been made. But he goes on to say that he is worried about a bigger mistake. He writes, "What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory." Senator Lieberman is right.

There is an important debate going on in our nation's capital about Iraq, and the fact that we can debate these issues openly in the midst of a dangerous war brings credit to our democracy. In this debate, some are calling for us to withdraw from Iraq on a fixed timetable, without regard to conditions on the ground. Recently, one Democratic leader came out in support of an artificial deadline for withdrawal, and said an immediate withdrawal of our troops would, "make the American people safer, our military stronger, and bring some stability to the region." That's the wrong policy for our government. Withdrawing on an artificial deadline would endanger the American people, would harm our military, and make the Middle East less stable. It would give the terrorists exactly what they want.

In a letter to the terrorist leader Zarqawi, the al Qaeda leader Zawahiri has outlined his goals in Iraq with these steps: "Expel the Americans from Iraq I establish an Islamic authority over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq extend the jihad wave." The terrorists hope America will withdraw before the job is done, so they can take over the country and turn it into a base for future attacks. Zawahiri called the Vietnam War as a reason to believe the terrorists can prevail. He wrote, "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam -- and how they ran and left their agents -- is noteworthy." In the past, al Qaeda has said that American pullouts from Lebanon and Somalia showed them that America was weak and could be made to run. And now the terrorists think they can make America run in Iraq, and that is not going to happen so long as I'm the Commander-in-Chief. (Applause.)

We are not going to yield the future of Iraq to men like Zarqawi, and we're not going to yield the future of the Middle East to men like bin Laden. We will complete our mission in Iraq, and leave behind a democracy that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself. Our military will continue to hunt down the terrorists in Iraq -- and to prepare the Iraqi security forces to take over more of the fight and control more of the territory on their own. We will continue to help the Iraqis rebuild their cities and their lives so they can enjoy the prosperity that freedom brings. We will continue to stand with the Iraqi people as they move forward on the path of democracy. And when victory is achieved, our troops will then come home with the honor they've earned.

Next week, I'll discuss the political element of our strategy in greater detail -- how we're helping Iraqis build a democracy that will be a strong ally in this global war against the terrorists. One of the great lessons of history is that free societies are peaceful societies, and free nations give their citizens a path to resolve their differences peacefully through the democratic process.

Democracy can be difficult and complicated and even chaotic. It can take years of hard work to build a healthy civil society. Iraqis have to overcome many challenges, including longstanding ethnic and religious tensions, and the legacy of brutal repression. But they're learning that democracy is the only way to build a just and peaceful society, because it's the only system that gives every citizen a voice in determining its future.

Before our mission in Iraq is accomplished, there will be tough days ahead. Victory in Iraq will require continued sacrifice by our men and women in uniform, and the continued determination of our citizens. There will be good days and there will be bad days in this war. I reject the pessimists in Washington who say we can't win this war. Yet every day, we can be confident of the outcome because we know that freedom has got the power to overcome terror and tyranny. We can be confident about the outcome because we know the character and strength of the men and women in the fight. Their courage makes all Americans proud.

This generation of Americans in uniform is every bit as brave and determined as the generation that went to war after the attack on our nation 64 years ago today. Like those who came before, they are defeating a dangerous enemy, bringing freedom to millions, and transforming a troubled part of the world. And like those who came before, they will always have the gratitude of the American people.

Our nation will uphold the cause for which our men and women in uniform are risking their lives. We will continue to hunt down the terrorists wherever they hide. We will help the Iraqi people so they can build a free society in the heart of a troubled region. And by laying the foundations of freedom in Iraq and across the broader Middle East, we will lay the foundation of peace for generations to come.

Thanks for giving me a chance to come and speak to you today. May God continue to bless our country. (Applause.)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:31 PM

NO TRIAL?:

Shots fired by air marshal (John Pain, 12/07/05, Associated Press)

A passenger who claimed to have a bomb in a carry-on bag was shot by a federal air marshal today on a jetway connected to an American Airlines plane that had just arrived from Colombia, officials said. Media reports quoted sources as saying the person's wounds were fatal.

Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Doyle said after the plane had parked at the gate, a passenger indicated there was a bomb in the bag. The passenger was confronted by air marshals but ran off the plane, Doyle said.

A team of air marshals pursued and ordered the passenger to get on the ground. The passenger did not comply and was shot when apparently reaching into a bag, Doyle said.


Man killed on American Airlines flight (The Associated Press, December 7, 2005)
A witness said the man frantically ran down the aisle and a woman with him said he was mentally ill.

Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Doyle said after the plane had parked at the gate, a passenger indicated there was a bomb in the bag. The passenger was confronted by air marshals but ran off the plane, Doyle said.

A team of air marshals pursued and ordered the passenger to get on the ground. The passenger did not comply and was shot when apparently reaching into the bag, Doyle said.

Passenger Mary Gardner told WTVJ in Miami that the man ran down the aisle from the rear of the plane. "He was frantic, his arms flailing in the air," she said. She said a woman followed, shouting, "My husband! My husband!"

Gardner said she heard the woman say her husband was bipolar and had not had his medication.


'Bi-polar' threat man shot dead (Reuters, December 08, 2005 )
This was thought to be the first time an air marshal has fired weapon on or near a plane, said Joseph Gutheinz, a former military pilot and lawyer who has worked in aviation security.

"I believe this is the first time they've ever discharged a weapon. I am 100 per cent sure they have never had an incident like this before," he said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:27 PM

THEN THERE'S THE DEMOCRATS' ANTI-IRAQ SPOKESMAN:

Rep. Murtha Holds a News Conference to Respond to President Bush's Speech (Courtesy FDCH eMedia, December 7, 2005)

SPEAKER: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE JOHN MURTHA (D-PA)

MURTHA: Let me start by going through a timeline and then get to what the president said.

In May 1, 2003, the president declared it was a major -- end of major operations. Then he sent John Hamre to Iraq. John Hamre was undersecretary of defense in the Clinton administration. And he found all kinds of problems. He said: You got three months, three critical months to get this thing under control if you want to control the security; 12 months at the most, but three months are crucial, the first three months.

He said small things like sewage and water and things that a lot of people don't pay attention to -- I pay attention, because in my district that's important. But a lot of people paid no attention to that report.

MURTHA: I went there -- now this was July that Hamre made his report and it was a very prescient report. I mean, it was a very accurate report about the predictions of what was going to happen. And we have a copy of it here for you.

In August 16th, I went to Iraq, from August 16th to the 20th. When I came back, I said to Secretary Rumsfeld: We require immediate attention of body armor. They said they were prepared. They said they had what they needed.

Forty thousand troops didn't have body armor. They needed armored Humvees. They needed jammers and Kevlar blankets they asked for. This was all levels of people in Iraq at the time.

And then I wrote to the president on September 4th and I said, "I believe you have miscalculated the magnitude of the effort we are facing. We should energize, Iraqitize and internationalize this effort."

And we have copies of that letter in there.

Then we had the $87 billion supplemental in October of 2003.

I said on the floor that I felt the most important part of that supplemental was the construction money. A lot of people voted against it because they didn't think we should be spending money in Iraq for construction when Wolfowitz, Assistant Secretary Wolfowitz, had said: It's going to be paid for by oil money.

So a lot of people opposed it on the floor, but it passed handily.

Then I went back to Iraq and I told Ambassador Bremer, General Sanchez and General Odierno and the young general that was their public relations guy, "You guys are way too optimistic about this."

MURTHA: "You're not being honest with the American people."

They took umbrage. I got some nasty letters, as I usually do when I say something like this.

Now, you remember, I wrote to the president in September 4th of 2003. I got a letter back in April 6th, 2004. The president didn't write back. I received a response from a deputy undersecretary -- paints a totally rosy, unrealistic picture, saying 200,000 Iraqis -- now, hear what I'm saying -- 200,000 Iraqis under arms, reconstruction projects and 70 percent of Iraqis feel -- or 2,200 reconstruction projects -- 70 percent of Iraqis feel life is good.

The irony is that this was the month with the most U.S. deaths; 137 were killed. But that's what they wrote to me.

Then we have Abu Ghraib that very year.

Now I said to the secretary of defense: You have got a shortage of people in specialty, MOS specialties, that's a military specialist. We had truck drivers who couldn't back up a truck. We had security guards who weren't trained in security at all. We had National Guard security people without radios -- couldn't talk to the front, the back of the convoy, endangering their lives.

We got radios over there and we tried to address this very problem. And we had a press conference. Nancy Pelosi and I did. We said, "the military's overstretched and there's poor planning." And I said at that time I did not think we could win this militarily.

I got a lot of criticism. DeLay got up on the floor and said I was a traitor. What I said to him, publicly, I won't tell you.

Now, here's the way I measure progress. The president said we got slow progress. We want to help the government of Iraq -- this is the State Department -- provide essential services, crude oil production.

MURTHA: Now, the green line you see here is the goal -- and they got charts here that you can get copies of. This is what we actually had in oil production.

Now, you remember, Secretary Wolfowitz said, we're going to have oil -- going to pay for this. And this is all we've gotten. We didn't get up to prewar level in oil production.

Today they said we're making progress.

I can only measure progress by what I see and the things that I can actually measure, not by what they say are brigades and so forth and so on.

Now, water production: We put $2.1 billion into water production. They're short of water all over the country. And they have only spent $581 billion -- or $581 million.

Now, that's why Hamre's report was so important. You had to get this insurgency under control immediately. You had to win the hearts and minds of the people. That's the key in a guerrilla-type war.

This is electricity overview. This is the demand. The yellow line is the demand. The red line is the prewar level. And you can see that occasionally you got up to prewar level. That's the way I measure progress.

Now, there's one other area where I measure progress, and that's incidents. Incidents have increased fivefold in the period of time that -- well, a year ago. A year ago there were five times less than today.

And at Abu Ghraib -- now, again, we didn't have the right people in the right kind of specialties. We didn't have them trained. So at Abu Ghraib, we had people untrained that were taking care of prisoners. And you see the result of that.

The secretary offered to resign at that time. I would have accepted his resignation, because I think this was a Defense Department responsibility. And we had many other (inaudible).

Right now, GAO says in a report of November -- November? -- November -- we have 112,000 shortages in critical MOSs. Now, what are those shortages?

MURTHA: Number one, they're in demolition experts; number two, special forces people; number three, intelligence experts, which are absolutely essential; and fourth is translators.

Now could there be any more important specialties than that? And we're short in every one of those fields.

And you know what? We're paying someone to go into the Army. When I was in, they paid $72 a day. I volunteered in the middle of the Korean War. They are now paying $150,000 for somebody that's in special forces, in one of the specialties, in order to get them to re- enlist.

They missed their goal. And one of the biggest reasons that I'm so concerned about this -- and I talk to the military all the time -- is the future of the military. They missed their goal in recruiting by 6,600 this last time.

But you have to look at that, because there's a retention, there's a stop-loss, plus the problem that we had with the people not in the right specialties. And they enlisted people in the higher levels who were probably going to enlist anyway that they wouldn't normally have re-enlisted.

They have lowered the standards. They're accepting 20 percent last year in category four. Now, this is a highly technical service we're dealing with, And yet they lowered the standards to category four, which they said when we had the volunteer army, that would eliminate all the category four.

Now, let me tell you the major problem we have. You heard the president talk today about terrorism. Every other word was "terrorism."

Let me separate terrorism from insurgency. When I was in Iraq in 1991, president -- or King Fahd said to me -- this was an early morning meeting, like two or three o'clock in the morning, when he normally met with people during the air war.

And he said: Get your troops out of Saudi Arabia the minute this war's over. You're on sacred ground. You're destabilizing the whole region. I reported that back to the State Department and, as you know, we didn't get our troops out of there. We left our troops there.

Bin Laden said he attacked the United States because of the troops in Saudi Arabia. That's terrorism. Terrorism was in London. Terrorism was in Spain. Terrorism was, obviously, in the United States.

MURTHA: That's completely separate from what's going on in Iraq. Iraq is an insurgency. At one of the hearings early on, Secretary Rumsfeld denied there was an insurgency. He said it was a gang of something or another. But they wouldn't admit that they were having real problems over there. They kept being unrealistic, illusionary about what was going on in Iraq.

One of the major problems we have in fighting an insurgency is the military and the way they fight. And I adhere to the way they fight. They send in massive force. They use artillery, they use air and mortars. And they kill a lot of people in order to suppress fire and protect our military. I'm for that.

But it doesn't make you any friends. That's part of the problem. For instance, in Fallujah, which happened about the same time -- the first Fallujah happened about the same time as Abu Ghraib -- we put 150,000 people outside their homes in Fallujah.

If you remember in Jordan, the bomber said that the reason she became a bomber was because two of her relatives were killed in Fallujah. We lost the hearts and minds of the people.

Hamre said: You've got three months to win the hearts and minds of the people, to get this under control, to get the looting and so forth under control.

We didn't do that. There's been poor planning from the start by the Defense Department. The Defense Department fought to keep this planning under their control. State Department had entirely different reasons for wanting it. And we even voted in the House to give it to the State Department.

And finally, in conference, we had to agree to let the president make the decision. He made the decision to give it to the Defense Department.

Now, in an insurgency and nation-building -- what did President Bush say when he ran for office the first time? "We are not into nation-building. And we're not into nation-building because of the way our military has to operate." It's that simple. We've got to go in and level the place, destroy a place. And when we destroy a place, we lose the very thing that's absolutely essential to winning the insurgency.

MURTHA: Now, let's talk about terrorism versus insurgency in Iraq itself. We think that foreign fighters are about 7 percent -- might be a little bit more, a little bit less. Very small proportion of the people that are involved in the insurgency are terrorists or how I would interpret them as terrorists.

And we don't have enough troops to guard against the border. The generals in charge of that part of Anbar said, "I don't have enough troops. They've given me a mission to protect against the Syrian border. I don't have enough troops to do that."

They have never had enough troops to get it under control. They didn't have enough troops for the looters. And they haven't had enough troops ever since then to get the place under control.

But the key elements, as I see it -- you heard him say that 70 percent of the Iraqis were satisfied, in that paper they sent me. Now, you'll see a document that's in this package here that told me six months before -- well, in the victory document he says we have 212,000 people trained now, Iraqi security people. Last year, we had 96,000.

Yet, they wrote to me six months before the last year's statement that said they had 200,000. Now, why don't I believe them when they say anything? They said we got weapons of mass destruction. They said we got an Al Qaida connection. They said we got nuclear weapons. They said we cross this red line which surrounds Baghdad and we're going to have a war with them.

Eighty percent of the people, according to a British poll reported by the Washington Times, says we want the United States out; 77 percent of the people in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt say there's a better chance of democracy if the United States is not there because we're considered occupiers; 45 percent of the people in Iraq think that it's justified to kill Americans. They even had an official communique that says it's justified to attack Americans.

So in this country, when I made my initial proposal to redeploy the troops and to make a diplomat effort and the only way I think this will work -- I don't think you can continue to draw down the way they're talking about. They're going to withdraw. There's no question they're going to withdraw. I predict a big proportion of the troops will be out by next year.

MURTHA: But the problem is they're just as vulnerable. The biggest vulnerability we have in Iraq is the convoys. Every convoy is attacked. When I was in Anbar, at Haditha, every single convoy was attacked that goes there to bring the logistics and supplies that they need. That's the most vulnerable part of our deployment.

And if you have half the troops there, you're going to still have to supply them, resupply them on the ground and they're going to be attacked.

When I said we can't win a military victory, it's because the Iraqis have turned against us. They throw a hand grenade or a rocket into American forces and the people run into the crowd and they -- nobody tells them where they are.

I am convinced, and everything that I've read, the conclusion I've reached is there will be less terrorism, there will be less danger to the United States and it'll be less insurgency once we're out.

I think the Iraqis themselves will turn against this very small group of Al Qaida.

They keep saying the terrorists are going to control Iraq -- no way. Al Qaida's only 7 percent of the people in Iraq and doing this fighting. The terrorists -- there's several factions, but let's say Al Qaida is 7 percent at the very most.

Iraq will get rid of them because they'll tell the Iraqis where they are and it will be the end of the terrorist activity.

Now, my plan says redeploy to the periphery, to Kuwait, to Okinawa, and if there's a terrorist activity that affects our allies or affects the United States' national security, we can then go back in.

I'm not talking about going back in if there's civil war, because we're in a civil war right now. We're caught in between a civil war right now.

MURTHA: And with that I'll end and answer any questions you may have.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:43 PM

LET'S PLAY TWO (via John Resnick):

Is Wal-Mart the Answer to France's Problems? (Charles Wheelan, Ph.D., December 7, 2005, The Naked Economist)

I recently found myself asking a fairly bizarre economic question: Would the disaffected youth torching cars in France be happier if they could get jobs at Wal-Mart? If you think I'm kidding, I'm not.

France and the United States have two distinct "flavors" of capitalism. The U.S. has the more "Wild West" version. Our economy is relatively unregulated compared to a place like France. We promise our citizens fewer benefits than the French. We offer our workers and firms less protection. Our government meddles less in how businesses operate and our overall tax burden is significantly lower.

The French have the more coddling flavor of capitalism. Citizens receive more benefits from the state, such as guaranteed health care. Workers have far more expansive benefits: Longer maternity leave and vacations, higher minimum pay, and the government has capped the workweek at 35 hours. Perhaps most significant, French workers have extraordinary job protection. Once hired, they're hard to get rid of.

Which brings me back to Wal-Mart and the French riots. Rarely have the strengths and weaknesses of these two flavors of capitalism been on such stark display.


Dr. Wheelan's analysis of Wal-Mart's economic effects seems as dubious as the assertion that they pay folks $5.15 an hour--in reality folks start at over $8 an hour nationwide, which means with just one spouse working one job at Wal-Mart a family of four is nearly above poverty level. Meanwhile, if you're trying to support a family and only have a skill set suitable for an entry level service job, why should you expect to have one family member work just 40 hours a week? Work two and you're above the French GDP per capita.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:28 PM

NEITHER FREEDOM NOR EQUALITY:

The Joy of Conservatism: An Interview with Roger Scruton (Part II): This is the second of two parts of my Right Reason interview with Roger Scruton, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the publication of his landmark book, The Meaning of Conservatism. You can read the first part here. (MaxGoss, 12/05/05, Right Reason)

MG: You are often described as a "paleoconservative," a term that Russell Kirk, who was described the same way, was uncomfortable with. Do you accept this designation?

Scruton: I am not hostile to American neo-conservatism, which seems to me to show a commendable desire to think things through and to develop an active alternative to liberalism in both national and international politics. But I suppose I am more of a paleo than a neo-conservative, since I believe that the conservative position is rooted in cultural rather than economic factors, and that the single-minded pursuit of competitive markets is just as much a threat to social order as the single-minded pursuit of equality.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:06 PM

THE ANTI-FEDERALISTS WIN EVENTUALLY:

Canada's dominoes could tip our way (SCOTT SCHAFFER, 12/07/05, Seattle Post-Intelligencer)

Canadian pollster Michael Adams believes that if a referendum were held in Quebec today, it would pass comfortably. While this would not necessarily mean outright independence for Quebec -- the more popular versions of sovereignty maintain some association with Canada -- any separation of its second-largest province could wreak havoc in the dominion and weaken the tenuous hold Ottawa has over the lightly populated, 5,000 mile-wide nation.

Americans take most things about Canada, including its existence, for granted. Most have viewed the Quebec sovereignty battle as little more than a curious ethnic-linguistic sideshow. In his 1998 book, "An Empire Wilderness," however, Robert Kaplan suggests that withdrawal of Quebec will result in other regions -- notably British Columbia and Alberta -- asserting independence from a distant imperial capital, and further disintegration of the Canadian federation as we know it. Kaplan further points out that without a stable and unified entity to its north, the United States could face unexpected stresses of its own. Regional ties in North America run north-south rather than east-west, as the map implies. Washington and Oregon are more closely linked socioeconomically with B.C. than with D.C., and a similar pattern is true across the continent. Kaplan foreshadows eventual weakening of both national governments' influence within their current borders, and the breakup of one may well hasten that process in the other. This future may be much closer than we suspect, and Quebec could be the catalyst.

What would a new North America based on regional interests look like? Some U.S. nationalists have assumed the United States inevitably will absorb Anglophone Canada, but Canadians have a long history of declining such integration. An intriguing alternate possibility is decentralization of the current nation-states, which could ultimately merge into a single confederacy with characteristics of the European Union and Canada: regional autonomy, a common currency, open trade relationships and a multilateral foreign policy.

Should such changes come to pass, future historians may note with irony how they were triggered by a little-noticed scandal that failed even to remove the offending party from power.


As Islamicism is defeated, China, Cuba, and North Korea fall apart and the Long War finally comes to an end, it may well provide a security comfort zone that allows the devolution from larger states to the smaller sort that couldn't defend themselves military very well but afford a preferable model for economic growth and social cohesion.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:59 PM

DARE ONE HOPE?:

Hague back in Cameron reshuffle (BBC, 12/07/05)

New Tory leader David Cameron has begun naming his frontline team, bringing in ex-leader William Hague and keeping David Davis as shadow home secretary.

Mr Hague becomes shadow foreign secretary, while his predecessor Liam Fox moves to the defence brief. [...]

The Tory leader, who says he wants to move away from "Punch and Judy" politics, said during prime minister's questions that he would back Mr Blair's controversial education reforms.


Cameron gives Duncan Smith social justice role (Matthew Tempest, December 7, 2005, Guardian Unlimited)
The new Conservative party leader, David Cameron, today announced his first policy initiative, appointing his predecessor Iain Duncan Smith to head up a new social justice policy group.

In his first public outing as leader, Mr Cameron visited a school for disadvantaged Afro-Caribbean boys in London's East End to make the announcement - where he also received a 12-point "lesson in leadership" from the pupils.

The policy group, one of several to be announced over the next few days, will report back in 18 months time - in plenty of time to feed into the party's policy platform for the next election.

Announcing the initiative, Mr Cameron said he wanted it to tackle "the causes and consequences of poverty, family breakdown, drug rehabilitation and care for the elderly".

It is based on the work of the Commission for Social Justice (CSJ), a centre-right group established by Mr Duncan Smith after his ignominious ousting from the Tory leadership two years ago.


Pretty big time cabinet, especially for such a fresh leader, and it's brilliant to back Blair on Third Way reforms.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:50 PM

THEY CAN WIN THIS IF THEY DON'T ACT LIKE THE IL GOP:

Governor's race to shrink (Rick Pearson, December 6, 2005, Chicago Tribune)

In a major realignment in the Republican race for governor, conservative state Sen. Steve Rauschenberger is expected to quit the contest and instead run for lieutenant governor as the running mate of moderate Chicago businessman Ronald Gidwitz, sources close to both campaigns said Tuesday.

The move, expected to be formally announced Wednesday, would cast the March 21 GOP primary race as a four-person field, with two moderates and two conservatives. Gidwitz hopes to gain some momentum for his candidacy, which has failed to generate any traction with potential primary voters despite significant spending on TV ads and direct mailings.

The impetus for the move, the sources said, was a meeting Friday called by state Republican Chairman Andrew McKenna Jr., who urged the contenders to reassess the viability of their campaigns. Sources said McKenna shared results of a GOP-financed poll that showed Gidwitz and Rauschenberger with support in the single digits.

Both Gidwitz and Rauschenberger, the sources said, viewed the meeting as an attempt by top state GOP officials to clear the field for the candidacy of state Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka, a moderate and the early frontrunner.


She ought to endorse him for LG and say she looks forward to a ticket that can unify the party.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:51 PM

JUST ONE REASON:

House Dems now regret their ‘yes’ votes on Iraq (Josephine Hearn and Jackie Kucinich, 12/07/05, The Hill)

In a Nov. 17 letter to Bush, Rep. Harold Ford (D-Tenn.) took responsibility for his original support of the war.

“You made the point that because the Congress and the Senate voted to authorize the use of force, we too are culpable,” he wrote. “I accept my responsibility.”

But Ford contended in the letter that many members made the decision to vote for the resolution based on faulty evidence.

“And now that no weapons of mass destruction were found you curiously maintain that your reasons for war were justified,” he wrote. “That is dishonest and wrong.”


Well, maybe he doesn't quite accept responsibility for his own vote:
Addressing the annual awards banquet of the University of Memphis Law School Alumni, Ford expressed his initial support of the war effort this way: “I support this war in Iraq. I supported it from the very beginning for one reason. Saddam Hussein was a bad guy.

It's a shame to see even good Democrats sell their souls to the anti-American Left.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:41 PM

STARS WERE MADE TO BE OGLED, NOT LISTENED TO:

Hollywood Ending? (Edward B. Driscoll, Jr., 12/06/05, Tech Central Station)

Andrew Breitbart, the co-author, with Mark Ebner, of Hollywood, Interrupted, and the West Coast Editor of The Drudge Report, explained to me recently that Hollywood's current star driven-production system plays a huge factor in Tinseltown's woes.

"Just like the old studio system needed to be overturned", Breitbart observes, "so does the current anti-studio system. The current system is one in which stars have undue power, and they're not necessarily the best arbiters of taste. As a matter of fact, since they're the ones in charge, and artists in Hollywood tend to be left of center, and tend to agree with one another, and tend to not really hear the other side whatsoever, I think that the disconnect that exists in Hollywood, which far exceeds just the political realm, is best represented, and is easiest seen, through the political realm".

Using George Clooney's new Syriana as one of his examples, Breitbart says, "I thought that Hollywood, in another era, would be, by virtue of the marketplace, trying to appease the masses. And in a post-9/11 world, there would have been countless movies that expressed the heroism that existed on that utterly important day". Instead, Hollywood spent the first three years after 9/11 in a period that James Lileks once dubbed, "The golden era of beating around the bush".

This was followed in 2004 by the golden era of beating up the Bush, with numerous lefty films such as Fahrenheit 9/11, The Day After Tomorrow, the inferior remake of The Manchurian Candidate, and others.

Finally, in 2005, Hollywood began to address terrorism and its accompanying geopolitics head-on. Well, sort of, at first. As columnist Mark Steyn wrote this past spring:

"The Sean Penn thriller, The Interpreter, was originally about Muslim terrorists blowing up a bus in New York. So, naturally, Hollywood called rewrite. Now the bus gets blown up by African terrorists from the little-known republic of Matobo. 'We didn't want to encumber the film in politics in any way,' said Kevin Misher, the producer.

"But being so perversely 'non-political' is itself a political act. If there were a dozen movies in which Tom Cruise kicked al-Qa'eda butt across the Hindu Kush, it would be reasonable to say, 'Hey, we'd rather deal with Matoban terrorism for a change.'

"But, when every movie goes out of its way to avoid being 'encumbered', it starts to look like a pathology. Whenever some hapless studio exec finds he's accidentally optioned a property that happens to have Islamist terrorists in it, the first thing he does is change the enemy. Thus, the baddies in Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears were de-Islamicised and transformed into German neo-Nazis, a very pressing threat to America in 2005."

Hollywood is only just now beginning to release films that actually focus directly on the War On Terror. And what does it do? In films such as Syriana, Jarhead, and others, Breitbart observes that Hollywood comes at its political statements "from the perspective that really, we're the ones who are to blame for the predicament that we find ourselves in".


Funny bit on NPR yesterday as Robert Siegel introduced a story on Syriana with a glowing recommendation about how compelling the film is. Journalistic objectivity doesn't long survive the encounter with Leftist agitprop.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:37 PM

IF DEMOCRATS DISAGREE WHY DOES HE STILL HAVE THAT JOB?:

Bush Criticizes Dean for Iraq War Remarks: GOP leaders take aim at the Democratic Party chairman after he says the idea the U.S. will win is 'just plain wrong.' (Edwin Chen, December 7, 2005, LA Times)

"Oh, there's pessimists, you know, and politicians who try to score points," the president replied. "Our troops need to know that the American people stand with them, and we have a strategy for victory."

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) also weighed in, saying Dean had "made it clear the Democratic Party sides with those who wish to surrender."

And Ken Mehlman, the Republican Party chairman, told the San Antonio radio station Tuesday: "I can't remember any time in history where the leader of a national party, one of our two national parties, predicted that America would lose a war we were engaged in. I think it sends the wrong message to our troops, the wrong message to the enemy, the wrong message to the Iraqi people."

Karen Finney, the Democratic National Committee's communications director, said that Dean's comments had been taken out of context.


The context being that only fellow Leftists were supposed to be listening? After three years on the national stage how can you still not be ready for primetime but keep your job?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:28 PM

DEMOCRACY DOESN'T ACTUALLY REQUIRE UNANIMITY:

On the Question of Torture, Americans Are Not United (Karlyn H. Bowman, December 7, 2005, Roll Call)

Is torture ever justified? Americans do not appear to have come to a broad consensus on that timely question in the war on terror.

In the Oct. 12-24 Pew Research Center poll, 15 percent of respondents said that the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often be justified, while 31 percent said it is sometimes justified, 17 percent said it is rarely justified and 32 percent said it’s never justified. Pew asked the question in July 2004 and March 2005 with similar results.

Results from a Nov. 10-11 PSRA/Newsweek poll were similar. Seventeen percent said that the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often be justified. Twenty-seven percent said it sometimes could, 18 percent said rarely and 33 percent said torture is never justified.

In the next question, 58 percent said they would support the use of torture by U.S. military or intelligence personnel if it might lead to the prevention of a major terrorist attack. Thirty-five percent said they would not.


Since when is 6 or 7 out of 10 not a consensus?


Posted by David Cohen at 11:16 AM

A RIGHTEOUS NATION

On the Providence of God in the Government of the World (Benjamin Franklin, 1730)

When I consider my own Weakness, and the discerning Judgment of those who are to be my Audience, I cannot help blaming my self considerably, for this rash Undertaking of mine, it being a Thing I am altogether ill practis'd in and very much unqualified for; I am especially discouraged when I reflect that you are all my intimate Pot Companions who have heard me say a 1000 silly Things in Conversations, and therefore have not that laudable Partiality and Veneration for whatever I shall deliver that Good People commonly have for their Spiritual Guides; that You have no Reverence for my Habit, nor for the Sanctity of my Countenance; that you do not believe me inspir'd or divinely assisted, and therefore will think your Selves at Liberty to assent or dissent approve or disapprove of any Thing I advance, canvassing and sifting it as the private Opinion of one of your Acquaintance. These are great Disadvantages and Discouragements but I am enter'd and must proceed, humbly requesting your Patience and Attention.

I propose at this Time to discourse on the Subject of our last Conversation: the Providence of God in the Government of the World. I shall not attempt to amuse you with Flourishes of Rhetorick, were I master of that deceitful Science because I know ye are Men of substantial Reason and can easily discern between sound Argument and the false Glosses of Oratory; nor shall I endeavour to impose on your Ears, by a musical Accent in delivery, in the Tone of one violently affected with what he says; for well I know that ye are far from being superstitious or fond of unmeaning Noise, and that ye believe a Thing to be no more true for being sung than said. I intend to offer you nothing but plain Reasoning, devoid of Art and Ornament; unsupported by the Authority of any Books or Men how sacred soever; because I know that no Authority is more convincing to Men of Reason than the Authority of Reason itself. It might be judg'd an Affront to your Understandings should I go about to prove this first Principle, the Existence of a Deity and that he is the Creator of the Universe, for that would suppose you ignorant of what all Mankind in all Ages have agreed in. I shall therefore proceed to observe: 1. That he must be a Being of great Wisdom; 2. That he must be a Being of great Goodness and 3. That he must be a Being of great Power. That he must be a Being of infinite Wisdom, appears in his admirable Order and Disposition of Things, whether we consider the heavenly Bodies, the Stars and Planets, and their wonderful regular Motions, or this Earth compounded of such an Excellent mixture of all the Elements; or the admirable Structure of Animal Bodies of such infinite Variety, and yet every one adapted to its Nature, and the Way of Life it is to be placed in, whether on Earth, in the Air or in the Waters, and so exactly that the highest and most exquisite human Reason, cannot find a fault and say this would have been better so or in another Manner, which whoever considers attentively and thoroughly will be astonish'd and swallow'd up in Admiration.

2. That the Deity is a Being of great Goodness, appears in his giving Life to so many Creatures, each of which acknowledge it a Benefit by their Unwillingness to leave it; in his providing plentiful Sustenance for them all, and making those Things that are most useful, most common and easy to be had; such as Water necessary for almost every Creature's Drink; Air without which few could subsist, the inexpressible Benefits of Light and Sunshine to almost all Animals in general; and to Men the most useful Vegetables, such as Corn, the most useful of Metals as Iron, and the most useful Animals, as Horses, Oxen and Sheep, he has made easiest to raise, or procure in Quantity or Numbers: each of which particulars if considered seriously and carefully would fill us with the highest Love and Affection. 3. That he is a Being of infinite Power appears, in his being able to form and compound such Vast Masses of Matter as this Earth and the Sun and innumerable Planets and Stars, and give them such prodigious Motion, and yet so to govern them in their greatest Velocity as that they shall not flie off out of their appointed Bounds nor dash one against another, to their mutual Destruction; but 'tis easy to conceive his Power, when we are convinc'd of his infinite Knowledge and Wisdom; for if weak and foolish Creatures as we are, by knowing the Nature of a few Things can produce such wonderful Effects; such as for instance by knowing the Nature only of Nitre and Sea Salt mix'd we can make a Water which will dissolve the hardest Iron and by adding one Ingredient more, can make another Water which will dissolve Gold and render the most Solid Bodies fluid -- and by knowing the Nature of Salt Peter Sulphur and Charcoal those mean Ingredients mix'd we can shake the Air in the most terrible Manner, destroy Ships Houses and Men at a Distance and in an Instant, overthrow Cities, rend Rocks into a Thousand Pieces, and level the highest Mountains. What Power must he possess who not only knows the Nature of every Thing in the Universe, but can make Things of new Natures with the greatest Ease and at his Pleasure!

Agreeing then that the World was at first made by a Being of infinite Wisdom, Goodness and Power, which Being we call God; The State of Things ever since and at this Time must be in one of these four following manners, viz.

1. Either he unchangeably decreed and appointed every Thing that comes to pass; and left nothing to the Course of Nature, nor allow'd any Creature free agency. or

2. Without decreeing any thing, he left all to general Nature and the Events of Free Agency in his Creatures, which he never alters or interrupts. or

3. He decreed some Things unchangeably, and left others to general Nature and the Events of Free agency, which also he never alters or interrupts; or

4. He sometimes interferes by his particular Providence and sets aside the Effects which would otherwise have been produced by any of the Above Causes.

I shall endeavour to shew the first 3 Suppositions to be inconsistent with the common Light of Reason; and that the 4th is most agreeable to it, and therefore most probably true.

In the 1. place. If you say he has in the Beginning unchangeably decreed all Things and left Nothing to Nature or free Agency. These Strange Conclusions will necessarily follow; 1. That he is now no more a God. 'Tis true indeed, before he had made such unchangeable Decree, he was a Being of Power, Almighty; but now having determin'd every Thing, he has divested himself of all further Power, he has done and has no more to do, he has ty'd up his Hands, and has now no greater Power than an Idol of Wood or Stone; nor can there be any more Reason for praying to him or worshipping of him, than of such an Idol for the Worshippers can be never the better for such Worship. Then 2. he has decreed some things contrary to the very Notion of a wise and good Being; Such as that some of his Creatures or Children shall do all Manner of Injury to others and bring every kind of Evil upon them without Cause; that some of them shall even blaspheme him their Creator in the most horrible manner; and, which is still more highly absurd that he has decreed the greatest Part of Mankind, shall in all Ages, put up their earnest Prayers to him both in private and publickly in great Assemblies, when all the while he had so determin'd their Fate that he could not possibly grant them any Benefits on that Account, nor could such Prayers be any way available. Why then should he ordain them to make such Prayers? It cannot be imagined they are of any Service to him. Surely it is not more difficult to believe the World was made by a God of Wood or Stone, than that the God who made the World should be such a God as this.

In the 2. Place. If you say he has decreed nothing but left all things to general Nature, and the Events of Free Agency, which he never alters or interrupts. Then these Conclusions will follow; He must either utterly hide him self from the Works of his Hands, and take no Notice at all of their Proceedings natural or moral; or he must be as undoubtedly he is, a Spectator of every thing; for there can be no Reason or Ground to suppose the first -- I say there can be no Reason to imagine he would make so glorious a Universe meerly to abandon it. In this Case imagine the Deity looking on and beholding the Ways of his Creatures; some Hero's in Virtue he sees are incessantly indeavouring the Good of others, they labour thro vast difficulties, they suffer incredible Hardships and Miseries to accomplish this End, in hopes to please a Good God, and obtain his Favour, which they earnestly Pray for; what Answer can he make them within himself but this; take the Reward Chance may give you, I do not intermeddle in these Affairs; he sees others continually doing all manner of Evil, and bringing by their Actions Misery and Destruction among Mankind: What can he say here but this, if Chance rewards you I shall not punish you, I am not to be concerned. He sees the just, the innocent and the Beneficent in the Hands of the wicked and violent Oppressor; and when the good are at the Brink of Destruction they pray to him, thou, O God, art mighty and powerful to save; help us we beseech thee: He answers, I cannot help you, 'tis none of my Business nor do I at all regard these things. How is it possible to believe a wise and an infinitely Good Being can be delighted in this Circumstance; and be utterly unconcern'd what becomes of the Beings and Things he has created; for thus, we must believe him idle and unactive, and that his glorious Attributes of Power, Wisdom and Goodness are no more to be made use of.

In the Third Place. If you say he has decreed some things and left others to the Events of Nature and Free Agency, Which he never alters or interrupts; Still you unGod him, if I may be allow'd the Expression; he has nothing to do; he can cause us neither Good nor Harm; he is no more to be regarded than a lifeless Image, than Dagon, or Baall, or Bell and the Dragon; and as in both the other Suppositions foregoing, that Being which from its Power is most able to Act, from its Wisdom knows best how to act, and from its Goodness would always certainly act best, is in this Opinion supposed to become the most unactive of all Beings and remain everlastingly Idle; an Absurdity, which when considered or but barely seen, cannot be swallowed without doing the greatest Violence to common Reason, and all the Faculties of the Understanding.

We are then necessarily driven into the fourth Supposition, That the Deity sometimes interferes by his particular Providence, and sets aside the Events which would otherwise have been produc'd in the Course of Nature, or by the Free Agency of Men; and this is perfectly agreeable with what we can know of his Attributes and Perfections: But as some may doubt whether 'tis possible there should be such a Thing as free Agency in Creatures; I shall just offer one Short Argument on that Account and proceed to shew how the Duties of Religion necessary follow the Belief of a Providence. You acknowledge that God is infinitely Powerful, Wise and Good, and also a free Agent; and you will not deny that he has communicated to us part of his Wisdom, Power and Goodness; i.e. he has made us in some Degree Wise, potent and good; and is it then impossible for him to communicate any Part of his Freedom, and make us also in some Degree Free? Is not even his infinite Power sufficient for this? I should be glad to hear what Reason any Man can give for thinking in that Manner; 'tis sufficient for me to shew tis not impossible, and no Man I think can shew 'tis improbable, but much more might be offer'd to demonstrate clearly that Men are in some Degree free Agents, and accountable for their Actions; however, this I may possibly reserve for another separate Discourse hereafter if I find Occasion.

Lastly If God does not sometimes interfere by his Providence tis either because he cannot, or because he will not; which of these Positions will you chuse? There is a righteous Nation grievously oppress'd by a cruel Tyrant, they earnestly intreat God to deliver them; If you say he cannot, you deny his infinite Power, which you at first acknowledg'd; if you say he will not, you must directly deny his infinite Goodness. You are then of necessity oblig'd to allow, that 'tis highly reasonable to believe a Providence because tis highly absurd to believe otherwise.

Now if tis unreasonable to suppose it out of the Power of the Deity to help and favour us particularly or that we are out of his Hearing or Notice or that Good Actions do not procure more of his Favour than ill Ones. Then I conclude, that believing a Providence we have the Foundation of all true Religion; for we should love and revere that Deity for his Goodness and thank him for his Benefits; we should adore him for his Wisdom, fear him for his Power, and pray to him for his Favour and Protection; and this Religion will be a Powerful Regulater of our Actions, give us Peace and Tranquility within our own Minds, and render us Benevolent, Useful and Beneficial to others.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:38 AM

THERE'S A NAME FOR CHRISTIAN DEISTS...CHRISTIANS:

The infamous philosophe: On Roger Pearson's "Voltaire Almighty: A Life in Pursuit of Freedom." (Mark Molesky, December 2005, The New Criterion)

Pearson’s overview and analysis of Voltaire’s complicated relationship with Catholicism is particularly revealing. For more than sixty years, the infamous philosophe preached religious toleration in a society where Protestant worship could send a man or woman to prison for life; his highly publicized defense of French Huguenots brought his name back into prominence years after his plays ceased to attract large audiences. Yet the Jesuit-educated Voltaire never went so far as to renounce his faith. He remained friends with numerous clerics from the highest levels of the Church hierarchy throughout his life (he kept a Jesuit around as a chess partner). And although he constantly threatened the limits of doctrinal acceptability, he took care never to cross the line that led to excommunication. True, he would cheekily refuse communion in his final days: “Monsieur l’abbé, I would remind you that I am constantly spitting blood. We really must avoid getting the Almighty’s blood mixed up with mine.” But he also saw fit to prepare a written statement in which he expressed a desire “to die in the holy Catholic religion into which I was born, hoping that God in His divine mercy will deign to forgive me all my errors; and that if I have offended the Church I beg forgiveness of God and of it.”

In the end, Voltaire succeeded in finagling a Christian burial. When he died in Paris on May 30, 1778, all of France wondered openly how the Church would handle the death of one of its most implacable foes. With a matter as delicate and controversial as the funeral of a national icon (or heretic?), Parisian church officials chose a course of action not uncommon for people in their situation; they punted. After allowing for a secret autopsy (his brain and heart were removed), they re-clothed Voltaire’s corpse, propped it up in a carriage, and sent it on its way out of the city as if he were still alive. Fortunately for Voltaire, his nephew, the Abbé Mignot, was in possession of a pile of papers testifying to his uncle’s fitness for Catholic internment. And so, when the playwright had reached a point of decomposition beyond which his retinue could endure, Mignot quickly located a church, shoved the testimonials in the face of the local cleric, and thus sent his uncle into the beyond with the proper seal of approval. The grandees of the church were furious—and that, one assumes, is how François-Marie would have wanted it.

But was Voltaire’s interest in remaining Catholic just a matter of social propriety or some kind of cynical acceptance of Pascal’s wager? According to Pearson, the prince of reason not only believed in God but at least on one occasion displayed a depth of religious feeling bordering on—dare one say—the Romantic. In early 1776, Voltaire awoke at three in the morning to view the sunrise from the top of a nearby mountain peak. As the first tendrils of light broke across the horizon, he dropped to the ground prostrate before the heavens. “I believe, I believe in you,” he chanted. “Almighty God, I believe!”

Voltaire had no patience for atheism. The myriad wonders of the universe proved His existence, and the laws of Nature, as outlined by Newton, were testament to His divine plan. He would have been as horrified by Europe’s loss of faith over the last two centuries as he would Robespierre’s overblown and pretentious Cult of the Supreme Being.


As the tide of Reason recedes it's left a lot of detritus high and dry in its wake. None imparts a worse stench than the Christophobic notion that the Founders were Deists and the Republic a function of the Enlightenment. So, it's especially amusing that the Deist icon wasn't even one.


MORE:
The Deist Minimum (Avery Cardinal Dulles, January 2005, First Things)

In his public pronouncements as a statesman and legislator, Jefferson expressed what he considered to belong to the common and public core of religion. He kept his more personal opinions to himself, refraining from putting them in any writing that might find its way into print, but he occasionally penned confidential memoranda for himself and a few friends.

Jefferson’s public religion appears in the Declaration of Independence, which refers to “the laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” to “inalienable” rights conferred upon all human beings by their Creator, and to “the protection of divine Providence.” In his first inaugural address, in 1801, Jefferson spoke of how the American people were “enlightened by a benign religion, professed indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and love of man, acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence.” In his second inaugural, four years later, he emphasized the nation’s need for the favor and enlightenment of Providence and asked his hearers to unite with him in supplication to “that Being in whose hands we are.”

One of Jefferson’s firmest principles, as we know, was that of religious freedom. In 1777, as a legislator, he composed what later became the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom, which embodies his personal conviction that the government should exercise no coercion in religious matters. In his famous letter of 1802 to the Danbury Baptist Association he referred to the “wall of separation between Church and State”—a term that had previously been used by the Baptist Roger Williams. But as we have seen, he did not hesitate to bring religion into his public pronouncements. As President he frequently attended religious services in Congress. While opposing a federal religious establishment, “he personally encouraged and symbolically supported religion by attending public church services in the Capitol,” as Daniel Driesbach has written.

Like his contemporaries Franklin, Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Madison, Jefferson was convinced that the republic could not stand without a high level of public morality, and that moral behavior could not survive in the absence of divine authority as its sanction. Obedience to the teachings of Jesus and reflection on the purity of Jesus’ life could enable people to overcome their selfishness and parochialism.

Jefferson’s friend Joseph Priestley (1733-1804) maintained that the authentic teachings of Jesus were vastly superior to those of Socrates or any other pagan but that they had been overlaid by a thick cover of legend and mythology, which must be stripped away for the truth to shine forth in its pristine brilliance. Priestley’s work made a deep impression on Jefferson and enabled him to regard himself as a Christian. Following in Priestley’s footsteps, Jefferson undertook to retrieve the true teachings of Jesus, especially in matters of morals. To this end he made two compilations of texts concerning Jesus from the New Testament. The first, entitled The Philosophy of Jesus, was completed in 1804 but has been lost. The second, which he called The Life and Morals of Jesus, is usually known as the Jefferson Bible. It was composed in his later years and published only after his death. Omitting all references to the miraculous and the supernatural, Jefferson selected what he took to be authentic sayings of Jesus as a moral teacher. The precepts of the Nazarene, he asserted, were “the most pure, benevolent, and sublime which have ever been preached to man.” The religion of Jesus, he believed, was so simple that it could be understood by a child, but the writers of the New Testament, especially Paul, overlaid it with mythology derived from Platonist sources. The sage of Monticello forthrightly dismissed dogmas such as the Trinity and the Incarnation, which he found unintelligible.

Jefferson’s religion, however, was not purely philosophical. For a living religion, he knew, scope must be given to the inclinations of the heart. He was enraptured by the beauty of the Psalms, which in his opinion surpassed all the hymnists of every language and of every time, including the hymn of Cleanthes to Jupiter so much admired by his friend John Adams. When he attended church services as an old man, the sounds of familiar hymns would bring tears to his eyes.

In his plan of studies for the University of Virginia Jefferson wanted natural religion to be taught to the exclusion of all doctrine attributed to revelation. But he knew that religion could not be purely academic and therefore recognized the importance of worship in the churches. He took pride in the fact that students at his university had opportunities to worship in Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptist services in the sanctuary at Charlottesville. Interdenominational competition, he believed, was the best protection against fanaticism. In matters of religion the aphorism “united we stand, divided we fall” had to be reversed. Divided we stand, he said, but united we fall.

In summary, then, Jefferson was a deist because he believed in one God, in divine providence, in the divine moral law, and in rewards and punishments after death, but did not believe in supernatural revelation. He was a Christian deist because he saw Christianity as the highest expression of natural religion and Jesus as an incomparably great moral teacher. He was not an orthodox Christian because he rejected, among other things, the doctrines that Jesus was the promised Messiah and the incarnate Son of God.

Jefferson’s religion is fairly typical of the American form of deism in his day. [...]

We can discern several reasons why deism, which once looked so promising, proved unable to sustain itself. Deism drew its vitality from the oppressive policies of the religious establishments against which it was reacting. In the minds of the Enlightenment thinkers, confessional religion, unless checked by law or by free competition, led inevitably to tyranny and persecution. But this assumption was based on a time-conditioned union or alliance between throne and altar, not on the gospel of Christ, which gave Caesar no authority over the things of God.

Jefferson himself came gradually to this realization. As a young adult he seems to have held that Christian faith was favorable to despotism and hostile to free society. But his friend Benjamin Rush convinced him that Christianity and republicanism were, so to speak, made for each other. As Eugene Sheridan has written, Rush regarded Christianity as “part of a divine plan to bring about the kingdom of God on earth by freeing mankind from the burden of royal and ecclesiastical oppression through the spread of the principles of human equality and Christian charity.” With Rush’s help Jefferson found a way of accepting Christianity without diminishing his commitment to the freedom of conscience. Deism, therefore, was not necessary to offset religious oppression. [...]

Although deism portrayed itself as a pure product of unaided reason, it was not what it claimed to be. Its basic tenets concerning God, the virtuous life, and rewards beyond the grave were in fact derived from Christianity, the faith in which the deists themselves had been reared. It is doubtful whether anyone who had not been brought up in a biblical religion could embrace the tenets of deism. The children of deists rarely persevered in the faith of their parents.

Deism also suffered from grave philosophical weaknesses. Its leading proponents were pamphleteers such as Toland and Tindal in England and Encyclopedists such as Diderot in France. They lacked the metaphysical principles needed to build a viable natural theology. Empiricists like Locke and rationalists like Newton lacked the rich ontology of Thomas Aquinas and the medieval schoolmen. Their epistemology was a shallow empiricism and their cosmology a universalized physics, both of which crumbled when faced with the penetrating critiques of David Hume and Immanuel Kant.

Additionally, the deist system suffered from some internal tensions. If there is an omnipotent God, capable of designing the entire universe and launching it into existence, it seems strange to hold that this God cannot intervene in the world He had made or derogate from the laws He had established. He might have good reasons for bestowing some added benefits not contained in the work of creation. American deists such as Jefferson and Franklin did not rule out all divine intervention. They were convinced that God punished evil and rewarded virtue both in this life and in the next. They also encouraged prayer in ways that seemed inconsistent with deism in its pure form.

If God was infinite in being, moreover, it was unreasonable to reject the notion of mystery. It would seem quite natural to suppose that there are depths of the divine being surpassing all that could be inferred from the created world. We cannot know what is going on in the minds of our fellow human beings unless they manifest it by word or deed. How much less, then, could we grasp the thoughts of God unless He were to disclose them to us by revelation? Since God knows far more about Himself and His plans than His creatures do, it is difficult to see why He could not reveal truths hidden from reason that would be important for persons such as ourselves. Throughout the centuries Christianity has held that central articles of faith, such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the atoning death of Christ, are revealed truths. We can understand them to some extent even if we cannot penetrate the full richness of their meaning.

Yet more, the deist God, who ceased to be active after launching the world into existence, seemed to be a useless vestige of the God of biblical religion. If God never intervened in the world, His existence could only be, from a human perspective, superfluous. It would be pointless to pray to Him or expect any blessings from Him. The pupils of the deists, carrying the critique of religion one stage further, questioned the existence of this idle Supreme Being. Thus deism came to be a halfway house on the road to atheism. Toland drifted gradually from deism into pantheism. Voltaire was unable to dissuade his erstwhile allies Diderot and d’Holbach from abandoning the deist camp and embracing atheism. In the United States atheism surfaced more slowly but was defended in the nineteenth century by Robert Ingersoll among others.

Yet another weakness in the deist system was the time-conditioned nature of its cosmological underpinnings. The system presupposed the static unalterable order of nature that appealed to mathematicians like Isaac Newton. But as the positive sciences matured, the universe appeared to be far less orderly than the deists had assumed. Eventually the Newtonian system would be superseded by the theories of Darwin and Huxley, Einstein and Heisenberg. William Paley’s depiction of God as the cosmic watchmaker lost its plausibility.

Deism also failed as a religion. Its static deity was a pallid reflection of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jesus Christ. The religion of the New Testament and of orthodox Christianity offered hope and consolation that lay far beyond the powers of deism. The gospel assures us that God never ceases to be active in the world: He freely calls us to Himself, hears our prayers, and enriches our lives with His grace. The doctrine that God became man in order to raise us to a share in His own divine life satisfied a deep desire of the human heart to which deism could not respond. It was impossible to enter into communion of life and love with the cold and distant God of deism.

Finally, the deist reconstruction of the historical Jesus lacked any serious foundation in biblical research. Jefferson claimed that it was “obvious and easy” to distinguish the authentic words of Jesus from those attributed to him by later Christians. In his view they were “as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill.” But even the most confident members of the Jesus Seminar today would make no such claim. Jefferson fell into the common error of simply projecting onto Jesus the moral ideals of his age. [...]

Today, therefore, we are faced with new questions. Can the biblical religions maintain themselves and win new adherents or must they resign themselves to becoming a minority? Should the American consensus be modified to make room for a broader pluralism? Can Islam, the Eastern religions, New Age religion, and even agnosticism and atheism, find equal acceptance in American society?

Jefferson would probably have insisted on the positive articles of deism as a required minimum. For him and the other Founding Fathers, the good of society requires a people who believe in one almighty God, in providence, in a divinely given moral code, in a future life, and in divinely administered rewards and punishments. He and they expected that the example and teachings of Jesus, as known from the Gospels, would be accepted in principle by the great majority of citizens.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:28 AM

WHAT, NO "BUT"?:

Productivity Rises, Wages Fall and Inflation Seems in Retreat (VIKAS BAJAJ, 12/07/05, NY Times)

Productivity rose at its fastest pace in two years in the third quarter, far more quickly than was earlier estimated, as output rose and labor costs fell, the government reported yesterday. The report eased some economists' fears of rising inflation.

Productivity, a measure of how much the economy produced per hour of work, rose 4.7 percent outside the farming sector from July to September, compared with an earlier reading of 4.1 percent, the Labor Department said. Real hourly compensation, which adjusts wages and benefits for inflation, fell 1.4 percent.

Also yesterday, the Commerce Department said factory orders bounced back in October, rising 2.2 percent, from a decline of 1.4 percent the month before. And the National Association of Realtors said an index that measures pending sales of existing homes fell 3.2 percent after a decrease of 1 percent in September, providing more evidence of a housing slowdown.

Unit labor costs, which gauge the compensation required to produce one unit of output, fell 1 percent in the quarter, twice as much as previously expected.


Even the notorious Vikas Bajaj didn't bother trying to spin this. Though, that may just because they didn't front page it?

MORE:
It's All Bad News: . . . Except for the economic reality on the ground. (Irwin M. Stelzer, 12/06/2005, Weekly Standard)

As if to underscore the imperviousness of the economy to the various negative forces abroad in the land, the so-called beige book--the Federal Reserve's monthly summary of business conditions around the country--reported, "Economic activity continued to expand between from mid-October through mid-November. . . . " This, say economists at Goldman Sachs, "foots fairly well with our sense that consumers have managed to work through the earlier increase in energy costs without significant retrenchment."

And we already know that consumers, their confidence buoyed by falling gasoline prices (the driver who took me from a Manhattan hotel to JFK had filled his tank in Jersey with off-brand gasoline at $1.98 per gallon), continued spending in the current quarter: on Black Friday--the bargain-hunters' bonanza that the day after Thanksgiving has become--consumers stormed the electronics and big discount stores, leaving 22 percent more dollars in their wake than the year before. Luxury retailers are also smiling: Tiffany's third-quarter profits exceeded those in the like 2004 period by 37 percent, as affluent consumers stocked up on colored diamonds and platinum jewelry. Only apparel retailers are having a hard time moving merchandise.

Meanwhile, in the important housing market, a bit of cooling has not degenerated into the bubble-bursting that some analysts feared would drag the economy down along with the housing sector, which now provides almost five million jobs, 60 percent more than the once-mighty auto sector. It is true that sales of existing homes in October declined by 2.7 percent from the previous month, pushing inventories of unsold existing homes to the highest level in 19 years. But such sales were nevertheless 3.7 percent above the October 2004 level, and the median price of existing houses that were sold jumped by almost 17 percent, the largest one-month gain in 26 years.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:26 AM

WHAT WOULD ANGELENOS KNOW ABOUT AMERICA?:

An overnight sensation: Mix up a buttery yeasted dough the evening before, and bake a superb coffeecake for breakfast. (Donna Deane, December 7, 2005, LA Times)

STAND in line at any cappuccino bar and your eyes are drawn to the pastry case, where pieces of streusel-topped "coffeecake" wink back at you temptingly. Don't waste the calories. Coffeecake — real coffeecake — is not just a cold, sweet hunk of generic cinnamon-topped cake gobbled down in the front seat of your car.

Real coffeecake is a Sunday-morning experience. It begins (if you're a lucky houseguest) with the unforgettable aroma of bread filling the house on a winter's morning, a yeasty smell so tantalizing that it seduces you out from the cozy bedcovers and down to the kitchen. There you pour yourself a fragrant cup of hot, strong coffee and score that slice of warm, fresh, not-too-sweet "cake" (but it's more like a buttery sweet bread), made rich with a filling that incorporates just a few luxurious details: hazelnuts, maybe, or citrus peel or chopped bittersweet chocolate. Each bite stands up to the java.

Real coffeecake is also the all-American answer to tea time. It's the warming, not-too-heavy snack to go with that 4 p.m. espresso.


Except that there's nothing American about espresso. A cup of coffee and a Drake's, that's another story....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:22 AM

NON-FICTION:


Keeper of the magic
: Disney's "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" stays true to C.S. Lewis' series (Carina Chocano, December 7, 2005, LA Times)

There are several things to be grateful for in Disney's adaptation of "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe," which, considering how beloved the source, comes as a relief. Most people who read the C.S. Lewis series as kids recall it with a fierce and proprietary fondness. But aside from an added prologue that kicks off the story in London and helps to ground it in a reality against which to contrast the fantasy to come, the movie remains faithful to the book in both tone and imagery. As soon as I finish this, I'll be sending thank-you notes to whomever it was that managed to avoid conforming to nervous marketers' notions of what "the kids" are into these days. Rather unbelievably — but oh so felicitously — Peter (William Moseley), Susan (Anna Popplewell), Edmund (Skandar Keynes) and Lucy (Georgie Henley) have made it onto the screen as British children (accents and all) who haven't been remotely coolified. They're starchy, polite, dressed in boiled wool and excited at the prospect of sardines on toast.

Some evangelical groups have been promoting the movie as " 'The Passion' for kids," which makes it sound potentially like a greater source of lifelong trauma than "Bambi." But the Christian allegory embedded at its chewy center serves less as evangelical cudgel than a primer on morality and the myths we create to explain it. The magical land of Narnia is a place where Western myths and religions (classical, Christian, Celtic, Norse, you name it) are jumbled together so that we may consider their similarities and uses. If it weren't for Lewis' stated intention to write a fantastical story to make the dogma go down, it might even come across as a liberal humanist parable about myth and its function in society, especially during times of trouble.


the point being that the myths partake of the true myth.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:16 AM

NEW EVANGELICALS FOR THE ADL TO HATE:

Conservative Jews set a conversion campaign: Aim at offspring of intermarriage (Charles A. Radin, December 7, 2005, Boston Globe)

Trying to counteract the loss of membership and vitality in one of Judaism's principal groups, the Conservative movement yesterday launched what its leaders said will be an aggressive effort to convert to Judaism the gentile spouses and children of Jews who have married outside the faith.

The move is a break with a centuries-old Jewish tradition of shunning conversion efforts, an aversion traceable to the hostility that such efforts generated in countries with Christian or Muslim majorities. Even in the United States, Jews did not consider the idea of converting gentiles until the late 20th century.

The new policy is needed to preserve Jewish families in the face of high rates of intermarriage and assimilation among American Jews, said Rabbi Jerome M. Epstein, chief executive officer of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, a union of the 760 Conservative synagogues in the United States and Canada.


Quite an honor to be chosen by the Chosen.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:01 AM

BALANCES OUT THE SANTORUM LOSS:

G.O.P. Puts Its Muscle Behind a Younger Kean (DAVID W. CHEN, 12/07/05, NY Times)

In an early sign of the importance of next year's contest for the United States Senate in New Jersey, national and state Republican leaders signaled their support Tuesday for State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr., the namesake son of one of New Jersey's most popular former governors.

United States Senator Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, the chairwoman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, flew here to pledge her "strong personal support" for Mr. Kean.

"He's a person who builds coalitions to get things done," said Mrs. Dole, who leads the effort by Senate Republicans to raise money for their candidates.

In a strong indication of the way Republicans are coalescing around Mr. Kean's moderate credentials, Bret D. Schundler, the conservative former mayor of Jersey City who ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2001 and this year, promised to raise at least $10,000 for Mr. Kean.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:57 AM

FIND A SHORTAGE, FIND THE STATE:

Hewitt tells hospitals with deficits to delay operations: Minister orders trusts to get finances under control NHS thinktank warns cash problems may get worse (John Carvel, December 7, 2005, The Guardian)

Cash-strapped NHS trusts should delay operations until the new financial year in April to cut down their financial deficits, the health secretary, Patricia Hewitt, told MPs yesterday.

In a robust defence of her policy of zero tolerance of overspending, she said it was better for hospitals to cancel operations and leave capacity idle than for local NHS commissioners to run deficits, forecast last week to reach £948m across England by the end of March.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:48 AM

DEBT IS THE HEALTH OF THE NATION:

Gold's Enduring Mystery (Robert J. Samuelson, December 7, 2005, Washington Post)

[G]rowing wealth in India, China and the Middle East has revived jewelry demand; that's up 12 percent this year after a 5 percent increase in 2004. Jewelry is often more than adornment; it's also a store of wealth. Consider India. "For thousands of years, [gold jewelry] has been a means of savings," says George Milling-Stanley of the World Gold Council. "Seventy percent or more of consumption is among the rural population. They don't have access to banks, stocks or bonds. They don't trust government or paper currency."

Higher demand collides with constricted supplies; wham, prices rise. That stimulates more speculative demand, but it also enlarges supply by causing past investors in bars or jewelry to sell and take profits. Governments also have large gold stocks; their sales and purchases influence prices, too.

Though new mines often require a decade to bring into production, supply could ultimately overtake demand. Or prosperity in India and China might multiply by many times the world's gold bugs. They may regard gold as a more trustworthy form of saving than any currency, even though gold investments don't pay interest or dividends. Whatever happens, the fears and anxieties that give gold its speculative appeal could intensify or dissipate. Gold is an unending mystery, because its value lies less in what it does for us (unlike sugar, copper or oil) and more in what it symbolizes. It is almost as unfathomable as the human drama itself.


it can be thought of in these terms: their demand for gold is a function of rising wealth among peoples who can't trust their own government institutions with their money.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:35 AM

LIBERTY'S AYATOLLAH:

Behind Iraq politicians, an ayatollah holds sway: Shi'ite cleric's views shadow elections (Thanassis Cambanis, December 7, 2005, Boston Globe)

The recent traffic to the doorstep of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in this southern shrine city should remove any doubt about who is really the most powerful man in Iraq.

Shi'ites make up Iraq's majority, and an alliance of Islamist Shi'ites -- many with ties to Iran -- dominates the current government in no small part because Sistani told Shi'ites to vote for the alliance in January.

Since then, Shi'ite politicians in the salons of power, and the faithful on the streets alike, have been turning to Najaf to seek Sistani's orders on nearly everything, from the drafting of the constitution this summer to campaign strategy for the Dec. 15 national parliamentary elections and even how people should vote.

Iraq's Shi'ite clerics repeatedly emphasize that they reject the approach of Iran's ayatollahs, who dominate almost every aspect of politics and society. [...]

Even Sistani loyalists are confounded by the clerics' all-encompassing influence. Dabagh, the independent Shi'ite candidate, said he regularly visits the grand ayatollah and seeks his counsel for all major political decisions. But he says politicians need to act independently once they're in office, and not consult Sistani ''on every small point" as they did during constitutional negotiations last summer. He said Sistani's attention to detail should not be misread as an attempt by the cleric to make political decisions himself.

''His eminence is not giving any ideas of whom to employ or whom to nominate in the government," he said. ''The most important thing which I look at as a positive thing is that he wants to give liberty for Iraqis."


The manifest failures of Khomeinism are a boon to the Iraqis.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:22 AM

BUT HIS VOTERS WERE PURE:

GOP state lawmaker wins House race in OC (AP, 12/07/05)

California state Sen. John Campbell will succeed Republican Christopher Cox, who represented the Orange County district in the House for 17 years before resigning to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. [...]

With all precincts reporting and absentee ballots counted, Campbell had 41,450 votes, or 45% in unofficial returns, followed by Democratic candidate Steve Young with 25,926 votes, or 28%, in one of the most reliably Republican districts in the nation.

Third-party candidate Jim Gilchrist, a founder of the Minuteman Project border patrol group who made illegal immigration the centerpiece of his campaign, was third with 23,237 votes, or nearly 25%.

The race placed the spotlight on national immigration policy at a time when the issue threatens to divide the GOP.


Speaking of principle, this suggests the impact nativism could have on our politics, not electing any anti-immigrationists but helping Democrats.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:13 AM

THEY'RE RIGHT OF BROWN AT LEAST:

Cameron on road to No10 and victory over Brown says poll (GERRI PEEV, 12/07/05, The Scotsman)

DAVID Cameron would beat Gordon Brown in a General Election, according to an opinion poll which electrified the Conservative Party last night.

Released only hours after he trounced David Davis for the Tory leadership, the poll revealed that 38 per cent of voters would back a Cameron-led Tory Party in the next General Election, compared with 33 per cent for Mr Brown.


Well, you know the old saying: If they held the election today...a lot of people would be surprised.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:33 AM

SOME FOLKS ROOT FOR THE WITCHES:

Fla. Professor Is Acquitted in Case Seen as Patriot Act Test (Spencer S. Hsu and Dan Eggen, December 7, 2005, Washington Post)

A federal jury acquitted former Florida professor Sami al-Arian yesterday of conspiring to aid a Palestinian group in killing Israelis through suicide bombings, dealing the U.S. government a setback in its efforts to use secretly gathered intelligence in criminal cases against terrorism suspects.

The trial was a crucial test of government power under the USA Patriot Act, which lowered barriers that had prevented intelligence agencies from sharing secretly monitored communications with prosecutors. The case was the first criminal terrorism prosecution to rely mainly on vast amounts of materials gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), whose standards for searches and surveillance are less restrictive than those set by criminal courts.

The Tampa jury deliberated 13 days before rejecting arguments laid out over five months by prosecutors that the former University of South Florida computer engineer and three co-defendants conspired with leaders of Palestinian Islamic Jihad -- which the United States has designated a terrorist group -- providing it money, strategy and advice. [...]

Al-Arian attorney William Moffitt rested his defense without presenting evidence. In court, he argued that the government sought to muzzle his client's avowed antipathy to Israel.

"The government itself has said you are free to praise groups that engage in terrorism as a means of achieving their ends," Moffitt said during the case. "This case concerns Dr. al-Arian's right to speak, our right to hear what he has to say and the attempt of the powerful to silence him."


As Robert Bork so brilliantly explained in his Indiana Law Journal essay, you oughtn't be free to do so and the 1st Amendment doesn't require that you be.

MORE:
Military Recruiting Bans Seem Doomed: The high court frowns on law schools' claims that free speech and gay rights would be violated. (David G. Savage, December 7, 2005, LA Times)

The Supreme Court justices signaled Tuesday that they would uphold the military's right to recruit on college campuses and at law schools, despite its policy of excluding openly gay people from its ranks.

The justices gave a thoroughly skeptical hearing to the position of some law faculties that they have a free-speech right to bar military recruiters, a claim that was upheld by a lower court. [...]

The case marked the second in a week in which the court, under new Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., sounded as though it had come together on a potentially divisive case.

Last week, the justices took up an abortion case from New Hampshire and appeared to agree on a middle course. The state may require doctors to notify a parent of a minor girl before performing an abortion, except in medical emergencies, the justices said.

On Tuesday, Roberts and the other justices seemed to agree that there was no free-speech problem with giving the Pentagon a right to recruit on campus, as long as the schools and their professors were free to criticize the military.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:28 AM

YESTERDAY WAS TOO LATE:

Kurds anticipate dictator's execution (Paul Martin, December 7, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The question on people's minds in Iraq's largest Kurdish city as they watch Saddam Hussein's trial on television is not whether he should be executed, but how and when.

Some argue that the ousted leader should be convicted and put to death immediately after the trial, which is being broadcast live on Kurdish television.

Others want to see a series of trials, in which Saddam is held to account for a long-term campaign that displaced hundreds of thousands of Kurds, and for four poison-gas attacks that killed several thousand others.

"Don't rush it; let it take years," Hero Talabani, the wife of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, told foreign reporters. Mrs. Talabani is the founder of a satellite television station that has been covering the trial.

You have to kill him just so Ba'atghists can't imagine he'll return to power one day. Indeed, not killing him the day we found him has needlessly prolonged the unrest in the country.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:48 AM

IDEAS, NOT GEOGRAPHY:

Asian, Western: Same, same? (Tawada Yoko, 12/08/05, Asia Times)

The Japanese do not like to talk about one "Asia". It sounds like Japanese imperialism. Asia is not one, and it is good that it isn't. There is neither a common religion nor a common political system, not even one common kind of rice. [...]

The term Western on the other hand contains an insidious concept. It tries to wrap up an ideology in a geographic packaging: whoever is in favor of democracy, freedom and individualism is considered Western in orientation.


The point of the West is that it is simply a group of interlocking ideas -- Grecco-Roman/Judeo-Christian in origin -- that culminate in liberal democratic, protestant, capitalist social arrangements premised on the God given dignity and free will of every individual who is in turn bound by God's moral laws. It is universally accessible and has nothing to do with geography or ethnicity. Not every nation in the West conforms to every element to Westernism to the same degree at all times, but it's easy enough to identify those that mostly do, mostly have, or are headed in a Western direction. Thus, Japan, Israel, India, Taiwan, the Philippines, and other geographically Asian nations are in fact becoming integral parts of the West.

However, various states of Europe, having destroyed the religio-cultural premises on which they were built, have drifted further and further away from Western norms. And over the past two centuries a trio of anti-Western ideologies --Marxism, Darwinism, and Freudianism -- have been especially successful in tempting folks away from Westernism. As a result, the 20th Century saw one long war between countries that were geographically Western but that pitted the West against experiments in Communism and National Socialism/Applied Darwinism occurring within Europe. While the ideologies are now pretty thoroughly discredited, little has been done to rescue these states from the corrosive effects of secularism, so it's questionable whether a place like France is even much a part of the West any more and, if we accept for the sake of argument that it is, whether it will remain one for long.

Asia is, of course, quite rapidly headed towards having just one political and economic system--democracy and capitalism--though there will be variants within those norms. Whether its states choose to become fully Western -- accepting Abrahamic monotheism and the corresponding morality -- will determine whether they thrive, like most of the Anglospheric world, or decline comfortably, like secular continental Europe and Japan.


MORE:
Find a nation's spot on this chart and you can see how well it balances morality and freedom


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:03 AM

REDDENING THE BOARDROOMS:

Christian Conservatives Test Boardroom Clout (Alan Murray, December 7, 2005, Wall Street Journal)

Score another victory for the American Family Association, a Mississippi-based Christian conservative group that is successfully bringing America's culture wars into the corporate boardroom.

Last Thursday, the group announced that it was suspending plans to boycott Ford Motor Co. for supporting gay-rights causes and advertising in gay-oriented publications. Ford "has heard our concerns," the group's chairman, Donald Wildmon, said in a news release. "They are acting on our concerns." Separately, Advocate.com, a leading gay news site, reported that Ford had stopped advertising its Jaguar and Land Rover brands in gay publications.

Ford doesn't dispute the Christian group's announcement, but says its decision to pull Jaguar and Land Rover ads from gay publications is strictly business.


December 6, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:25 PM

THROW THE MAN A LIFELINE, FOR GOODNESS SAKE:

Lieberman Calls For Formation Of 'War Cabinet' (DAVID LIGHTMAN, December 6 2005, The Hartford Courant)

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, increasingly isolated in his own Democratic party because of his strong support for the Iraq war, today called on the White House and congressional leaders to form a special "war cabinet" to provide advice and direction for the war effort.

The Connecticut Democrat's "Bipartisan Victory in Iraq Administrative Group," designed to take some of the political edge off the war debate, would be modeled after similar panels during the Vietnam War and World War II.

Lieberman, whom the Bush administration has praised repeatedly for his war stance, defended the president. "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more years," the senator said. "We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril."


You can smell how badly he wants out of the Democratic caucus.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:20 PM

THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO HER:

Hillary Gets Two Surprise Challengers: Anti-war underdogs take on Clinton, put Sheehan in a pickle (Kristen Lombardi, December 4th, 2005, Village Voice)

Suddenly, Hillary Clinton has not one but two anti-war challengers in the 2006 Senate race.

Cheered on by none other than "Peace Mom" Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war movement has been hounding Clinton for voting to support the war in Iraq and refusing to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops.

Now the movement has a pair of candidates pledging to dog Clinton throughout the Democratic primary, forcing her to keep explaining her vote on Iraq. The first is Steven Greenfield of New Paltz, a musician and volunteer firefighter who's set to make his candidacy official Monday morning at a press conference at Columbia University, in Manhattan. The second is Jonathan Tasini a Washington Heights resident and labor activist best known for Tasini v. New York Times, a landmark lawsuit over writers' digital rights. He's planning to make his bid official at a press event at the W Hotel, in Union Square, on December 6.


If they force Ms Clinton back to the Right on the war and she triangultes off of them it sets her up perfectly for '08.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:14 PM

GET BRUNNHILDE A TORCH:

Germans Told to Cheer Up. 'Why Should We?' Some Say. (RICHARD BERNSTEIN, 12/06/05, NY Times)

First there are trees silhouetted against a pastoral horizon; then a distinguished-looking elderly lady appears on screen looking you right in the eye as she says, "You are Germany's miracle."

From then on, as this slickly produced spot broadcast on German television continues, a succession of people, famous and not famous, appears, each speaking a segment of a larger inspirational message.

"A butterfly can cause a typhoon," a well-known television hostess says. A young Asian woman holding a baby follows with, "The blast of wind that comes from its wings may uproot trees kilometers away."

The television message includes gay and handicapped people speaking from among the concrete pillars of Berlin's recently opened Holocaust Memorial, the Olympic figure skating champion Katarina Witt and a cluster of small children pointing straight into the camera and shouting the main slogan: "Du bist Deutschland!" - "You are Germany!"

Produced free by one of Germany's leading advertising agencies, the television sequence is part of a broader campaign, pretty much ubiquitous in the country these days, aimed at cheering up the presumably gloomy population, nudging Germans toward an unaccustomed optimism.

It is intended to make the public believe that, like that butterfly flapping its wings, a large number of small gestures can add up to a big difference.

Whether this is an appropriate way to battle the national melancholy - and opinions vary greatly on this issue - the very existence of such a campaign, reportedly the first of its sort in this country, is a sign of what is generally recognized here: that Germany is indeed in a sour mood, its economy in the doldrums, its financial deficits too high and none of its leaders strong or visionary enough to lead the way out.


Geez, if that ad doesn't make you root for the Gotterdammerung...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:09 PM

PELOSI'S PARTY:

Democrats Fear That Antiwar Remarks Could Backfire (Jim VandeHei and Shalaigh Murray, December 7, 2005, Washington Post)

Strong antiwar comments in recent days by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean have opened anew a party rift over Iraq, with some lawmakers warning that the leaders' rhetorical blasts could harm efforts to win control of Congress next year. [...]

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy redeployment, combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party, congressional sources said.

These sources said the two leaders have expressed worry that Pelosi is playing into Bush's hands by suggesting Democrats are the party of a quick pullout -- an unpopular position in many of the most competitive House races.


The Democrats declared what kind of party they are when they made Ms Pelosi & Mr. Dean their leaders.

MORE:
Hoyer's Campaign to Undermine Dems & Topple Pelosi (David Sirota, 12/07/05, Huffington Post)

Here are some questions every Democrat in America should be asking: why is Steny Hoyer, the House's second-ranking Democrat, going out of his way to undermine the Democratic Party's message on
Iraq? Why is Hoyer using his taxpayer-paid staff to place stories bragging about his efforts to shakedown corporate lobbyists? And why has Hoyer undercut his party on critical votes that would have helped Democrats craft a strong, crisp message?

I used to think it was because Steny Hoyer was just an extraordinary stupid person who had been insulated in the Beltway for so long that he was simply suffering from severe brain rot. But alas, I was stupid in thinking that. What's really going on is very obvious: Hoyer is waging a not-so-secret, but oh-so-self-serving campaign to topple House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D) and assume the top job in the Democratic Caucus - a job he has coveted since Pelosi beat him out for whip a few years back. And he's waging his campaign even though it is destroying his own party.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:04 PM

SET THE TIVO FOR C-SPAN:

The great gamble (Philip Webster and Rosemary Bennett, 12/07/05, Times of London)

THE Conservatives yesterday staked their future on David Cameron, the most inexperienced person to become leader of a British political party since William Pitt the Younger.

Mr Cameron, at 39, faces Tony Blair across the dispatch box at Question Time today after becoming the 26th leader of the Conservative Party.


It'll be the first time Tony Blair's ever seemed an elder statesman.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:16 PM

HIGH HONOR:

Jeb Bush 'honored' by Castro's jab (Associated Press, 12/06/05)

Gov. Jeb Bush said Tuesday that he was "honored" Cuban President Fidel Castro had referred to him as President Bush's "fat little brother in Florida." [...]

"I'm flattered and honored," Bush replied with a smile, but then turned serious.

"I will take any criticism from Fidel Castro, of all people, as an honor given the fact that, you know, 8 million people, I believe, live on the island, 8 million people are repressed and they've been that way for 40 or 50 years," Bush said.

"To be criticized by a man like that who has repressed people for such an extended period of time is a high honor," the governor added. "He can call me whatever he wants."



Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:12 PM

MORE IN COMMON THAN SEPARATES US:

Jews, Muslims Join Fight for Christian Christmas (Andrea Useem, 12/06/05, Religion News Service)

The movement defending Christmas as a Christian holiday has attracted some unlikely allies: religiously observant Jews and Muslims.

Their support bucks the assumption that religious minorities prefer a neutral approach to the season, desiring "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" at retail checkout lines or "Frosty the Snowman" over "O Holy Night" at public school concerts. [...]

Islamic support for Christmas stems in part from religious doctrine. While observant Muslims can follow the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad in respecting Jewish and Christian holidays, they say they have little motivation to value Santa-based winter holiday celebrations.

When it comes to Christmas, "the more religious it is, the more acceptable it is to Muslims," said Ahmed Bedier, director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations' Central Florida office.


And all against the witches.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:08 PM

THE LEFT GRABS ONTO ANOTHER 40% ISSUE:

Poll finds broad approval of terrorist torture: Most in U.S., Britain, France, S. Korea say torture justified in rare instances (Dec. 6, 2005, MSNBC)

Most Americans and a majority of people in Britain, France and South Korea say torturing terrorism suspects is justified at least in rare instances, according to AP-Ipsos polling. [...]

“I don’t think we should go out and string everybody up by their thumbs until somebody talks. But if there is definitely a good reason to get an answer, we should do whatever it takes,” said Billy Adams, a retiree from Tomball, Texas.

In America, 61 percent of those surveyed agreed torture is justified at least on rare occasions. Almost nine in 10 in South Korea and just over half in France and Britain felt that way.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:59 PM

NO WAY TO TREAT THE LADY:

The new boy v yesterday's men (George Jones, 07/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

David Cameron cast aside the legacy of Lady Thatcher yesterday and promised to rebuild a "modern, compassionate" Conservative Party that would recapture the centre ground from Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Blairism is the legacy of Lady Thatcher, except you have to add anti-Europeanism to it. Something you'd think a Tory might be capable of eventually.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:37 PM

PURITY IS FOR POSEURS:

'I Didn't Like Nixon Until Watergate': The Conservative Movement Now (Rick Perlstein, Huffington Post)

This past weekend, Princeton University presented the conference "The Conservative Movement: Its Past, Present, and Future." The sponsor, the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, advertises itself "an independently funded center...[s]tarted by the courageous and interpid Robert P. 'Robby' George, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence in Princeton's Politics Department." George is a member of the President's Council of Bioethics. [...]

I was part of the panel "Barry Goldwater and the Modern Conservative Movement," alongside Lee Edwards and M. Stanton Evans, cofounders of the pioneering conservative activist group Young Americans for Freedom and movers in the 1964 Barry Goldwater presidential campaign. This is the speech I delivered.
[...]

Richard Nixon once instructed a new staffer, Richard Whalen, "Flexibility is the first principle of politics." The conservative movement has understood itself to be the people who unflaggingly answered back to Nixon: "Principle rises above politics." That's a quote from Alf Regnery, in a profile of him this fall in the Washington Post. In the same article, David Keene related his answer to someone who criticized the ACU for attacking congressional spending, because Republicans were the ones in charge of it: "Well, that's too bad." The man here to my right, Lee Edwards, got the money quote: "What we have here is the principled conservatives vs. the pragmatic conservatives."

Young Americans for Freedom distributed a pamphlet in 1965: the text of the inaugural address of their first chairman named after the Goldwater defeat. It excoriated conservatives "who abuse the truth, who resort to violence and engage in slander," and "who seek victory at any price without regard for the broken lives...incurred by those who stand in the way." That is the spirit of Barry Goldwater--the spirit we honor on this panel. As he put it in Conscience of a Conservative--in italics: "we entrust the conduct of our affairs to men who understand that their first duty as public officials is to divest themselves of the power they have been given."

I'm working on the sequel to my book Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus now. It's going to be called "Nixonland," and it covers the years 1965 to 1972. And it wasn't long into the research before I found myself wrestling with a historiographic problem.

What to make of the fact that some of the names who pioneered this anti-Nixonian movement of principle showed up in the dankest recesses of the Nixon administration? People like Douglas Caddy, of course, the co-founder of the effort to draft Goldwater for vice-president in 1960 and YAF's first president, who was the man the White House called on to represent the Watergate burglars in 1972. And people like the guy inaugurated as YAF's chair in the 1965 with those stirring words about truth: Tom Charles Huston--who, as the author of the first extra-legal espionage and sabotage plan in the Nixon White House, can fairly be called an architect of Watergate.

It is a thread one finds throughout the annals of the Nixon presidency. The notion that what they were doing was moral, the eggs that need be broken in the act of redeeming a crumbling West. Jeb Magruder told the Senate Watergate Committee: "Although I was aware they were illegal we had become somewhat inured to using some activities that would help us in accomplishing what we thought was a cause." That message came straight from the top. "Just remember you're doing the right thing," the president told Bob Haldeman on Easter Sunday, 1973. "That's what I used to think when I killed some innocent children in Hanoi." Then he briefed him on how to suborn perjury from an aide concerning the blackmailing of the Watergate burglars.

Here is something I started to ponder only after completing Before the Storm. How did my subjects from the youth conservative movement of the 1960s, the ones that later came to inherit the world, present themselves to the researcher who came calling for stories about how their triumph began? On the one hand, beaming, telling me stories of principle. On the other, sometimes in the same breath, winkingly defining political deviancy down, telling Hustonian tales of antinomial subterfuge. Peeling off opposition bumper stickers with razor blades, jamming Rockefeller phone banks, working to subvert the 1961 National Student Association convention by setting up a dummy "Middle of the Road Caucus." I related these in the spirit they were offered: as evidence of good, healthy political exuberance, in an ennervated political age. I didn't even give a second thought to the delight F. Clifton White took in relating, in his two memoirs, his self-tutelage in the techniques of Stalinists--Stalinists!--to take over the Young Republicans National Federation.

Well, I'm writing now, however, not in an age of Clintonian triangulation, but in an age where the notion of conservative Republicans seeing as their first duty divesting themselves of the power they have been given seems perfectly absurd. Perhaps that is why it has becomes my thesis that the Republicans are less the party of Goldwater, and more the party of Watergate--and this not despite the operational ascendecy of the conservative movement in its councils but in some sense because of it.

Nixon knew that if you had a dirty job to get down, you got people who answered to the description he made of E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy: "good, healthy right-wing exuberants." My question is: can conservatism exist without the Tom Charles Hustons?


As a matter of fact, there are rather few people of principle and the ones who pretend to be are pretty useless to a political movement. A principled conservative would be obligated to sit by and watch everything he supposedly wants to conserve be destroyed because the exercise of power to save it requires pragmatic compromise. That's why the Right hated Reagan while he was in office and hates W now. Two things are always worth recalling in this regard. First, Eric Hoffer's dictum:
Free men are aware of the imperfection inherent in human affairs, and they are willing to fight and die for that which is not perfect. They know that basic human problems can have no final solutions, that our freedom, justice, equality, etc. are far from absolute, and that the good life is compounded of half measures, compromises, lesser evils, and gropings toward the perfect. The rejection of approximations and the insistence on absolutes are the manifestation of a nihilism that loathes freedom, tolerance, and equity.

And, second, after all that guff about turning the other cheek, Christ personally scourged the moneychangers.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:42 PM

HARD INSPIRING THE EXPIRING:

Off to a dead heat: A new Maclean's survey shows a tight race nationwide, but a rout underway in Quebec (JONATHON GATEHOUSE, 12/06/05, Maclean's)

The outcome of the January 23 federal election is up for grabs in English Canada, but already a foregone conclusion in Quebec, according to a new Maclean's poll. After a week on the hustings, the ruling Liberals and the opposition Conservatives find themselves in a statistical dead-heat outside of La belle province -- 40 per cent to 37 per cent of decided voters. And while English Canadians seem less than enthused about their options -- Stephen Harper and Paul Martin are rated as "inspiring" by just 13 and 11 per cent respectively -- the early advantage appears to be titling toward the Tories. The official opposition is doing a better job holding on to its supporters from the 2004 vote, retaining nine out of 10, versus just three of four for the Liberals, and is making gains in key policy areas like taxation, crime and U.S.-Canada relations. And perhaps most surprisingly, the two parties are almost tied on health care, the issue that scared many voters away from casting a ballot for the Conservatives in past campaigns.

Presumably voters understand that the Conservatives won't actually change anything.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:37 PM

ANOTHER MYSTERY SOLVED:

India's costly love affair with gold: Money spent on gold could be cutting the country's economic growth by 0.4 percentage points per year (Sunil Jagtiani, 12/06/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

With a stockpile already worth $200 billion, Indian gold purchases jumped nearly 40 percent this year, making the country the world's leading consumer of the precious metal.

Gold may seem like a savvy investment as its value hits a 22-year high. But experts say it may actually be weighing down one of Asia's fastest rising economies. It would be better if the money locked up in the glistening yellow metal went instead to finance new start-ups or better roads, boosting the Indian economy over the long term, economists contend.

That could provide quite a boost, given that the amount Indians have saved in gold - mostly as jewelry - is worth 30 percent of the country's $690 billion economy.


Get them to buy our bonds like the Chinese are and we can really cut taxes....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:31 PM

THE SAVIOR HAS TO DIE, DOESN'T HE?:

Harry's timely end (news.com.au, December 07, 2005)

Author of the hit series JK Rowling is reportedly desperate to kill off the boy wizard after living with him for too long.

Actor Jim Dale, the voice of Harry in the US audio books, says Rowling recently confessed to him the seventh book - which she is penning at the moment - will be the end of the much-loved magical tales.

He did not reveal how the teenager would meet his fate.

The Carry On star confessed: "Book seven is the final one. She's lived with Harry Potter so long she really wants to kill him off."


At least we know he doesn't get to dwell in the Promised Land.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:25 PM

AND WHY CAN'T THEY DRIVE THEMSELVES HOME FROM THE HOSPITAL?

Pooh-poohing diapers (Kelly Patrick, National Post, December 6th, 2005)

Matthew Berger is a potty prodigy. At two months, he started using the toilet. At one, he rarely wore diapers. Now at almost two, he's been completely diaper-free for six months.

"It totally works," said Matthew's mother, Ana Beltran, 26. "I'm pregnant and I'm definitely going to do it again."

"It" is teaching babies to use the potty early. Very early. Mrs. Beltran is one of a growing group of parents who are stopping -- or at least drastically reducing -- their use of diapers before their children have uttered a word, taken a step or swallowed solid food.

The alternative to diapers, supporters say, is not wet or dirty sleeper bottoms. It is "elimination communication," a practice that has spawned books, Web sites and a diaper-free support group with chapters in 14 countries, 38 U.S. states and 10 Canadian cities, including Toronto, Halifax and Vancouver.

Elimination communication, or "EC," encourages parents to interpret their babies' facial expressions, coos and sighs to determine when they need to use the potty. Best begun at birth, the method also sees parents learn their infants' bowel and bladder rhythms to figure out when to cradle them over a toilet or sink, or when they're old enough to sit, place them on specially designed miniature potties. To help babies along, parents make a "cuing" sound -- usually a sssshhhhh like running water -- while their infants are on the potty.

"It just makes sense," Mrs. Beltran said. "What baby likes to sit in a soaked diaper? There's no diaper rash, it's cheaper, it's less pollution."

More importantly, say diaper-free devotees, it brings parents closer to their babies.

Yes, we rather expect it would. Where else but here would you encounter the argument that rushing toddlers out of their crappy diapers is contrary to human nature and undermines human dignity? Laugh if you will, but can anyone name a popular parenting fad from the last two generations that isn’t based on rushing the little tyrants out of a state of dependency and innocence as fast as possible?


Posted by David Cohen at 2:54 PM

O TEMPORA, O MORES

Witch says fellow pagan out to get her (Janett Neuwahl, Daytona Beach News-Journal, 12/6/05)

It was close to midnight on Sunday and Jill Pagan -- who practices paganism and calls herself a witch -- was getting settled into bed when she heard a crash. It sounded like something might have fallen.

Upon investigation, Pagan discovered that her home's white aluminum door had a large gash in it. And just to the right, a large chunk of concrete was sitting in a flowerpot with a note attached to it by rubber bands. She immediately recognized a handwritten note in an ancient language called Theban, which she said is used almost exclusively by witches. . . .

Pagan later translated the message as, " 'You've been warned. Stop what you're doing,' " she said Monday. And it was a way to scare her, her husband and daughter. . . .

Pagans in Volusia and Flagler counties are a loose-knit group with various beliefs. Some believe in multiple deities, while some follow the Wicca, Celtic, Norse, Egyptian, Druid, African and Native American traditions.

"Someone knew damn well that I was a witch and that I would recognize Theban for what it was," Pagan said, angry at what she calls a hate crime on her Belvedere Lane home.

Pagan wants to know why someone sent such a violent message.

Julius Caesar (writing c. 15 March, 44 B. C. E.) De Bello Gallico 6.16 (Julius Caesar, 3/15/-44)
All the people of Gaul are completely devoted to religion, and for this reason those who are greatly affected by diseases and in the dangers of battle either sacrifice human victims or vow to do so using the Druids as administrators to these sacrifices, since it is judged that unless for a man's life a man's life is given back, the will of the immortal gods cannot be placated. In public affairs they have instituted the same kind of sacrifice. Others have effigies of great size interwoven with twigs, the limbs of which are filled up with living people which are set on fire from below, and the people are deprived of life surrounded by flames. It is judged that the punishment of those who participated in theft or brigandage or other crimes are more pleasing to the immortal gods; but when the supplies of this kind fail, they even go so low as to inflict punishment on the innocent (trans. Anne Lea, in Koch and Carey 1995. 22).
In Neil Gaiman's excellent American Gods, there's a wonderful scene in which Odin interrogates a self-described San Francisco pagan:
[T]ell me, as a pagan, who do you worship?"

"Worship?"

"That's right. I imagine you must have a pretty wide open field. So to whom do you set up your household alter? To whom do you bow down? To whom do you pray at dawn and at dusk?"

Her lips described several shapes without saying anything before she said, "The female principle. It's an empowerment thing, you know?"

"Indeed. And this female principle of yours. Does she have a name?"

"She's the goddess within us all. . . . She doesn't need a name."

"Ah, ... so do you have mighty bacchanals in her honor? Do you drink blood wine under the full moon while scarlet candles burn in silver candleholders. Do you step naked into the seafoam, chanting ecstatically to your nameless goddess while the waves lick at your legs, lapping your thighs like the tongues of a thousand leopards?"

"You're making fun of me," she said. "We don't do any of that stuff you were saying."

Even among the pagans, orthodoxy declines. One day, sacrificer of the innocent; a few thousand years later, an occassion for constitutionally protected transgression. One would very much like to introduce Ms. Pagan to her namesakes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:17 PM

LIFESAVER (via Robert Schwartz):

On Milton Friedman's Birthday, We Get the Present: Him (BEN STEIN, 12/04/05, NY Times)

Although he was working in the graduate school, Professor Friedman let me be a pupil. If memory serves, the text we used was the book he had written with Dr. Schwartz (one of the truly great unsung heroes of economics and my late mother's best friend at Barnard), "The Monetary History of the United States." This book was the culmination of their analysis of the connection between the quantity of money and business cycles in the United States economy.

Until "The Monetary History," the prevailing view of economists was that the supply of money affected the price level but not the real level of economic activity. By dint of painstaking research and formulas, Professor Friedman and Dr. Schwartz showed that changes in the money supply greatly affected real levels of output and employment.

The main thesis of the book was that the Great Depression had been caused not by changes in tariff laws (always a questionable notion at best), not by the stock market crash (even more questionable), but by catastrophically wrongheaded decisions by the Federal Reserve Board in the period 1929-33 and again in 1936-37. The Fed - obsessed with fears of inflation even as the economy was collapsing - shrank the money supply drastically and basically choked the life out of the economy. (There was also a fascinating ethnic and racial angle to the story, which Professor Friedman later related to me: certain potentates at the Fed were doing this in part as an anti-Semitic reaction to the views of a Jewish Fed official named Eugene I. Meyer, who was also owner of The Washington Post and father of Katharine Meyer Graham.)

In the world of economics, this was a discovery on a par with the theory of relativity in physics or Copernican astronomy. There is simply no way to exaggerate its importance. The use of the money supply to regulate the economy and to prevent future depressions was largely born of the work by Professor Friedman and Dr. Schwartz. It was, in every way, lifesaving.


The most hopeful thing about the new Fed Chairman is that his field of expertise is the Depression, not the '70s.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:08 PM

NOT AN OPTION, SO LONG AS DEMOCRATS HAVE A SAY (via Mike Daley):

Taking risks to take back the schools (Daniel Weintraub, November 20, 2005, Sacramento Bee)

"Our School" is eye-opening, chilling and inspiring. Up-close and personal, it follows the lives of the students, parents and faculty who had faith that they could break free and succeed.

When [Downtown College Prep] opened its doors in 2000, 83 percent of its 102 students were Hispanic, and nearly half were not completely fluent in English. Most had earned Ds and Fs in middle school, and some were taking the ninth grade for a second time. If they made it, almost all of the students would be the first in their families to go to college.

"With few exceptions," Jacobs writes, "DCP students are the kids nobody else wanted, the kids nobody really believes can make it. " [...]

Over its first four years, the school added about 100 freshmen each year, and by the end, about half of the original class graduated, with about a third transferring to other schools, 11 moving away and six who were kicked out or left for disciplinary reasons. Although those numbers might be typical for the demographic that DCP was educating, the other result was unique: Every one of the graduates was accepted to a four-year college.

Although its stories of success are heartwarming, "Our School" leaves you wondering about the thousands of similar students who don't have a Downtown College Prep as an option, and the teachers in our massive, urban high schools who don't have inspirational leadership with a dogged determination to throw out the old rules and create a new model where professionals are given the support they need to shine.

The book is a call to arms for our best teachers: Rise up, take the initiative, take back the schools. We need you. We need more Downtown College Preps.


Sadly, the schools have to be taken from the teachers' unions first.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:03 PM

SPARE THE ROD SPOIL THE PARENT (via bboys):

Parents insist their `Indigo children' can see the future (MICHAEL CORONADO, 12/05/05, The Orange County Register)

It was a typical kids' birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese. Pizza, games and noise.

But when Carolyn Kaufman was getting her daughter, Ariel Carreno, ready to go, Ariel had an unusual request.

"Mom, we need to take an orange," Ariel said.

"Why?" Carolyn asked.

Carolyn explained that this was a pizza party, and that an orange would probably be out of place.

But when Ariel insisted, Carolyn grabbed an orange and took it to the party. For Carolyn's family, what seems odd isn't odd at all.

Kaufman believes Ariel can see the future.

So Ariel carried her orange into Chuck E. Cheese. The party went just as planned. The kids ate pizza. The kids played games. The parents endured the noise.

Then, the birthday girl asked for the strangest thing.

An orange.

It's moments like this that has Kaufman convinced. She's a mom - like so many other parents - who believes her children are different than other kids.

Carolyn Kaufman believes she is the mother of three "Indigo children."

Indigo advocates believe that many children born after 1975 possess an Indigo-color aura around them and unique almost supernatural traits. To the rest of the world, these kids may appear to be unruly and their parents may have gone overboard in the coddling of their children. Indigo kids bristle at authority and have little patience. Their advocates say they act like royalty and have no guilt. Simple acts, like waiting in lines, drive them crazy. Their parents are sure they can see the future and talk to angels.


These parents need to be renditioned.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:48 PM

MISSIONLESSNESS LEADS TO MUSH:

'New Journalists': They gave readers more, not less,: a review of The Gang That Wouldn't Write Straight: Wolfe, Thompson, Didion and the New Journalism Revolution By Marc Weingarten (Carlin Romano, 12/04/05, Philadelphia Inquirer)

Marc Weingarten, a smooth newspaper and magazine writer, tells the tale here of the main outlets and heroes of what Tom Wolfe christened, in a 1973 anthology he coedited, "The New Journalism": Esquire, Rolling Stone, the New York Herald Tribune, New York magazine, editors such as Harold Hayes, Clay Felker and Jann Wenner, and the star writers everyone knows now, such as Wolfe, Jimmy Breslin, Hunter S. Thompson, Gay Talese, Joan Didion and Michael Herr.

Weingarten's approach appeals. While his biographies of writers and editors remain necessarily compact, they explain how New Journalists individually grasped what journalistic bosses ignore today: that more - more detail, more nerve, more reporting, more style, more voice - convinces readers they're getting more for their money, so they buy.

Weingarten starts out with the still-hilarious tale of how Wolfe, then the Herald Tribune's hot feature writer, took off in 1965 after the New Yorker in his bristly two-part piece, "Tiny Mummies! The True Story of the Ruler of 43rd Street's Land of the Walking Dead!"

William Shawn, the New Yorker's venerable longtime editor, a man with a profile so low he might have been in a "witness protection program," had declined an interview request from Wolfe and asked the aggressive young reporter to back off. "If we tell someone we want to do a profile and that person doesn't want to cooperate," Shawn explained to Wolfe, "we don't do the profile. We would expect you to extend us the same courtesy."

Instead, Wolfe extended his portrait to thousands of words, including stinging detail gathered from New Yorker insiders, about Shawn's office with its "horsehair-stuffing atmosphere of old carpeting... and happy-shabby, baked-apple gentility." Manhattan's chattering classes could talk about little else for weeks.

The impulse shared by Weingarten's New Journalist revolutionaries - he labels their convergence "the greatest literary movement since the American fiction renaissance of the 1920s" - was to begin "to think like novelists," to aim at "journalism that reads like fiction" but still "rings with the truth of reported fact." [...]

Weingarten stresses that the freedom the evolving New Journalism stars received from editors and publishers to stretch further, to report peripheries, to let loose with perspective and voice, came at a price. The cost of ambition and achievement was space.

"You have to have a mission when you're publishing," Time cofounder Henry Luce told a young Clay Felker, "otherwise you have nothing." Weingarten's back-to-the-past tour leaves one with the impression that the folks with SAS today are editors and publishers who can't remember that long-form journalism excited sophisticated readers as short-form journalism never has.


A couple years ago, Esquire put some of their best long pieces on-line, including: Frank Sinatra Has a Cold by Gay Talese; What Do You Think of Ted Williams Now? by Richard Ben Cramer; and The Last American Hero Is Junior Johnson. Yes! by Tom Wolfe. It was enough to make you wonder why no one even bothers trying to publish a good general interest magazine today.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:46 PM

I'LL GET YOU YET, MY PRETTY:

Mom seeks to euthanize girl she gave up (Adam Gorlick, December 6, 2005, ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Allison Avrett's photos show her daughter Haleigh as a smiling little girl with brown bangs hanging over her squinting eyes.

Those pictures were taken before Mrs. Avrett gave up Haleigh for adoption five years ago, and long before the purported beating that landed the 11-year-old in a hospital attached to the ventilator and feeding tube. [...]

Mrs. Avrett, who gave up her parental rights when she let her sister adopt Haleigh in 2000, says her daughter should not suffer anymore.

Did Allison have a little dog she can kill too?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:39 PM

WHAT THE...?:

A parent's right to know (Jonathan Turley, 12/05/05, USA Today)

Cases like Ayotte are produced by a collision of two powerful interests: The right of parents to participate in major medical and moral decisions affecting their minor children vs. the right of children to have abortions.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:56 AM

W THE LION:

'Narnia represents everything that is most hateful about religion': Children won't get the Christian subtext, but unbelievers should keep a sickbag handy during Disney's new epic (Polly Toynbee, December 5, 2005, The Guardian)

Most British children will be utterly clueless about any message beyond the age-old mythic battle between good and evil. Most of the fairy story works as well as any Norse saga, pagan legend or modern fantasy, so only the minority who are familiar with Christian iconography will see Jesus in the lion. After all, 43% of people in Britain in a recent poll couldn't say what Easter celebrated. Among the young - apart from those in faith schools - that number must be considerably higher. Ask art galleries: they now have to write the story of every religious painting on the label as people no longer know what "agony in the garden", "deposition", "transfiguration" or "ascension" mean. This may be regrettable cultural ignorance, but it means Aslan will stay just a lion to most movie-goers.

All the same, children may puzzle over the lion and ask embarrassing questions. For non-CS Lewis aficionados, here is a recap. The four children enter Narnia through a wardrobe and find themselves in a land frozen into "always winter, never Christmas" by the white witch, (played with elemental force by Tilda Swinton). Unhappy middle child Edmund, resentful of being bossed about by his older brother, broods with meanness and misery. The devil, in the shape of the witch, tempts him: for the price of several chunks of turkish delight, rather than 30 pieces of silver, Edmund betrays his siblings and their Narnian friends.

The sins of this "son of Adam" can only be redeemed by the supreme sacrifice of Aslan. This Christ-lion willingly lays down his life, submitting himself to be bound, thrashed and humiliated by the white witch, allowing his golden mane to be cut and himself to be slaughtered on the sacrificial stone table: it cracks in sympathetic agony and his body goes missing. The two girls lay down their heads and weep, Magdalene and Mary-like. Be warned, the film lingers long and lovingly over all this.

But so far, so good. The story makes sense. The lion exchanging his life for Edmund's is the sort of thing Arthurian legends are made of. Parfait knights and heroes in prisoner-of-war camps do it all the time. But what's this? After a long, dark night of the soul and women's weeping, the lion is suddenly alive again. Why? How?, my children used to ask. Well, it is hard to say why. It does not make any more sense in CS Lewis's tale than in the gospels. Ah, Aslan explains, it is the "deep magic", where pure sacrifice alone vanquishes death.

Of all the elements of Christianity, the most repugnant is the notion of the Christ who took our sins upon himself and sacrificed his body in agony to save our souls. Did we ask him to? [...]

[H]ere in Narnia is the perfect Republican, muscular Christianity for America - that warped, distorted neo-fascist strain that thinks might is proof of right. I once heard the famous preacher Norman Vincent Peel in New York expound a sermon that reassured his wealthy congregation that they were made rich by God because they deserved it. The godly will reap earthly reward because God is on the side of the strong. This appears to be CS Lewis's view, too. In the battle at the end of the film, visually a great epic treat, the child crusaders are crowned kings and queens for no particular reason. Intellectually, the poor do not inherit Lewis's earth.

Does any of this matter? Not really. Most children will never notice. But adults who wince at the worst elements of Christian belief may need a sickbag handy for the most religiose scenes.


Strange the way she seems to hate God and America for the same reason, that both save her without her asking.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:50 AM

GET RIGHT WITH GOD, JOE:

Weicker May Return to Politics Over Lieberman's Support of War (WILLIAM YARDLEY, 12/06/05, NY Times)

Former Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. on Monday criticized Senator Joseph I. Lieberman's continued support of the war in Iraq and said that if no candidate challenged the senator on the issue in the 2006 election, he would consider running.

"When you've become the president's best friend on the war in Iraq, you should not be in office, especially if you're in the opposing party," Mr. Weicker, 74, said in a phone interview from his home in Essex, Conn.


Why don't the Republicans nominate Mr. Lieberman and the Democrats Mr. Weicker? As a Republican Senator Lieberman could even adhere to the tenets of his faith.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:38 AM

WINK, WINK, NUDGE, NUDGE:

Rice Defends Tactics Used Against Suspects: Europe Aware of Operations, She Implies (Glenn Kessler, December 6, 2005, Washington Post)

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, seeking to dampen a furor in Europe over the CIA's secret detention and transport of suspected terrorists on European soil, on Monday defended U.S. actions there as preventing terrorist attacks and strongly suggested that operations have occurred only with the cooperation of relevant governments.

At Andrews Air Force Base before boarding her plane for a week-long swing through Europe, Rice said the United States always respects the sovereignty of foreign countries when conducting intelligence operations within their borders. Aides said that was diplomatic code meaning that the United States does not act without first getting permission.


Here everyone thought Chirac and Schroeder were leering at Ms Rice when in fact they were just giving a wink of approval.


MORE:
The Man Behind the Secretary of State's Rock Star Image (JOEL BRINKLEY, 12/05/05, NY Times)

When Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice landed in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, a few weeks ago, waiting to greet her as she stepped off the plane was a falconer. Ms. Rice looked a bit wary as he urged his bird to perch on her arm.

As she landed in Tokyo early this year, waiting for her at the bottom of the stairs was Konishiki, the popular, 600-pound, Japanese-American sumo champion, decked out in a billowing black silk kimono. When he reached out to give Ms. Rice a hug she looked startled and gasped as he enveloped her delicate frame. The next day, a senior Japanese official said, "she and Konishiki were all over the newspapers" across Japan.

Despite the time-worn diplomatic formula of quiet airport greetings by often-dour foreign ministers, for Ms. Rice the more telegenic receptions in Bishkek and Tokyo were not anomalies. Among the diplomats, politicians and journalists of the world, there is no argument that she has ascended to rock star status.


Other than Bono, is any rock star taken seriously?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:30 AM

NEWS FROM SCHNOOKVILLE (via Bryan Francoeur):

'Goodfella' gets jail for threatening wife(AP, 12/06/05)

Henry Hill, the former mobster immortalized in "Goodfellas," was sentenced Monday to 180 days in jail for threatening his wife and another man last summer.

The judge ordered the sentence to be served concurrently with a six-month term Hill is already serving for attempted methamphetamine possession. Hill pleaded no contest to making terroristic threats. [...]

Police say Hill threatened his wife with a knife on July 8 at a hotel, then followed her after she left and threatened the man who had been waiting for her.


Isn't that what everyone wanted to do after sitting through Medicine Man?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:46 AM

CAPITALIST TOOL:

Band-Aid Fix for Alternative Minimum Tax (Jonathan Weisman and Shailagh Murray, December 6, 2005, Washington Post)

The alternative minimum tax is Washington's ticking time bomb, a menace not just to middle-class taxpayers but to politicians of all stripes. No one wants it to explode, but no one wants to pay the enormous cost of defusing it, either. [...]

To the surprise of many lawmakers, House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) left the AMT fix out of his version of a tax "reconciliation" bill. Instead, House leaders will bring the AMT bill to the floor tomorrow or Thursday under special rules designed to expedite passage of non-controversial bills. Thomas thought an AMT patch would have overwhelming support. If a protected tax reconciliation bill was limited this year to $70 billion over five years, why waste that precious $70 billion on a bill with broad support?

Under such "suspension" rules, bills need the support of two-thirds of the House to pass. In other words, while the Senate used parliamentary rules that made it easier to pass the AMT fix, the House is using rules that will make it harder, thinking lawmakers from neither party would dare vote against "stealth tax relief."

It's a good bet.

"It's not surprising they are doing this, because next year, it's going to hit big-time," Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.) said, adding that Democrats probably would support the measure if it is not linked to less bipartisan tax cuts.


Democrats are sufficienty vested in AMT relief that it can, and must, be used to force them to sign on to a general tax restructuring bill.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:26 AM

FOR WASHINGTON?:

Berlin's Silence for Washington: Gerhard Schröder's government had detailed information on how the CIA operated in Europe -- and said nothing. The lower echelons of the administration even co-operated actively. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is likely to expect the same silent complicity from the new chancellor, Angela Merkel. (Matthias Gebauer, 12/05/05, Der Spiegel)

Schröder's time is over now. But questions about Germany's involvement in the methods of CIA agents operating in Europe are catching up with him as well as with the other political pensioners -- former foreign minister Joschka Fischer and especially former interior minister Otto Schily. Research by the Washington Post, SPIEGEL and other media show that neither the previous government nor the new administration under Angela Merkel should have been surprised about the reports in recent weeks about secret prisoner transports, secret prisons and CIA kidnappings.

It is also becoming ever clearer that the Schröder government was informed in detail and at an early stage about the policy of so-called "extraordinary renditions" and "black sites" across Europe. Cabinet ministers in Berlin clearly didn't just know the dirty details about Bush's unrestricted war on terror by reading the newspapers.

In some cases German intelligence officers even tried to profit from the controversial methods by questioning prisoners who were being held without any legal foundation. Schröder's stance on Iraq was popular and won him votes. But behind its anti-American veil, his government was quietly complicit and was occasionally rewarded for its silence.


The silence isn't a favor to Washington, it's a necessity of their own cravenness. Someone's got to fight terror and if it isn't going to be them it's got to be us. It's not as if Europeans aren't accustomed to having us win their wars for them.

MORE:
"Everyone Knew What Was Going On in Bondsteel": As European governments investigate reports about apparent CIA "black sites" maintained by the United States to hold suspected terrorists, Camp Bondsteel has come under great scrutiny. Prisoners were locked up for months in the Kosovo military camp without trial in conditions similar to those at Guantanamo. Alvaro Gil Robles, Human Rights Commissioner for the Council of Europe, tells SPIEGEL ONLINE what he saw at the camp in 2002 and reveals that Germany knew all about it. (Der Spiegel, 12/05/05)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:15 AM

ASSUME THE POSITION (via Robert Schwartz):

THE POLITICS OF THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT: And the Intractable Dilemma of International ANSWER (Bill Weinberg, Info Shop)

Since the prelude to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the large, visible anti-war protests in the US—especially the marches in Washington, New York and San Francisco—have been led by two organizations, which have at times cooperated but have frequently been at odds: United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and International ANSWER (for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism). In the Sept. 24 march, they agreed to cooperate; they divided the stage time equally, with different speakers and different banners, although ANSWER actually held the permit.

Both UFPJ and ANSWER have been criticized by some activists as top-down and insufficiently democratic. But concerns are growing over ANSWER's links to a doctrinaire neo-Stalinist organization called the Workers World Party (WWP), which has a history of seeking to dominate coalitions, and has some embarrassing ultra-hardline positions.

Steve Ault, a gay activist in New York City since 1970, served as UFPJ's logistics coordinator for the historic pre-war mobilization of Feb. 15, 2003, last summer's Republican National Convention protests and the May 1, 2005 march for nuclear disarmament. He charges that ANSWER is a front group for the WWP. Speaking as an individual—not on behalf of UFPJ—he decries what he sees as an imbalance between the two major anti-war formations: "One small sectarian group has equal power with a genuine coalition. We aren't going to be able to have a real movement until they are called out on the carpet for it."

Ault says he has for 20 years witnessed WWP use "stacking meetings and undemocratic tactics" to control left coalitions. "When Workers World forms a so-called coalition, its not a coalition at all, its a vehicle to attempt to amplify their power and control. Its not a genuine coalition like UFPJ which has no controlling faction—it has communists, Greens, pacifists, anarchists."


So he's been a Stalinist tool for twenty years?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:06 AM

WHO NEEDS THEM?:

From Seattle to Hong Kong: There have been eight rounds of multilateral trade negotiations prior to Doha. Although they all ended well, it is important to remember that few went smoothly. Negotiators in Hong Kong now face real obstacles, but there is reason for hope -- if, that is, they have the will and courage to do what is necessary to succeed. (Jagdish Bhagwati, December 2005, Foreign Affairs)

There were eight successful rounds of multilateral trade negotiations (MTN) under the auspices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The first round of talks were held in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1947 and the last was launched in Punta del Este, Uruguay, in 1986. This last round was concluded in 1994 in Marrakesh, Morocco, and led to the creation of the GATT's successor, the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Although they might seem like successes in retrospect, it is important to recall that few of these MTNs went smoothly. Moreover, with each successive round, the negotiators' task has grown more complex, even as their ability to close trade deals has increasingly been impaired by the greater visibility of the process and the growing involvement of a variety of lobbies and stakeholders. The issues have also become more complicated, thanks to the proliferation of non-trade barriers and to sectors such as agriculture that had earlier been shunted aside by waivers. So it is hardly surprising that the Uruguay Round of talks took nearly eight years to complete and suffered midway breakdowns and cascading crises of confidence, whereas the preceding Tokyo Round took five years and the previous rounds took much less. [...]

[T]he central breakthrough at Cancún was the emergence of the Group of 20 (G-20), led by Brazil, India, and South Africa. Seen at first as spoilers, these countries had played a negligible role in earlier negotiating rounds. Press coverage of the MTNs tended to focus almost exclusively on the interplay between the European and the American trade representatives, who were treated as the stars of the trade talks with others sidelined to obscurity. At Cancún, however, this dynamic finally changed. Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign minister, made a dramatic stand, planting the flag of the developing world on the MTN map and forcing the media to pay attention to its interests. In past years, the Quad -- the United States, the EU, Japan, and Canada -- had set the terms of the negotiations. After Cancún, however, the agenda was set by a new Group of 5, which included the United States, the EU, Brazil, India, and Australia (as a representative of the Cairns Group of 17 agriculture-exporting countries).

Cancún thus represented a triumph for developing countries, which suddenly gained recognition and a political stake in the negotiations. Indeed, the G-20 even managed to demand successfully that the EU and the United States go back to the drawing board and come back with improved offers on agricultural subsidies and trade barriers. This development augurs well for the future, since effective negotiations can occur only among equals; finally, representatives from Washington and Brussels face opponents their own size (or near to it).

Even the fact that the Cancún talks did not wrap up the Doha Round should not be seen as a failure. After all, at the time of Cancún, the Doha Round was only two years old. Both the Tokyo and Uruguay Rounds had taken much longer to close. Finishing Doha so quickly would have taken a miracle, and miracles do not happen in trade. [...]

The most difficult issue is lowering agricultural protections; in recent months, Washington and Brussels have lobbed related offers and counteroffers at each other without much progress. The EU itself is divided between France and its allies, which oppose making any serious concessions, and the United Kingdom and the Nordic countries, which favor accommodation.

The French opposition to the liberalization of agricultural trade rules seems animated by the popular and populist conviction that reducing such barriers would constitute an attack on both French agriculture and French culture.


Just make it a frontal assault on France and cut them out of the trade scheme.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:59 AM

OVERLY HONEST:

The tax cut two-step (LA Times, December 6, 2005)

Bush's simple message that decent Americans know better than Washington how to spend their dollars is getting tiresome.

Isn't the MSM supposed to at least pretend that it isn't Statist?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:20 AM

IT WASN'T ABOUT PRINCIPLE, BUT PEDIGREE:

Dodging Debate On Alito (E. J. Dionne Jr., December 6, 2005, Washington Post)

When conservatives revolted against President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, they proudly proclaimed their desire for a big debate over constitutional principles. Now they are running from the fight.

If Ms Miers wasn't Evangelical and had gone to Yale she'd be a justice now.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:03 AM

MARCIA, MARCIA, MARCIA! (via ted haines):

BRAND X (Larry Beinhart, Huffington Post)

If we know anything from the 2004 election, we know that branding is as essential to politics as it is to selling detergents, cars and perfume. [...]

Democrats and liberals have still failed to brand Bush and the Republicans as anything in particular. Here are some suggestions. [...]

7. The Mean Girls Party. Oh my word, aren't they whiney. Now that they're in party, they just keep everyone out. They have their secrets, which they don't have to share, and that makes them better than anyone else in the lunchroom. They all have their nicknames. And they like to play mean dirty tricks on other people and snicker about later. Nothing they ever do is wrong, because other people made them do it. Anyway, they're the real victims. You don't even have to ask, they'll tell you so. With my apologies to the feminists among us, but they are just like the Heathers.


Mr. Beinhart is living proof that all humor is conservative, not just because he's unfunny, but because he's accidentally always the butt of his own jokes, as in his novels, and here where he makes himself sound like a petulant and unpopular teenage girl, a pluperfect metaphor for the Left today.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:45 AM

FLEXIBLE FLYING:

UN reform: How about a little competition? (Ruth Wedgwood, DECEMBER 5, 2005, The New York Times)

Kofi Annan's term as secretary general of the United Nations has one year to go, and so far he has been unable to deliver on any real institutional reform.

Paradoxically, the most promising reform route may be in recognizing the virtues of outside competition. Monopoly can be corrosive for any institution, and many of the problems addressed by the United Nations can be and have been handled in other forums. Washington and the UN would both be aided by recognizing the virtues of "competitive multilateralism." [...]

The idea of competitive multilateralism avoids the stark choice of going alone or going to the United Nations. America must still support the purposes of the United Nations; it is a historic alliance, a product of World War II, and it remains the only all-inclusive political organization around. America enjoys prerogatives as a permanent Security Council member that would be hard to gain again. But we do have some flexibility in how we choose to approach international cooperation.

The United Nations' specialized agencies depend on voluntary financing from member states, and we should direct our money to those that are cost-effective. We can also give funds directly to private relief organizations that show initiative, without a bypass through UN middle management.

On issues where the global organization is impotent or counterproductive, we can make progress through regional organizations and informal coalitions. We can give greater support to regional human rights groups, instead of seeking consensus with political thugs at the Human Rights Commission. We can act in international crises through the Community of Democracies and NATO.


We should also consumate the idea of forming a liberal democratic causcus within the U.N.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:42 AM

WE'RE ALL THATCHERITE NOW:

Brown promises to be 'Blairite' (BBC, 12/05/05)

Chancellor Gordon Brown has told the BBC he would run a Blairite administration if he becomes prime minister when Tony Blair steps down.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today he would lead a reforming Labour Party, which encouraged an entrepreneurial economy.

Pressed to say whether this meant a Brown administration would be Blairite, the chancellor replied: "Exactly."


A Party of Accountants (Chris Pope, American Enterprise)
The British Conservative Party needs a purpose. Although an ambitious chancellor and a disgruntled party currently threaten Tony Blair, his leadership—for all intents and purposes—hasn’t been challenged in a decade. Meanwhile, the Tories are looking for their fifth chief in just eight years. Their problem is not only that they need a new face, but that they must find a new spirit.

The Tories’ frustrations are familiar. They wonder why Thatcherism is not rewarded for the prosperity and social stability it bequeathed to Britain. [...]

While New Labor framed the debate of the 1990s as between the values of “caring” and “uncaring,” post-Blair Conservatives should redefine the political battleground. They should challenge the British public to higher objectives, rejecting the cultural nihilism that has abandoned town centers to the proclivities of drunken teenagers and has been unable to offer the appeal of more productive ventures. When Muslim immigrants reject such a society, they can hardly be blamed for not willing to be “more British.”

And so that should be the goal of British Conservatives. It should not be to harangue newcomers into patriotism, but to awaken their desire to be part of the nation. The Conservative Party may have many intelligent policies, but it should sell a vision rather than a balance sheet. School choice may provide freedom and higher standards, but it opens the path to inspiration. Tax cuts may increase efficiency and responsibility, but they are the engine of growth and leadership in Europe. A strong foreign policy may keep us safe and free, but it is also the way to leave a legacy.

The Conservatives should not worry about concerns that a party of accountants is not sexy enough. What it really lacks is a soul.


Having lost the economic aspects of Thatcherism to Tony Blair, what other option do Tories have but a return to traditional British culture and opposition to Europe?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:34 AM

THE 11TH COALITION:

Free-market eurosceptics join forces (Mark Beunderman, 12/05/05, EUOBSERVER)

While free marketeers from politics and think tanks launched a new eurosceptic network in Brussels on Monday (5 December), the possible election of David Cameron as UK conservative leader could prompt the formation of a new anti-EU integration group in the European Parliament.

Both initiatives have emerged from the British Tory party, who UK papers are confident will elect eurosceptic David Cameron as new party leader on Tuesday.

Conservative member of the European Parliament Daniel Hannan initiated today's "Congress of Brussels", a gathering of right-of centre politicians and think tanks across Europe.

The network, which goes by the name "Alliance for an Open Europe" wants to establish a loose alternative to the existing EU, based on the sovereignty of nation states, but firmly promoting free trade and transatlantic ties.

Participants included, apart from UK conservatives, Czech members of the ODS party of president Vaclav Klaus, politicians of Polish government party Law and Justice and French Mouvement pour la France members.

Politicians from Iceland, Portugal and Sweden took part in the meeting - as well as a range of libertarian-oriented think tanks from 30 countries as far afield as Albania, Israel and the US.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:29 AM

THROW ENOUGH & SOMETHING MIGHT STICK:

DeLay's Felony Charge Is Upheld: But Texas Judge Dismisses Some Conspiracy Counts (R. Jeffrey Smith and Jonathan Weisman, December 6, 2005, Washington Post )

Senior District Judge Pat Priest, who took over the case after DeLay's lawyers objected to another judge on political grounds, did not rule in his 11-page decision on the issue of DeLay's culpability. In a slap at Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle, who oversaw the DeLay inquiry, Priest said a grand jury had erred in indicting DeLay for conspiracy when that crime was actually not covered by the state election law when it occurred.

But Priest also said that a different indictment -- hastily secured by Earle from a different grand jury after he realized the conspiracy charge might be flawed -- was worth hearing at trial.


DeLAY FAILS TO GET CASE TOSSED OUT: With charges of money laundering upheld, hopes for a rapid resolution come up short (R.G. RATCLIFFE, 12/06/05, Houston Chronicle)
DeLay's only chance now to avoid trial entirely rests with his challenge to the remaining indictment on the grounds that it was returned by a grand jury as a result of prosecutorial misconduct by Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle.

The election law conspiracy indictment that Priest threw out was returned Sept. 28 after months of investigation by a grand jury whose term was expiring.

But when Earle realized he may have legal problems with that indictment, he tried to get another grand jury to indict DeLay on money laundering charges. That grand jury declined to issue any indictments on Sept. 30.

Earle then got a third grand jury to indict DeLay on the money laundering charges on Oct. 3, the first day it met. DeGuerin said Earle's actions amount to prosecutor misconduct.

Priest has offered to hear the prosecutorial misconduct motion, as well as a motion to move the trial out of Travis County, either next week or the final week of December. But Earle has 15 days to appeal Priest's ruling, which could delay further hearings.


December 5, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:13 PM

THE ROAD TO MOROCCO

Sources Tell ABC News Top Al Qaeda Figures Held in Secret CIA Prisons: 10 Out of 11 High-Value Terror Leaders Subjected to 'Enhanced Interrogation Techniques' (BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO, Dec. 5, 2005, ABC News)

Two CIA secret prisons were operating in Eastern Europe until last month when they were shut down following Human Rights Watch reports of their existence in Poland and Romania.

Current and former CIA officers speaking to ABC News on the condition of confidentiality say the United States scrambled to get all the suspects off European soil before Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived there today. The officers say 11 top al Qaeda suspects have now been moved to a new CIA facility in the North African desert. [...]

Sources tell ABC that the CIA's secret prisons have existed since March 2002 when one was established in Thailand to house the first important al Qaeda target captured. Sources tell ABC that the approval for another secret prison was granted last year by a North African nation.

Sources tell ABC News that the CIA has a related system of secretly returning other prisoners to their home country when they have outlived their usefulness to the United States.

These same sources also tell ABC News that U.S. intelligence also ships some "unlawful combatants" to countries that use interrogation techniques harsher than any authorized for use by U.S. intelligence officers. They say that Jordan, Syria, Morocco and Egypt were among the nations used in order to extract confessions quickly using techniques harsher than those authorized for use by U.S. intelligence officers. These prisoners were not necessarily citizens of those nations. [...]

Of the 12 high value targets housed by the CIA, only one did not require water boarding before he talked. Ramzi bin al-Shibh broke down in tears after he was walked past the cell of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the operational planner for Sept. 11. Visibly shaken, he started to cry and became as cooperative as if he had been tied down to a water board, sources said.


So torture works.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:03 PM

CLARITY KILLS (via David Hill, The Bronx):

Iraq will likely be divisive issue for Democrats in '06, Obama says (JEFF ZELENY AND RICK PEARSON, 12/05/05, Chicago Tribune)

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said Monday that the Democratic Party was unlikely to reconcile its differences and reach a unified strategy for Iraq, conceding: "The politics and the policy of this may not match perfectly." [...]

"It is arguable that the best politics going into '06 would be a clear succinct message: `Let's bring our troops home,'" Obama said. [...]

"It's a little too early to tell how coherent the Democratic message is," Obama said.


Even more amusing, House Democrats Seek to Avoid Iraq Stance Vote (Erin P. Billings, December 5, 2005, Roll Call)
House Democratic leaders this week will try to block any effort by members to adopt an official Democratic Caucus position on the Iraq war, recognizing such a move would highlight internal party differences and invite new political troubles.

When you're a 40% party it's always best not to advertise where you stand.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:39 PM

PIT PODS (via Robert Schwartz):

It's no good if you can't dance to it (Matthew Westwood, December 02, 2005, the Australian)

LIKE elsewhere in the Australian work force, an industrial revolution is happening in the pit of the Sydney Opera House. Under a new interpretation of WorkCover rules, players in the Australian Opera and Ballet Orchestra can't be exposed to sound levels higher than 85 decibels averaged over a day.

This will have implications for orchestral music generally, but its immediate impact is being felt on, of all things, the Australian Ballet's Sleeping Beauty. To avoid any one musician being exposed to excessive sound, the orchestra is working with relay teams of extra musicians: four separate horn sections, four of clarinets, four of flutes, and so on. The orchestra that begins a particular performance isn't necessarily the same one that finishes it.

It's a logistical nightmare and an expensive one, adding $100,000 to the ballet's production costs. And all this for a score as lyrical and romantic as Tchaikovsky's Sleeping Beauty, never mind the noisily modernist Rite of Spring.


Why not just keep them in sensory deprivation tanks other than during show time?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:36 PM

UNSUSTAINABLE FICTION:

Some oil executives worry prices may fall (Jad Mouawad, DECEMBER 4, 2005, The New York Times)

Hold on to your gas guzzlers: Cheap oil may once again be just around the corner. Even as consumers worry about high gasoline prices and rising heating bills, oil executives in London, Texas and Saudi Arabia seem to be concerned about a prospect of falling oil prices.

In a recent speech in Singapore, John Browne, the chief executive of BP, spoke of a possible sharp drop in prices and called current levels "unsustainably high."

John Hofmeister, head of Shell Oil in the United States, said during an interview, "This high price cycle is artificially inflated."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:32 PM

IF WWII WERE REFOUGHT TODAY THEY'D MAKE JEWS THE BAD GUYS:

Hollywood's New Axis of Evil: Why do businessmen wear the black hat? (Edward Jay Epstein, Dec. 5, 2005, Slate)

In the new Warner Bros. political thriller, Syriana, the villain is not al-Qaida, an enemy state, the Mafia, or even a psychotic serial killer. Rather, it's the big oil companies, which manipulate terrorism, wars, and social unrest to drive up oil prices (which have risen almost as much as movie ticket prices in the last 10 years). One doesn't need to look far to discover that the root-of-evil corporate villain is hardly atypical of post-Cold War Hollywood.

Consider, for example, Paramount's 2004 remake of the 1962 classic The Manchurian Candidate. In the original, directed by John Frankenheimer, the villain-behind-the-villain is the Soviet Union, whose nefarious agents, with the help of the Chinese Communists, abduct a U.S. soldier in Korea and turn him into a sleeper assassin. In the new version, the military abduction is transposed from Korea in 1950 to Kuwait in 1991, and the defunct Soviet Union is replaced as the resident evil. The new villain is—you guessed it—the Manchurian Global Corporation, an American company loosely modeled on the Halliburton Corporation. As the director, Jonathan Demme, explains in his DVD commentary, he avoided making the Iraqi forces of Saddam Hussein (whom the United States was battling in the time frame of the movie) the replacement villain, because he did not want to "negatively stereotype" Muslims. Not only were neither Saddam Hussein nor Iraq mentioned in a film about the Iraq-Kuwait war, but the Manchurian corporation's technicians rewire the brains of the abducted U.S. soldiers with false memories of al-Qaida-type jihadists so that they will lay the blame for their terrorist acts on an innocent Muslim jihadist.

Why don't the movies have plausible, real-world villains anymore? One reason is that a plethora of stereotype-sensitive advocacy groups, representing everyone from hyphenated ethnic minorities and the physically handicapped to Army and CIA veterans, now maintain liaisons in Hollywood to protect their images. The studios themselves often have "outreach programs" in which executives review scripts and characters with representatives from these groups, evaluate their complaints, and attempt to avoid potential brouhahas.


Have the businessmen who run Hollywood not noticed that the movies where they make themselves the villains are uninteresting and don't make money?


Posted by David Cohen at 7:04 PM

SERENDIPITY

BrothersJudd has been nominated as Best Group Blog (a cruel joke, I assume) in the Weblog Awards. At the same time, I see that my work here is done

I urge those of you who think that Orrin, though a lefty, is the best group blogger, to vote early and often.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:51 PM

THERE GOES THE NEIGHBOURHOOD

Betting on the Studs (Steve Friess, Newsweek, December 12th, 2005)

Standing on a desolate stretch of property dotted with sagebrush and litter 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas, former Hollywood Madam Heidi Fleiss surveys the sexual frontier. She's sketching out her vision for Heidi's Stud Farm, the country's first legal brothel serving female customers. This pleasure palace will be shaped like a castle, with a marble-floored great room, a spa, a sex-toy shop and secluded bungalows where 20 Casanovas will spend quality time with the clientele (at $250 an hour).

But Fleiss may not be welcome in these parts. As a convicted felon—she served time in prison in the late '90s on charges stemming from her high-priced call-girl operation in L.A.—Fleiss may find it difficult to get a license. And some owners of the state's legal bordellos (where rates range from several hundred to several thousand dollars, depending on the activities) worry that Fleiss's business could give Nevada's religious conservatives ammunition to get prostitution outlawed altogether.

"Heidi Fleiss scares the hell out of me," says George Flint, lobbyist for the Nevada Brothel Association, which represents some of the state's 26 legal houses of ill repute, most of them dressed-up doublewides with names like the Chicken Ranch and the Cherry Patch. "Our industry is not so firm, so to speak, that we need to flirt with some secondary activity that could bring down the whole house of cards." Because the brothel laws all refer to prostitutes as "she" and require cervical STD tests for sex workers, Fleiss would need to get the statutes reworded to cover her studs. Richard Ziser, president of the conservative group Nevada Concerned Citizens, warns: "She may bring enough publicity to cause a problem for the industry."

What hope is there for the West when even the reprobates choose security over freedom?



Posted by Peter Burnet at 5:47 PM

THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KING’S COUNSEL

McLachlin urges judges to go beyond letter of law (Janice Tibbetts, The Ottawa Citizen, December 5th, 2005)

Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, says Canada's chief justice.

Beverley McLachlin, in a speech delivered in New Zealand, took on critics who say judges have no business going beyond the strict letter of the constitution to strike down laws and enforce rights.

"The rule of law requires judges to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly enacted laws or hostile public opinion," said a prepared text of the lecture Chief Justice McLachlin gave to law students at Victoria University of Wellington late last week.

"There is certainly no guarantee or presumption that a given list of constitutional principles is complete, even assuming the good faith intention of the drafters to provide such a catalogue."

Chief Justice McLachlin set out a blueprint for when judges must rely on unwritten principles, which she defined as "norms that are essential to a nation's history, identity, values, and legal system."

Yet another judge shilling for judicial supremacy is hardly news, but Her Honour’s reliance on the rule of law is a little like Vladimir Putin quoting the Declaration of Independence. The rule of law, of course, dictates that we are ruled by laws, not men, and certainly not by the unelected, unaccountable, privileged members of one elite profession that claims the right to trump the opinions of democratically elected representatives..

More:
The Rule of Law
(William Einwechter, Vision Forum Ministries, March 29th, 2005)

Republicans generally follow the conservative understanding of the “rule of law.” When conservatives speak of the rule of law they mean that properly enacted law is binding on everyone — no one is above the law — including presidents, judges, legislators, etc. Thus, the chief authorities in American politics are the written laws contained in the federal and individual state constitutions and the statutes established by duly elected legislatures.

Conservatives stress that we must respect the law as we find it and submit to it, even if we think the law is arcane or unjust. Conservatives remind us that our civil law has emerged through the crucible of experience, and, no doubt, reflects a measure of wisdom that should not be lightly set aside. If the law is to be changed, it should be done so carefully, slowly, and only by the action of those in government who are constitutionally empowered to do so. In American politics, this power is given to the legislative branch of government. The role of the executive branch is to see that the laws are carried out, while the role of the judicial branch is to make sure that the will of the legislature as reflected in the letter of the law is properly understood and applied.

To conservatives the rule of law also means that, ultimately, we are governed not by men, but by written law — a government of law, not a government of men.

Democrats generally follow the liberal understanding of the “rule of law.” Liberals differ with conservatives in their conception of the purpose of law. Conservatives view the law as a deposit of wisdom, and see it as a means of restraining the evil proclivities of men and of bringing order to society. Liberals, while not denying the need for order, see the law in a different light. They take a much more utilitarian approach to law, making it a tool for social change.

Furthermore, contrary to conservatives who place law in the context of fixed principles and higher law, liberals set law in the context of evolutionary thinking. Man is changing and evolving. Law, according to liberals, finds its ultimate source in man. Hence, law is not based on fixed principles or unchanging higher law, but upon evolving man. So as man evolves and becomes more enlightened, law must reflect this and change with him. Law that suited man in an earlier stage of his development is no longer viable for modern man and his society.

But since man’s evolution to higher levels of understanding is not at the same rate, it is necessary that an enlightened “elite” lead the way for the rest of us whose evolutionary clocks are slower. This “elite” have found that “law” is a very useful tool for bringing about societal change. The quickest and most effective means to accomplish this change is not through the legislature where elected representatives must take into account the views of their constituents, but through the courts where activist judges can sweep away constitutional and statutory law by their new, enlightened “rulings.”

Thus for liberals, the rule of law often means no more than the rule of judges, i.e., the judge’s interpretation of the law, or simply the judge’s opinion on what the law should be. The rest, the executive and legislative branches of government and all citizens, are bound to submit to their decrees from the bench.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:16 PM

IT'S NOT LIKE THEY CARE WHAT COMES AFTER THEM:

What planet are the eco-cultists on? (Mark Steyn, 06/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

The eco-doom-mongers were speculating on possible changes in thermohaline circulation in the Atlantic - or, as the Daily Mail put it: "Is Britain on the brink of a New Ice Age?" Europe could get so chilly that shivering Muslim rioters might burn the entire Peugeot fleet on the first night. Which would be good for the environment, presumably. After that, they'd be reduced to huddling round the nearest fire-breathing imam for warmth. [...]

For anywhere other than Antarctica and a few sparsely inhabited islands, the first condition for a healthy environment is a strong economy. In the past third of a century, the American economy has swollen by 150 per cent, automobile traffic has increased by 143 per cent, and energy consumption has grown

45 per cent. During this same period, air pollutants have declined by 29 per cent, toxic emissions by 48.5 per cent, sulphur dioxide levels by 65.3 per cent, and airborne lead by 97.3 per cent. Despite signing on to Kyoto, European greenhouse gas emissions have increased since 2001, whereas America's emissions have fallen by nearly one per cent, despite the Toxic Texan's best efforts to destroy the planet.

Had America and Australia ratified Kyoto, and had the Europeans complied with it instead of just pretending to, by 2050 the treaty would have reduced global warming by 0.07C - a figure that would be statistically undectectable within annual climate variation. In return for this meaningless gesture, American GDP in 2010 would be lower by $97 billion to $397 billion - and those are the US Energy Information Administration's somewhat optimistic models.

I've mentioned before the environmentalists' ceaseless fretting for the prospect of every species but their own. By the end of this century, the demographically doomed French, Italians and Spaniards will be so shrivelled in number they may have too few environmentalists to man their local Greenpeace office. Is that part of the plan? To create a habitable environment with no humans left to inhabit it? If so, destroying the global economy for 0.07C is a swell idea.


It actually is the plan.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:31 PM

THE GREATEST BLESSING (via Robert Schwartz):

Downloaded 'choice' is no substitute for classic prayers (Christopher Howse, 30/11/2005, Daily Telegraph)

When the Prince of Wales married Camilla Parker Bowles last April he was said by one of the less charitable tabloid newspapers that blow about the shopping centres of our nation to have decided to "apologise for his adultery".

Bride and groom, in "an extraordinary act of public penitence", it was reported, were to be forced to declaim these words about their sinful shenanigans: "We do earnestly repent, And are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; The remembrance of them is grievous unto us; The burden of them is intolerable. Have mercy upon us."

In reality, it was no "extraordinary" act of public penitence at all, but the familiar words of the general confession from the Communion service of the Book of Common Prayer. Stirring stuff, certainly, but a prayer that once every schoolboy knew.

Something has gone wrong. Those words penned by Thomas Cranmer more than 400 years ago have grown unfamiliar. Worse, they have been replaced by "tired and trite" language designed to be accessible to modern worshippers. [...]

Christianity is a gift from its founder. It was not devised by a group of well-meaning human beings as a programme of appealing, popular ploys. In private prayer, where, on the advice of Jesus, you go into your room and shut the door, you speak in your own words, one-to-one with your Father. In public worship, it is quite otherwise.

Public worship is the inheritance of the Church, which is the Body of Christ. No one with a conscience dare disregard the command of Jesus: "Do this in memory of me." So, for the service of Holy Communion, or the sacrament of Baptism, for example, it is impossibly wrong to try a DIY approach.

Not even Archbishop Cranmer started from scratch. [...]

The greatest blessing for the language of worship is to be left alone. Strange phrases become familiar and beloved; the least obvious grows transparent through use. "Prevent us, O Lord, in all our doings," might be misunderstood by a child. Once the meaning is learnt, the archaism is no obstacle. Archaism goes towards dignity, gravity and beauty. They realised that 400 years ago, and elevated their speech in formal prayers, never thinking the newest street slang would improve it.

To the common inheritance of the body of Christendom, held in trust, there is a public right of access. Irregular churchgoers least of all should be offered the latest fad of the local "liturgy" committee. True democracy includes the votes of generations who went before and decided to leave a heritage not for squandering. That argument is a conservative one. But this is a conservative newspaper.


It's impossible not to cringe when someone uses a version of the Bible other than the King James.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:31 PM

LET'S ASSUME THE BEST, THEY'RE JUST GROTESQUE:

Wrongly accused? a review of The Myth of Hitler's Pope By Rabbi David G. Dalin (FRANCIS PHILLIPS, Jerusalem Post)

History can be fickle. Until 1963, Pope Pius XII was regarded as a defender, even a champion, of the Jews during the fascist period. Then, in 1963, Rolf Hochhuth, a German playwright, wrote Der Stellvertreter (The Deputy) - a play attacking Pius for his alleged "silence" while the Holocaust was taking place. Other writers followed suit, not least John Cornwell, to whose much-publicized book, Hitler's Pope, the title of this volume alludes.

The author of this book, an ordained rabbi, is a professor of history and political science at Ave Maria University, Florida. His book, which is robust, polemical and argumentative, deploys much documentation to show that the portrayal of the pope as a Nazi sympathizer and anti-Semite is at best grotesque, at worst deliberately false. Given the wealth of evidence he assembles, it seems strange that such a notion should ever have been taken seriously. Rabbi Dalin argues persuasively that it has been used by Western liberals to further their own hidden agenda: an attack on Judaeo-Christian civilization itself, and in particular on the bastion of this civilization, the Catholic Church. [...]

It is perverse how those who perpetuate the myth ignore the overwhelming documentation in Pius XII's favor by the very people he is supposed to have despised.

RABBI DALIN attempts to set the record straight. His best-known source is Three Popes and the Jews by the Jewish diplomat and historian Pinchas Lapide, which was published in 1967. Weighing all the evidence at his disposal, Lapide calculated that "Pius saved at least 700,000 but possibly 860,000 Jews from death" - more than all the other relief agencies put together. This enormous effort was achieved largely through the church's own religious houses in Italy, and through the papal nunciatures in other European countries such as Hungary and Bulgaria.

Both Archbishop Roncalli (later to become Pope John XXIII) and Archbishop Montini (later to become Pope Paul VI) were charged by Pius to do what they could to save Jewish lives. Theologian Henri de Lubac SJ was similarly directed, as were countless other priests and senior members of the church's hierarchy. Convents, monasteries and presbyteries all over Europe opened their doors to Jewish fugitives; more than 1,000 found asylum at the papal summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, and hundreds were hidden in the Vatican itself. It is estimated that more than 80 percent of Rome's Jews were saved by the intervention of the pope.

Albert Einstein paid tribute to Pius XII as early as 1940, saying that in Germany, "only the Catholic Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth." When Pius died in 1958 he was deeply mourned by the Jews. Golda Meir, then Israel's foreign minister, wrote to the Vatican: "When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the pope was raised for the victims."

One telling detail is omitted from this well-researched book: after the war the chief rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, converted to Catholicism; in a personal tribute to Pius he took "Eugenio" as his baptismal name.

So how could the slur of Pius's "silence" ever gain the slightest credibility? Although the pope was not silent in his actions, in his directives to church personnel and in his communications with Allied diplomats, he deliberately refrained from making public statements attacking Hitler during the war. Was this silence culpable? His reason, heavily influenced by Jewish and diplomatic advice, was that not only would a public protest not help the Jews, but it would actually increase their persecution.

The former chief rabbi of Denmark, Marcus Melchior, a Holocaust survivor, argued that "it is an error to think Pius XII could have had any influence whatsoever. If the pope had spoken out, Hitler would have massacred more than six million Jews." When Holland's bishops did courageously protest the rounding up of Dutch Jews, the Nazis instantly retaliated with even harsher measures. To have excommunicated Hitler - a former Catholic - would, as historical examples demonstrate, have had a similar effect.

Such an imposed silence must have caused Pius great inner agony.


As with the spate of books celebrating the Founders, it's fun to watch the Left lose control of the historical narrative.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:30 PM

BUSHENOMICS 101:

President Discuses Economy and Tax Relief in North Carolina (President George W. Bush, John Deere-Hitachi Construction Machinery Corporation, Kernersville, North Carolina, 12/05/05)

Government does not create wealth. American and businesses and workers and farmers and entrepreneurs create the wealth for this country. (Applause.) And so the role of the government is to create an environment where the small businesses can grow into a big business, where the entrepreneur can flourish, where people who dream about owning a home are able to own a home. In our economy, our most precious resource is the talent of the American worker -- and there is no limit to what we can do when people have the freedom to make a better life for themselves and their family. (Applause.)

Ours is a confident and optimistic nation -- and our trust in the American people has brought us through some pretty tough times. In the past five years, our economy has endured a stock market collapse, a recession, terrorist attacks, corporate scandals, high energy costs, and devastating natural disasters. These were all shocks to our economy, which I felt required decisive action. I believe that economy grows when people are allowed to keep more of their own money, to be able to save and to spend. (Applause.)

And so I called on the United States Congress to let the people keep more of their own money, to cut their taxes, and Congress responded. We lowered your taxes and gave you an opportunity to keep more of what you earn -- and let you decide the best way to spend your own money. We cut taxes on families by lowering the tax rates, and by doubling the child credit, and reducing the marriage penalty. I felt we shouldn't penalize marriage; I thought we ought to reward marriage in the tax code. (Applause.)

These cuts are making a real difference to American families. I just met one of your co-workers, Kirby Hartsell. Kirby is an Air Force veteran; he did a tour in South Korea. He and his wife, Carol, have three children: Olivia, David and Claire. When we cut taxes, the Hartsells received a refund check that they put in the bank for themselves and to save for their children. This year, the Hartsells saved $2,200 on their 2004 federal taxes because of our tax cuts. Now I know some in Washington say that's not a lot of money -- well, it's a lot of money to the Hartsells. (Applause.) And when the folks in Washington, D.C., say that our working families don't need that tax relief, they ought to come right here to North Carolina and talk to the Hartsells, just like I did. (Applause.)

We not only reduced the taxes on individuals and families, we cut the taxes on dividends and capital gains to encourage job-creating investment. I understand most new jobs in America -- and I hope you understand this, too -- most new jobs in America are created by small business owners. (Applause.) And so we cut the taxes -- we cut the taxes for our small businesses. Most small businesses pay taxes at the individual income tax rate. And so when you hear us talking about lowering the taxes on individuals, I want you to connect that with lowering taxes on small businesses. And we created incentives for small businesses to invest in new equipment so that they can expand and create jobs. To help our farmers and entrepreneurs pass on a lifetime of hard work to their loved ones, we put the death tax on the road to extinction.

Now some of those people up in Washington said the tax cuts wouldn't work. In the spring of 2003, one Democrat leader called tax relief a "tragedy," and said it would not create jobs or grow the economy. Another Democratic leader said the tax cuts "are ruining our economy and costing us jobs." All comes with the job, by the way -- doing what you think is right, and people laying out the criticism. But I want to remind people of the facts: Since those words were spoken, our economy has added nearly four and a half million new jobs. (Applause.)

Just this past Friday, the latest figures show our economy added 215,000 jobs in the month of November alone. Our unemployment rate is down to five percent. That's lower than the average of the 1970s, the 1980s and 1990s. The latest numbers also show the economy grew at 4.3 percent last quarter. (Applause.) And it has been growing at near that average for more than two years. This economy of ours is on the move. People are being able to find work, and that's what's important to me. I want Americans working. I want anybody who wants a job to be able to find work -- good paying, steady work -- and that's what's happening in America. (Applause.)

Americans are buying homes, and that's good news for this country. We hit an all-time high in October, in terms of home buying. More Americans now own their homes than any time in our nation's history. Minority ownership -- home ownership is at an all-time high in the United States of America. (Applause.) Real disposable income is up; our consumers are confident. New orders for durable goods, like machinery, have risen sharply, and shipments of manufactured goods are up, as well. Business activity in our manufacturing sector reported its 30th straight month of growth. In the past five years, productivity has grown at some of the fastest rates since the 1960s. Our small businesses are thriving. Fortunately, I didn't listen to the pessimists about tax cuts. The tax cuts are working. (Applause.)

We've been wise with your money, as well. Each year I've been in office, we've cut the rate of growth in non-security discretionary spending. We're on track to reach our goal of cutting the budget deficit in half by 2009. Thanks to tax relief, and spending restraint, and pro-growth economic policies, this economy is strong, businesses are booming, and the people in this country are working. (Applause.) See, we can't take this growth for granted. So we're moving forward with a comprehensive agenda that's going to keep the economy growing to make sure people have got a hopeful future. Keeping this economy growing begins with a commitment to keeping your taxes low, and at the same time being wise about how we spend your money.

Unfortunately, just as we're seeing the evidence of how our tax cuts have helped the economy, we're hearing some voices in Washington that want to raise your taxes. The tax relief we set -- that we delivered is set to expire in a couple of years. In other words, it's not permanent -- it can go away. And unless Congress acts, you're going to get a big tax hike when that happens.

Some even say we should repeal the tax relief sooner. If that happens, a family of four making $60,000 today would see their federal income taxes eventually go up by more than 50 percent. I want you to think about that. As you work hard and balance your family budgets and try to save for the future, back in Washington some folks want to take more out of your paycheck by rolling back the tax cuts. When you hear people say that we don't need to make the tax relief permanent, what they're really saying is they're going to raise your taxes. One way to keep this economy growing is to have certainty in our tax code, and to help you keep -- and to keep -- let you keep more of your paycheck, and so the United States Congress needs to make this tax relief permanent. (Applause.)

We're going to re-double our efforts to restrain the spending appetite of the federal government. Listen, we're at war, and we're going to spend what it takes to support our troops in harm's way. (Applause.) And that means we've got to show real discipline in other areas of the federal budget.

Earlier this year I submitted a budget that proposed an actual cut in non-security discretionary spending. It's the most disciplined budget proposal since Ronald Reagan was in the White House, and Congress is set to meet this target -- and I appreciate their hard work. I also proposed to terminate or reduce more than 150 government programs that are under-performing or not meeting needs of the American people. I'm pleased to report it looks like the Congress is poised to deliver savings on more than 90 of these programs. For the first time since 1997, Congress is poised to deliver more than $35 billion in savings in entitlement programs. By taking action to restrain spending, we're on our track to cut that deficit in half by 2009.

But there's a lot of work that needs to be done. In the long-term, the most significant deficits will occur as baby boomers retire, and more people receive Social Security and Medicare benefits. There's unfunded liabilities in our Social Security and Medicare systems. That means that there's a lot of baby boomers retiring who have been promised more benefits with fewer people paying into the system. That's what that means. And unless we do something about it, these unfunded liabilities, we're going to put a great burden on our children and our grandchildren.

Reform of Social Security and Medicare is an important issue for the American people. And I've been talking about it, and I'm going to keep talking about it, because I strongly believe the United States Congress has an obligation to do something about it. (Applause.) My attitude is, when you get elected to office in Washington, D.C., you have an obligation to confront problems, not pass them on to future generations and future Congresses. (Applause.)

Our approach on spending is clear: Working families have to set priorities for their spending, and so should the federal government. Unfortunately, we have too many politicians back in Washington who preach fiscal discipline while voting against spending cuts -- and too many who think the only answer for runaway spending is to raise your taxes. My solution is to keep your taxes low and to be fiscally sound about how we use your money. (Applause.)

As we think about ways to make sure this economy remains strong today and strong tomorrow, one thing we've got to work on is our energy. I mean, we've got to be less dependent on foreign sources of energy if we want this economy to remain vibrant. High gasoline and heating costs are a tax on the working people, and they're a tax on small businesses, and they drain the budgets of people working hard; they make it expensive for people to run their companies. And they both affect our economic and national security. So our goal is to work for a day in which America is no longer dependent, beginning with less dependent on foreign sources of energy.

We made a pretty good start with an energy bill I signed this summer. It encourages conservation, and that makes sense. One way to become less dependent on foreign sources of energy is to use less of it. We made -- we're spending money on making sure we can burn coal in a clean way; clean coal technologies make a lot of sense. We've got a lot of coal in the United States of America, and we need to figure out how to use it cleanly. We need to do a better job of making sure we can get natural gas from overseas -- liquified natural gas into the United States. We don't have enough liquified natural gas portals to allow that gas to come here, and we need to expand that in the United States.

We're promoting renewable sources of energy, like ethanol and biodiesel. It makes sense to be able to use corn or soybeans to power our -- power our automobiles. I mean, one of these days, hopefully, the President sits down, opens up the crop report and says, my, we've got a lot of corn, it means we're less dependent on foreign sources of energy. It makes sense to explore that. We're spending money on hydrogen. One of these days I hope your grandchildren or your children can start a car and have hydrogen being the source of power.

So we've got a good bill on the table that I signed. But we've got to do more. We've got to do more. Listen, Katrina hit us, and Rita hit us, and we realize how dependent and how fragile our infrastructure is when it comes to gasoline. Listen, your prices went up -- I know that. And these storms show that we've got bottlenecks in the system, and there are shortages. Now, fortunately, today's gasoline prices are down nearly to what they were before Katrina and Rita, and that's good news. But we ought to take notice of what happened. Congress needs to pass legislation that will allow us to build and expand refineries. Do you realize we have not built a new refinery in the United States since the early 1970s? In order to take the pressure off your pocketbook, it seems to make sense to me that we need to expand the amount of supply of gasoline. The more gasoline there is available for our consumers, the less pressure there will be. (Applause.)

We've got to produce and refine more crude oil and natural gas here at home in environmentally sensitive ways. And we can do that. The most promising site for energy in America is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. I don't know if you realize this, but technology today enables us to take a very small portion of the land -- 2,000 acres out of 19 million acres -- and use that 2,000-acre site to exploit the oil and gas resources in that vast area, with little or no impact on the land or wildlife. And that's important for people to understand, the facts involved: developing this tiny area could yield up to a million barrels of oil a day. That's a million barrels of oil a day less from a foreign source of energy. I can't tell you how important I think it is for the United States Congress to authorize a pro-growth, pro-job, pro-environment exploration of ANWR. (Applause.)

We prosper as a country when working people can look to the future with confidence. And people are more confident when they own something. And that's why I've promoted an ownership society -- an ownership society in which people own their own homes, and have control over their health care accounts. They can own their own small businesses. Americans need to know that their hard work will be rewarded, and that the institutions they depend upon are reliable. And so I want to talk about some reforms and some ideas for job training and health care.

We need to prepare Americans to take advantage of the opportunities of the 21st century. One thing is certain, is that this economy of ours changes, and as it changes, we've got to make sure the workers have got the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st century. It's one of the real challenges of our society.

I'm a big believer, by the way, in community centers -- community colleges. I think they work. I think they work well because they are available and they're affordable. And they have got flexibility in their curriculum. I know that firsthand, that you've got a good system here in North Carolina because I've been to some of your community colleges. I've been to Forsythe Technical Community College. I've seen workers who were in the textile industry receiving help necessary to go back to school to become health care workers. And with a little bit of government help, they are able to gain new skills and find permanent work at better pay. And that's really the challenge ahead of us, isn't it -- to make sure that we match our workers' desire to work with the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st century. (Applause.)

We've got a good program out of Washington, D.C. It's $125 million a year in grants to help community colleges. More importantly, it's to help the workers going to community colleges. I'm working with Congress to make sure that we work with these schools that are developing curriculum for jobs which actually exist. We don't need people being trained for work where jobs don't exist; we need people being able to match the job demand with the curriculum. And it's happening. Congress needs to renew the job training program for our community college system, and give us more flexibility to make sure that the money actually gets to the workers, not to the bureaucracies involved with the program. (Applause.)

We need a health care system that makes sure that health care is available and affordable for all our people. And we need a health care system that puts patients in charge of the health care decisions, that offers greater choice, and allows you to have control over -- over your plan. There's a new product called health savings accounts -- HSAs -- and they're a step toward consumer-driven health care.

Now, let me try to explain this to you. Under this type of plan, you or your employer can put money tax-free into what they call a health savings account. And you use that money in your account for routine medical expenses. And if you don't use it all up, you can roll it over to the next year, tax free. And the money in the account earns interest tax free. In other words, it's a tax-free account. The money goes in tax free, it stays in tax free, and it comes out tax free. And it's your money, and you control it, and you pay routine health care expenses.

And you couple that with a high-deducible insurance policy -- paid by yourself if you're self-employed, or your company -- that pays for catastrophic care above a certain deductible if you get really sick or you get really hurt. Now, the advantage of this program is that, one, you make the decisions. Secondly, you own the HSA, and if you happen to change jobs -- listen, we're in a society where people are changing jobs. And one of the uncertainty that comes with job changes is that you -- a fellow or a woman worries about health care. Under this plan, it's your own health care plan, and you can take it with you to your next employer. And the employer can help you with your HSA, if that's the deal you're able to strike with them. In other words, if you own your health care plan, it brings certainty into your life. It makes your future more stable.

These high-deductible policies have lower premiums, and that's what you've got to know, which provide savings for the self-employed or the small business owner or for the large company. People are beginning to understand the advantages of health savings accounts. Since I signed a bill into law that allowed for the existence of health savings accounts, a million Americans have enrolled. Most are families with children -- and nearly 40 percent of HSA owners were uninsured before they got their account. Now we're going to strengthen health savings accounts, make them more available and more affordable so people have more choices when it comes to health care.

Now that's just one part of a comprehensive health initiative. Congress needs to pass association health plans. I don't know if there's any small business owners here -- small businesses sometimes have trouble affording health care. They need to be allowed to pool risk across jurisdictional boundaries so they can buy health insurance at the same discounts that big companies are able to buy health insurance.

The federal government has a responsibility to the elderly and the poor when it comes to health care. That's a commitment our government made. My attitude is, if you're going to provide health care for the elderly, it ought to be good health care. That's why we had the most substantive reforms of Medicare since Lyndon Baines Johnson was the President, since the program was formed. The Medicare plan that is now available for our seniors includes prescription drug coverage and a wide variety of choices for our seniors to choose from. And it's going to become available this January, and if you've got a mother and father on Medicare, I strongly urge you to look on the Internet for medicare.gov, and take a look and explain to your mother or father the options available. It's a good deal. It makes sense to have a modern, reformed Medicare system for our seniors.

We're going to take care of the poor with Medicaid, and to make sure there's a strong safety net available for the poor citizens in the United States. And we're going to be wise about how we set up systems. Since I took office, we've opened or expanded more than 800 community health centers, places for the poor and the indigent to get primary health care. It makes sense to make sure that people go to a primary care facility, such as a health center, and not an emergency room of a hospital.

We need to expand information technology in health care, which a lot of the experts are convinced will lower the cost of health care to the American citizens. To make health care available and affordable, we need medical liability reform. When your doctors get sued, it means there's going to be fewer doctors practicing medicine, and when your doctors get sued, it means your cost of medicine goes up. And for the sake of affordable health care, we need medical liability reform now. (Applause.)

In order to make sure the economy is -- keeps going on, we need a comprehensive health care agenda that gives you the power for making medical decisions, not bureaucracies in Washington, D.C.

Now for the good of the workers, we need to strengthen the rules governing private pensions, as well. You know, most Americans work for private companies that offer traditional pensions. And most companies, like this one, are fulfilling their obligations to their employees and their retirees. But too many companies are not putting away the cash they need to fund the retirement promises they're making to their employees. In other words, they're saying, we'll make sure you got a retirement system, but they're not funding it. Therefore, when -- if the company were to get into financial trouble and go bankrupt, their failure to live up to their promises, their failure to fund their pensions will leave retirees with pension checks that have been slashed.

Now, the federal government insures these pensions, and that means that if more and more companies fail to meet their responsibilities, the federal government might have to step in and bail them out. In that case, it would not only be the retirees who are harmed by the companies not fulfilling their obligations, but it can mean the taxpayers, as well. Every American has an interest in seeing to it that this system gets fixed. So whether you're a worker at a company with an under-funded pension, or a taxpayer, it's what I want you to understand.

In our society, we've had some companies -- big companies go bankrupt, and workers at those companies know what I'm talking about. And so my message to corporate America is: You need to fulfill your promises. When you say to a worker, this is what they're going to get when they retire, you better put enough money in the account to make sure the worker gets that which you said. (Applause.)

The government's current pension rules are confusing and misleading -- they allow companies to technically play by the rules and yet still not fund the promises they've made to their employees. And so Congress needs to straighten up these rules so that there's no confusion, so that everybody understands what I just said. I said, if you make a promise to a worker, you put enough money in the account to fulfill that promise.

So we proposed reforms to the pension rules that say this, that say that companies must accurately measure and report the financial status of their pension plans to make sure they're fulfilling the promises they make. This reform plan would give companies that under-fund their pensions seven years to catch up. That seems reasonable to me. We're going to give you a little time to do what you said you're going to do, but you're going to do what you said you're going to do.

But some in Congress have said this reform is too tough, or some may be on the outskirts of Congress who have said the reform is too tough. And not only that, they want to weaken the current law even further. I believe that if you put in your hours, your pension should be there for you when you retire. Our workers need reform that significantly improves funding for these private pension plans, not a piece of legislation that weakens it. And I'm not going to sign a bill that weakens pension funding for the American workers. (Applause.)

And, finally, keeping this economy strong means welcoming opportunities that a global economy offers -- not fearing those opportunities. And this country is home to about 5 percent of the world's population, which means that 95 percent of potential customers live abroad. By opening up new markets for our goods and our farm products and our services, we will help our economy continue to grow and create opportunity for people right here in our country.

In Washington, there are economic isolationists, people who are afraid of new opportunities. I think they've got to have more faith in the American worker and in the entrepreneur. The folks in North Carolina are showing them why. Today, one of every 12 jobs in North Carolina is exported by -- is supported by exports. In other words, one in 12 of the people who work in this state do so because they're selling a product overseas. And it's just not what you're sending overseas that is helping North Carolina grow. More than 200,000 North Carolinians have jobs because foreign companies have chosen to invest in the Tar Heel state. In other words, this is a good place to be. All across America, we see the same story: Foreign businesses come here because they recognize the quality and the skill and ethic of the American worker. That's why they're coming. (Applause.)

This company is a good example of how trade has transformed American business. In 1837, an Illinois blacksmith named John Deere fashioned a steel plow that let pioneer farmers cut through prairie soil. Today, the company that this guy started ships products -- ships combines made in Illinois to Russia. Interesting, isn't it? A lot of the Deere business is done overseas because the product is good. People want the Deere product. People realize that their society could become more productive if they use products made by John Deere.

You've got an advantage right here in Kernersville. You've got an interesting joint venture with Hitachi. This plant is actually "in-sourcing". Over the past four years, this factory has taken on production that used to be done in Japan and Mexico. You've tripled your workforce. That's what opening markets means. It means good, steady work. It means good opportunity. In the 21st century, no economy can afford to be an island. And to create new opportunities for our workers, we need to keep this economy open to trade and investment. And we've got to make sure that everybody else treats us the way we treat them, that we want to have free trade, and we want to have fair trade. (Applause.)

The textile industry in this state has been through tough times. I understand that. We just did a deal with Central America that says, you treat us the way we treat you. Do you realize products going from the United States to Central America were taxed? Products coming the other way weren't. It seemed to make sense to level the playing field, which we're in the process of doing. But it also means that by working together with Central American partners, North Carolina textiles are more likely to be able to compete with Asian textiles.

My predecessor worked to get China into the WTO. And one of the conditions was that the United States and other WTO members would take steps to prevent their markets from being flooded with cheap Chinese textiles. Last month, we reached an agreement with China to have them meet that obligation under the textile agreements. It's an important agreement. It means that not only are we for free trade with China, but we expect China to be fair with American textile companies and American workers. This agreement adds certainty and predictability for businesses in both America and China.

Here's what I believe. I believe free trade is good for jobs. I believe opening markets for U.S. products is smart to do. I know we've got to make sure we have a level playing field because when we have a level playing field, the American worker, the American entrepreneur, and the American farmer can compete with anybody, any time, anyplace. (Applause.)

The greatest opportunity we have to advance the goal of free and fair trade is through the Doha round of trade talks. The Doha trade round has great potential to boost jobs here in America. By reducing and eliminating tariffs and other barriers on industrial goods, and on farm goods -- industrial goods like John Deere products, by the way -- to end unfair subsidies, and open up global markets for our services. Trade ministers will gather in Hong Kong next week for a critical meeting. I told our Trade Representative, Ambassador Rob Portman, that he's got to push for a bold and wide-ranging agreement. Opportunity increasingly depends on a free and fair trading global system, and our administration is going to continue to use our influence to bring greater opportunities for the American worker.

You know, throughout the last century, we often heard pessimists telling us that our best days are behind us, and that the future belongs to others. Our grandparents heard the pessimists in the 1930s and 1940s say that the future belonged to the central planners. Our parents heard the pessimists again in the 1950s, when the Soviet Union launched the first satellite. Some of us remember hearing the pessimists in the 1970s and 1980s, when we were told that America was tired and could no longer compete with Japan. At that moment, Ronald Reagan's tax cuts were just beginning to kick in, and that set off one of the largest economic expansions in history. One newspaper editorialized about "the stench of failure" during that period of time.

You know, the great thing about our history when you look at it is the American people have always proved the pessimists wrong. At the start of a hopeful new century, the American worker is the most productive worker that human history has ever known. (Applause.) At the start of this new century, we have proven that pro-growth economic policies out of Washington, D.C., do work, and can overcome some mighty obstacles. At the start of the century, we recommit ourselves to the notion that the more free people are, the better off your economy will be. (Applause.)

This great country of ours is a place where people can start out with nothing -- and be able to raise a family, and own a home, or start a business. Through all my travels around the world, I'm always struck by how bright the future of America is. Our job in Washington is to keep that future bright and hopeful by making choices that reward hard work and enterprise. This economy is strong, and the best days are yet to come for the American economy. (Applause.)

I'm honored you let me come by. I'm always glad to come back to North Carolina. And I'm particularly pleased to be with the good, fine folks right here at the Deere-Hitachi plant. May God bless you and your families, and may God continue to bless our country. (Applause.)


Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were reasonably good stewards of the modern economy, but lacked the total economic vision on display here: reduced taxes, educational opportunity, free trade, personal welfare net and savings, etc. . Add in the FBI, Social Security and tax reform and you've got a whole series of interlocking pieces that reduce dependence on government and depend on free market mechanisms, social institutions, and personal responsibility.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:22 PM

WHO GUARDS THE GUARDIAN?:

Religion Versus Reality: Who is this man—a mystic, a bumbling political novice or an imminent threat to Iran's established order? (Richard Ernsberger Jr., 12/12/05, Newsweek International)

Iran may be a nasty theocracy, but it's no monolithic evil empire. Indeed, the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said before last June's election that "the existence of two factions [conservative and reformist] serves the regime, like the two wings of a bird." But Ahmadinejad's messianic message has shaken the boughs of the establishment and created turmoil within the conservative leadership at a time when Iran is involved in crucial international negotiations over its nuclear program. Khamenei is said to have thrown his support behind Ahmadinejad just two days before the election last June, supposedly at the urging of his son, Mojtaba. But some experts now believe Khamenei regrets his decision and fears Ahmadinejad more than he did the previous president, Mohammad Khatami, who though a reformist at least supported the status quo.

Clearly, the new president does not—and that makes the country's traditional and very conservative clerical leaders uneasy, partly because they've exploited the current system for personal gain. "The new government is neoconservative and quite hard-line, and that doesn't even do justice to how wacky they are," says Ali Ansari, an associate professor of modern history at St. Andrews University in Scotland. As for Ahmadinejad himself, Ansari describes him as "very naive politically and out of his depth."

It's not clear if Ahmadinejad poses a serious threat to Khamenei's authority, but the new president certainly aims to install a more rigid Islamic government. [...]

Ahmadinejad is not a budding Stalin, many experts suggest, but merely a grossly inexperienced, unpolished political tyro. Says Hamid Reza Jalaipour, a political analyst and professor at Tehran University: "The question is, can his reliance on Imam Mahdi be turned into a political ideology? I don't think so. Even the leading theologians in Qum do not take these allusions seriously."

Parliament doesn't either, apparently. Already it has dismantled the centerpiece of Ahmadinejad's populist program—the Imam Reza Care Fund, better known as the "Love Fund," intended to provide interest-free wedding loans for young people as well as to offer make-work employment programs. Meanwhile, Khamenei may now be working behind the scenes to bolster Rafsanjani at Ahmadinejad's expense.


Ayatollah Khamenei badly miscalculated the last election and the degree to which his machinations had estranged the reformist electorate from the process. But the contradictions have to be forced in Iran sooner or later it may as well be before they've got nukes.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:17 PM

REALISTS GAVE UP ON THEM TOO:

Lech Walesa tells his story of faith at Seton Hall: Former Polish president finally accepts honorary degree conferred in 1982 (SARA K. CLARKE, , December 02, 2005, Newark Star-Ledger)

Former Polish President Lech Walesa said yesterday it was faith that allowed Poland to triumph over Communism, and he credited Pope John Paul II with stirring the nation to rise up in solidarity.

Walesa urged listeners to focus on values as he spoke to a gymnasium full of people at Seton Hall University Thursday, as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

"No one throughout the world gave us the least of a chance to break Communism down," the Nobel laureate said.

"It happened quite simply," he added. "We knelt down and prayed."


No one but Solzhenitsyn and Reagan.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:51 PM

LITERALLY A PINKO:

Yeah, sucking up to Code Pink will get people to take Democrats seriously on national defense issues....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:11 PM

THE WRONG WAY FOR US TO CATCH UP TO CHILE:

Chile’s Pensions Under Fire (Alvaro Vargas Llosa, Independent Institute)

Almost 25 years ago, Chile’s salaried workers were allowed to opt out of the pay-as-you-go pension system and place part of their money in personal savings accounts managed by fund administrators of their own choosing. The majority of workers chose to become the owners of their own assets. Thanks to José Piñera’s reform, Chilean workers have seen their pensions earn an annual return of 10 percent. The cumulative pool of capital now amounts to $85 billion, if one includes the $15 billion that some retired workers have used to buy annuities from insurance companies—almost 90 percent of the nation’s GDP!

Chile’s pension system is much less restricted than other countries’. There are no barriers to entry, which is why six companies are competing in that market as opposed to fewer in other Chilean markets. Commissions have been coming down. If more Chileans decide to participate, they will go further down.

The principled objection one can raise is that in a free society there should not be mandatory savings for salaried workers. True. But even the mandatory aspect, which applies to a fixed sum of pesos, is diluting with time because real wages have tripled since the reform was implemented. In any case, the privatized system is a great leap forward compared to the previous system that had no connection between workers´contributions and their benefits, and when they could not dream of owning savings accounts with an average 10 percent rate of interest. So many Chileans have become used to assuming responsibility for their own retirement that it is politically conceivable that a future leader will one day dare let salaried workers, just like independent workers do today, decide whether they would rather invest in a retirement account or do something else with their money.

The current objections against Chile’s private pensions, however, have nothing to do with this argument. Rather, they charge that half the Chilean workforce will not get a decent pension. But guess what: those are people who either have no job at all, have a part-time job, or who have chosen, as independent workers, to invest their money otherwise. Not to mention those who are simply part of the underground economy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:28 PM

MUSEUMS GOOD, NAVY BAD:

Losing the battleships (Robert Novak, Dec 5, 2005, Townhall)

U.S. Marines, while fighting valiantly in Iraq, are on the verge of serious defeat on Capitol Hill. A Senate-House conference on the Armed Services authorization bill convening this week is considering turning the Navy's last two battleships, the Iowa and Wisconsin, into museums. [...]

The Navy high command is determined to get rid of the battleships, relying for support on an expensive new destroyer at least 10 years in the future.


As the war winds down and defense spending goes vback below 3% of GDP, we won't build the destroyers either.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:24 PM

WHILE THE NEOCONS STILL DREAM OF EMPIRE.... (via Kevin Whited):

Withdrawal Pains: Let's Acknowledge the Reality of Iraq And Stop Talking About Fewer Troops (Robert Kagan, December 4, 2005, Washington Post)

The current discussion about drawing down American troops in Iraq -- whether "immediately," "rapidly" or "as soon as possible" -- would be amusing were it not so dangerously divorced from reality. There could be no greater mistake than drawing down the U.S. force now, at a moment when there is real hope for success if the United States perseveres.

But Democrats calling for these reductions are not the only ones to blame for giving the impression, however mistaken, that the United States is growing short of breath in Iraq just as the situation appears to be improving. The Bush administration has been talking about reducing forces in Iraq ever since the invasion ended in 2003.


No one understands George W. Bush less well than this crowd.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:20 PM

NATURAL REPUBLICANS:

N.J. Democrats Embrace School Choice (Dan Lips, Dec 5, 2005, Human Events)

[A] group of New Jersey Democrats is now breaking ranks with its party in a move that could have implications across the nation.

Assemblywoman Nilsa Cruz-Perez (D-Camden) and four Democrat colleagues are sponsoring legislation to create a corporate tax credit program that would allow businesses to provide tuition scholarships to 4,000 low-income children in Camden, Newark, Orange and Trenton. These students could leave their public schools and attend private schools of their parents' choice. Similar legislation has been proposed in the State Senate.

Cruz-Perez explains her support for this measure: “Expanding schooling and program options for low-income, often minority, students in urban school systems is the most immediate way to address poor educational prospects for these families. It is a necessary step and an urgent one that will also rebuild these neighborhoods and cities.” [...]

Supporters of the measure will face a powerful opponent: The New Jersey Education Association, the state's 190,000-member teachers union. [...]

The teachers union won't be the only obstacle school choice backers will face. Both Acting Governor Richard Codey and Governor-elect Jon Corzine are on record against school vouchers.


It's generally true, but especially obvious in the area of public education, that the Democrats are the enemies of poor minorities.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:16 PM

JUST ONE SAFE HAVEN:

A Contrarian View On China And Interest Rates (Steve Hanke, 12.05.05, Forbes)

Everyone’s calling for a revaluation of about 20%, which I don’t think is going to happen because if you had a 20% revaluation in China, you’d have about a 16% Chinese deflation. This would be like the Great Depression. It would be a disaster. The main population group that would be hit would be the 800 million peasants in rural China. The deflation would just wipe them out. If the idea is to overthrow the Communist government, this will do it. If you revalue the yuan 20%, you’ll get a 16% deflationary impulse, and you’ll have a major revolt on your hands and probably a regime change. I don’t think this will happen because the Chinese know what the results would be. Instead, there will be continued pressure and a very high probability of protectionist legislation coming out of the U.S.

Next, let’s look at U.S. bond purchases. The normal rate of U.S. bond purchases by foreigners is about 2% of gross domestic product. Today, it is about 7% of GDP. About five percentage points of that is from private investment in U.S. bonds. This explains why long-term interest rates are so low. You’ve had a surge of private money coming into the U.S. bond markets. Therefore, anything that would spook foreign private investors is something we have to worry about. I personally think that right now there’s a durable dollar and a durable U.S. bond market, and that these flows explain the so-called low-interest rate puzzle. [...]

My conclusion: stay as safe as you possibly can in your portfolio. I wouldn’t be net long any stock market in the world, with perhaps the possible exception of Japan. [...] I think the dollar remains OK, and U.S. Treasuries, particularly TIPS (Treasury Inflation Protection Securities), are where I’d want to park most liquid assets for safety at this time.


Where's the contrarian bit?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:11 PM

100% EFFECTIVE:

THE EU VERSUS THE US ON AIDS (Der Spiegel, 12/05/05)

SPIEGEL ONLINE spoke with Robin Gorna, head of the UK's Global AIDS Policy Team, about how realistic abstinence is, whether the US is helping or hurting, and how close we are to an AIDS cure. [...]

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The statement released by the EU to mark World AIDS Day seems to criticize the US policy of promoting abstinence as a way of combating HIV and AIDS. Is abstinence a real weapon in that fight? Is it realistic to expect people to abstain from sex?

Robin Gorna: Our Secretary of State (editor's note: International Development Secretary Hilary Benn) has said very clearly that abstinence is fine for some people, but not everyone can abstain, and no-one should die because of sex.


And they won't if they behave morally.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:06 PM

WHY SHOULD THEY FAVOR INSTABILITY? (via Robert Schwartz):

Regime change is needed in Europe (Daily Telegraph, 05/12/2005)

As the American Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, arrives in Europe, it is instructive to look at the areas where her country's interests clash with those of the EU. They fall into six broad categories: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Israel, China and what one might loosely call "supra-nationalism" - that is, the power of the UN, the Kyoto process, the International Criminal Court and so on. These disputes are not unrelated; they are linked by a common ideological thread. In each case, the United States is pro-democracy, the EU pro-stability.

The important thing to recognize is that it makes perfect sense for the dying secular peoples of Europe to favor even an evil stability elsewhere in the world so long as they are left alone themselves.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:02 AM

THE WINNERS WILL BE THOSE THAT BECOME LIKE AMERICA FASTEST:

A new land of promise (Hassan M. Fattah, 12/04/05, The New York Times)

"Getting a visa to Canada or the U.S. is almost impossible now," Tale said. "Here, you just buy a property and you get a residence.

"Dubai is building an environment of freedom that still fits our culture."

Thousands of Iranians, most of them wealthy, are making the leap, investing in real estate, starting businesses and buying second homes, turning this desert country into an Iranian business hub free of the corruption, American penalties and political turbulence they face in Iran.

Tale, who studied in Australia, came last year in the hope of profiting from Dubai's construction boom, which is fed in significant part by Iranian money. His biweekly real-estate guide, Maskan, with its print run of 12,000 copies, disappears from the stands in days.

"This is a bridge between Iran and the West," Tale said. "It's like America 25 years ago, where if you are smart and you have a plan, you can make money." [...]

Iranian businesses make up about a tenth of the companies operating in the so-called Free Zone, Dubai's vast tax-free industrial and business zone, helping to increase trade between the United Arab Emirates and Iran to an expected $7 billion this year from $4 billion in 2003.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:59 AM

GROWN UPS:

Brazil and India surprise G-7 on trade (Graham Bowley, DECEMBER 4, 2005, International Herald Tribune)

Brazil and India have made a surprise offer of trade concessions to the world's leading industrial nations, but one that depends on those countries resolving their discord over agricultural subsidies, challenging the rich nations to find a solution. [...]

The offer from Brazil and India, which are spearheading the position of the developing countries, involves opening their markets further to industrial goods and services. But this proposal, they said, was conditional on the United States and the European Union further dismantling protection of their agricultural markets.

"Brazil is willing to make a further offer in the industrial tariff negotiations," the Brazilian government said in a statement to the G-7. But it added that this would "depend on further moves by the EU and U.S. on agriculture." India said it was "willing to undertake higher cuts provided developed countries can match or take higher cuts."

Nice to see them mature even as the French act childish.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:51 AM

BRITAIN ISN'T EUROPEAN:

Ghost of Napoleon haunts Tony Blair: The divergence of Britain from the Continent can be traced to Bonaparte's greatest victory 200 years ago -- and his enduring legacy. (Niall Ferguson, December 5, 2005, LA Times)

Napoleon's idea of Europe was double-edged. On the one hand, he overthrew decadent dynasties such as the Bourbons of Naples and established what was to become the model for Continental legal systems, the Code Napoléon. Later, in exile, he claimed that he had "wished to found a European system, a European code of laws, a European judiciary" so that "there would be one people in Europe." Yet, at the same time, Napoleonic Europe was without question an authoritarian empire.

What finally killed Napoleon's Europe was the fatal combination of the English Channel and the Russian winter. Nevertheless, it proved impossible to restore the old pre-Napoleonic Europe.

Napoleon fell; Bonapartism lived on, with the civil code and economic dirigisme as perhaps its most enduring legacies.

And how they have endured! Ask yourself what are the biggest differences between England and the Continent?

The answer is that the Europeans have Napoleonic law and economics, and the English, whom he did not conquer, have common law and the free market.

Which is why Tony Blair must often feel that Napoleon's ghost has come back to haunt him.


The Channel likewise kept them free from Hitler and will allow them to ignore the EU when they finally wake up.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:47 AM

DID SECULARS EVEN KNOW LORD OF THE RINGS WAS RELIGIOUS?:

In 'Narnia,' Tycoon Seeks Blockbuster With a Message (Claudia Eller, December 5, 2005, LA Times)

[A] windfall would give the 65-year-old [Philip] Anschutz, whose vast assets include Staples Center, the Los Angeles Kings hockey team, the San Francisco Examiner and Regal Entertainment Group, the world's largest operator of movie theaters, something he needs more than money: credibility as a savvy investor in the movie business.

It could also give Disney something it lacks — a sure-fire movie series on a par with the "Harry Potter" or "Lord of the Rings" franchises, which have reaped billions for rival studios. Anschutz, a religious Christian who has vowed to make wholesome entertainment that doesn't rely on sex, foul language or violence to sell tickets, controls the rights to all seven books in the Narnia series.

But first, the companies must pull off a delicate balancing act, luring religious moviegoers to the allegorical film without turning off mainstream audiences.

"It's a balance to try to market to the widest possible audience," said Disney Studios Chairman Dick Cook. "We're trying to cast the widest net we can."

To that end, Disney is spending mightily — an estimated $120 million to market and distribute the PG-rated film worldwide on more than 8,000 screens.


A 'Narnia' C.S. Lewis might love: The author was highly protective of his work, but modern technology and a civilized directorial touch should avoid any risk of his book being 'blasphemed.' (Alan Jacobs, December 5, 2005, LA Times)
[A]ssuming the technology allows for a dignified Aslan — nothing "remotely approaching the comic" — and has treated the other characters and events in an appropriate style, would Lewis have any reason to complain about the film version of his story?

No, with his stated fears addressed, Lewis would be free to worry about something more crucial: Whether the film preserved the integrity of his story. Having died 42 years ago, he's not available for consultation. But his stepson, Douglas Gresham, co-produced the film and has been spending the last several months reassuring Lewis' Christian fans that the film will faithfully mirror the book. At the heart of it will be Aslan's sacrifice to save poor Edmund and end the long cold winter of the White Witch. If viewers fail to get the message of redemption, it won't be the fault of the filmmakers.

And if the movie's not a work of genius, it's unlikely to be overly vulgar. After all, its director, Andrew Adamson, was raised in a relatively "decent society": New Zealand.

MORE:
See the 9-Minute Supertrailer


Posted by kevin_whited at 9:44 AM

SURVEY NEWS YOU CAN USE

Arabs in survey prefer France over United States (David R. Sands, Washington Times, 12/03/2005)

Arabs across the Middle East remain deeply skeptical of U.S. motives and policies in Iraq, and more than one in five would prefer to see France replace the United States as the world's only superpower, according to a major new survey released yesterday.

In other cutting-edge survey research, investigators have discovered that children prefer Cookie Crisp cereal to shredded wheat.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:36 AM

NON-JEWISH JEWS VS. JEWISH NON-JEWS::

Jewish leaders to devise strategy (Julia Duin, 12/05/05, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

A group of Jewish leaders meets in New York this week to develop a response to the religious right, which they say is eroding civil liberties and planning to "christianize America."

Led by Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, the private meeting is set for today, said an assistant to Mr. Yoffie. [...]

On Nov. 19, Mr. Yoffie compared the religious right to Nazis.

"We understand those who believe that the Bible opposes gay marriage, even though we read that text in a very different way," the rabbi said. "We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations."

Criticism has been strong among conservative-leaning Jews.

"Foxman loves to whine about the religious right and how they're destroying religious liberty in America," said Don Feder, president of Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation.

"Is wanting to keep God in the Pledge of Allegiance Christianizing America? Is opposition to gay marriage Christianizing America? Is efforts to keep public displays of the Ten Commandments Christianizing America? If so, Moses was a Christianizer."


That's what makes it so delicious--it's because Mr. Foxman and Mr. Yoffie despise Judaism that they hate the Evangelicals.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:14 AM

THE PERILS OF SUPERFLUITY:

Tory party faces meltdown as its grassroots troops desert or die (Andrew Pierce, 12/05/05, Times of London)

THE new Tory leader will tomorrow inherit a Conservative Party organisation that is in danger of collapsing in large swathes of the country, with many constituency associations verging on the brink of extinction.

The new leader, expected to be David Cameron, will head a party where almost half of the 450 active associations have fewer than 100 members and 170 have income that has slumped below £1,000-a-year, according to an internal report commissioned by Francis Maude, the party chairman. The situation is so dire that the party leadership has put 200 associations on an “at risk” list. [...]

The report, A 21st Century Party, ordered by the Conservative Party high command, is a devastating indictment of the state of the party. As recently as the 1960s it was one of the biggest mass political movements in the world, with three million members.

Today the figure is closer to 280,000, with the majority of members in receipt of their old age pensions.


Having surrendered Thatcherism to Tony Blair, what was the point of a Tory Party the past ten years?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:43 AM

WATERWORLD:

Holland goes beyond holding back the tide: Nation endeavors to be climate-proof (Colin Nickerson, December 5, 2005, Boston Globe)

The government has begun acquiring thousands of acres of agricultural land and industrial strips along major waterways, which would be used as flood plains in periods of high water.

Dikes along these stretches of river will be lowered, repositioned, or, in some cases, removed.

In dry times, the flats could be used for agriculture, or even for envisioned ''floatable" factories and housing.

But when the rivers swell from winter rains, the land would serve as a natural buffer zone, thus softening the fury of the water by allowing it to spread, and, thus, lowering the risk of a disastrous breaching of the dikes.

On other fronts, Dutch contractors are building and selling ''amphibious" homes that rest on land for most of the time, but that can rise and float on flood waters.

Dutch architects and engineers are working on even more ambitious plans to construct floating farms, industrial plants, greenhouses, and apartment buildings -- including a proposed 12,000-house community, which would be able to bob above floods, near Schiphol International Airport, outside Amsterdam.

After centuries of protecting itself from sea storms and river floods, solely with ''hard" barriers, such as dikes and dams, the Netherlands is now endeavoring to make itself ''climate-proof."


What's the Dutch for Ozymandian?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:40 AM

THE ELEPHANT IN THE BLUE ROOM:

GOP embracing its maverick: Tough race makes Chafee an asset (Rick Klein, December 5, 2005, Boston Globe)

Chafee is the closest thing to a GOP flower child in Washington these days. He's a Brown University classics major who spent seven years shoeing horses before turning to the family business of politics. His liberal positions would be well-suited for a centrist Democrat. The ease with which he speaks of living in harmony with nature marks him as a product of the '60s, and a child of a household that always had a compost pile.

But with the Republican Party's hold on the Senate looking tenuous, the party of Wall Street and the religious right is suddenly chummy with its most prominent environmentalist. With a tough race looming, and a solid conservative challenging Chafee in the primary, Republican elites are sending checks to Rhode Island -- to help Chafee.

And the Democrats, eager to regain control of the Senate, are targeting the one Republican to the left of much of their own caucus. ''Chafee can deny that he is the elephant in the room until he is blue in the face," said Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, ''but he'll never be able to hide the degree to which he is beholden to George Bush and the Bush agenda."


The GOP is the majority party precisely because it contains those who would once have been moderate Democrats, a creature that no longer exists in the wild.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:34 AM

THE 9-11 ERA IS OVER:

9/11 panel says US security still lax: Recommended actions not taken, report warns (Hope Yen, December 5, 2005, Associated Press)

The United States is at great risk for more terrorist attacks because Congress and the White House have failed to enact several strong security measures, members of the former Sept. 11 commission said yesterday.

''It's not a priority for the government right now," said the former chairman, Thomas Kean, in advance of the group's release of a report today assessing how well its recommendations have been followed.

''More than four years after 9/11 . . . people are not paying attention," the former Republican governor of New Jersey said.


The notion that Americans were going to spend the money or tolerate the inconvenience that the security such folk envision would require was always a non-starter. The Commission existed for political reasons, not national security ones.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:19 AM

SO FAR WE HAVE "SURRENDER TO W" OR "SURRENDER TO ZARQAWI":

Democrats Find Iraq Alternative Is Elusive: Party's Elite Differ on How to Shift U.S. Policy (Robin Wright, December 5, 2005, Washington Post)

[A]mong the Democratic foreign-policy elite, dominated by people who previously served in the top ranks of government, there are stark differences -- and significant vagueness -- about a viable alternative.

In interviews, veteran policymakers offered no end of criticism about how President Bush maneuvered the United States into its present predicament, but only one had a clear vision of what he would do if the Iraq problem were handed over to a Democratic administration tomorrow. Several accept Bush's premise that a rapid withdrawal anytime soon would leave Iraq unstable and risk a strategic disaster in the broader Middle East.

"I'm not prepared to lay out a detailed policy or strategy," said former U.N. ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke, who was widely considered the leading candidate to be secretary of state if Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) had won the presidency last year. [...]

The biggest common denominator was the anguish of trying to define a Democratic alternative.


There's the Democratic motto for '06: A Party of Significant Vagueness!


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

NO GUARDIANS, NO PROBLEM:

More Iraqis look to vote secular Dec. 15: Many see the nonsectarian parties as the best alternative for a unified and stable Iraq. (Howard LaFranchi , 12/05/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

"This contest between the secular and religious visions of government is really the main choice to be made," says Adnan Pachachi, a prominent Sunni statesman who has joined Mr. Allawi's Iraqi National list. "It won't be decided in one election, but it is a basic choice between an open and progressive Iraq and one that is backward and continues to fall behind."

"Yes, there is an Islamic identity to the people of Iraq and their history," he adds. "But the question is if we will be Islamic in identity and modern and open, or more like countries where religion plays a more important governing role, like Iran, Afghanistan under the Taliban, and Saudi Arabia. Those examples are not very inspiring."


A viable secular party is all to the good, but Iraqis seem most likely to look to the Iranian example and, when they do, to see a country that just needs to move towards a more Iraq-like constitutional order to become a fully functional liberal democracy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:02 AM

YOU MEAN WE WON'T ALL BE SELLING APPLES ON STREET CORNERS?:

Next year's economy: The forecast brightens (Ron Scherer, 12/05/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

The economic gloom cast in the wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita and the subsequent run-up in energy prices are subsiding. In its place are brighter prospects for 2006, considered a year of slowdown just three months ago.

That means America could enter a fifth year of economic expansion with solid growth, nearly on pace with this year.


So the Democrats Plan A, to the extent they had one, was to run in '06 against George Bush's Hooveresque economy and his insistence on keeping American troops in Iraq as part of his permanent oil empire. What's Plan B?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:49 AM

VE KNOW NUTINK!:

Rice to claim Euro backing for CIA prisons (Alec Russell in Washington and Kate Connolly in Berlin, 05/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

In a preview of her trip, Stephen Hadley, Miss Rice's successor as President George W Bush's national security adviser, said: "There is a lot of co-operation at a lot of levels.

"One of the things she will be saying is: 'Look, we are all threatened by terror'," he told Fox News. "We need to co-operate in its solution."

The administration has long argued that its actions in the fight against terrorism comply with the US constitution, US law and US treaty obligations, claims challenged by human rights groups.

But since the publication in the Washington Post of the report about the CIA prisons, the administration has faced a new difficulty: European officials have argued that secret CIA prisons would violate European law.

Mr Hadley foreshadowed Miss Rice's riposte, saying: "We respect the sovereignty of those countries with whom we co-operate."

This is seen as diplomatic code for saying that anything the CIA gets up to in Europe is done with the permission of the host country.


If they aren't careful, she'll stop letting the Europeans hide behind her skirt.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:56 AM

AN ASSERTION ISN'T ACTUALLY A MORAL PRINCIPLE:

How much torture is OK? (Cathy Young, December 5, 2005, Boston Globe)

IT IS A shocking sign of the times that we are having a debate about the appropriateness of torture. Some would say that it's a sign of our democracy's moral decline; others, of the desperate times that have driven us to desperate measures. Either way, those of us who do not want the free world to lose its soul to terrorism must stand up and be counted. [...]

It is said, rightly, that torture degrades both its victims and its perpetrators.


Why? If you catch someone you were trying to kill and he has information that could save lives, why is it morally degrading to harm him briefly in order to obtain it?


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:53 AM

STILL DON’T BELIEVE IN THE DEVIL?

Saddam's lawyers walk out of court (The Telegraph, December 5th, 2005)

The defence team in the trial of Saddam Hussein has walked out of court in protest at the legitimacy of the proceedings.

The lawyers left the court in Baghdad after the chief judge refused to allow Ramsey Clark, the former US Attorney General and member of the defence team, to challenge the legitimacy of the trial.

Mr Clark said he only needed two minutes to present his argument to the court, but Rizgar Mohammed Amin, the chief judge, said the tribunal had been established under the law by an elected Iraqi government and that only Saddam's chief lawyer could address the hearing.

Mr Amin told the defence it should submit its motion and writing and warned that the court would appoint replacement lawyers if the defence team walked out.

Saddam Hussein then shouted: "We reject the appointment of court employees to defend us," before chanting "long live Iraq, long live the Arab state".

When the judge explained that he was ruling in accordance with the law, Saddam replied: "This is a law made by America and does not reflect Iraqi sovereignty."[...]

International observers have raised concerns about the court, which operates under a mix of Iraq's criminal code, some international statutes and others written specifically for the tribunal, which was originally formed under US occupation.

Imagine how morally confused, if not depraved, one must become in order to convince oneself that the road to international peace and justice lies in saving Saddam Hussein



Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:30 AM

FOR THE ELITES, BY THE ELITES

Regime change is needed in Europe (The Telegraph, December 5th, 2005)

As the American Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, arrives in Europe, it is instructive to look at the areas where her country's interests clash with those of the EU. They fall into six broad categories: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Israel, China and what one might loosely call "supra-nationalism" - that is, the power of the UN, the Kyoto process, the International Criminal Court and so on. These disputes are not unrelated; they are linked by a common ideological thread. In each case, the United States is pro-democracy, the EU pro-stability.[...]

This difference in approach was, as it were, encoded in the DNA of the two organisations. The US was born out of a revolt against autocratic government. In consequence, it sympathises naturally with democracy, decentralisation and national self-determination. Its founding creed was adumbrated by Thomas Jefferson, who believed that power should be exercised by the individual in preference to the state, and by lower in preference to higher tiers of government.

The EU, by contrast, was a reaction against the pre-war plebiscitary democracy which, in its patriarchs' eyes, had led to fascism and conflict. Its governing principle is the precise opposite of Jeffersonianism: the doctrine of "ever-closer union". Its leaders believe to this day that states are better run by experts than by populist politicians and, just as they apply that belief to their own institutions, so they extend it to other continents. Indeed, the distinction between the two unions can be inferred from the opening words of their founding charters: the American Constitution begins "We, the people"; the Treaty of Rome begins "His Majesty the King of the Belgians".

There is only one part of the world where America does not extend its principles: the EU itself. Everywhere else, this administration has moved beyond the Cold War tendency to do business with local strongmen ("he may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's our son-of-a-bitch"). George Bush has grasped that undemocratic states tend to export their problems, which makes them objectively inimical to Western interests, however notionally pro-Western their leaders.

But, when it comes to Europe, he is happy to indulge the elites even as they take more power from their peoples. [...]

But Miss Rice should be careful. Forty years of solid Washington support for the EU have not led to any reciprocal pro-Americanism in Brussels. As she has found before, and will find again, Europeans often exhibit a psychotic desire to bite the hand that freed them.

Why would the writer call them psychotic when he has just argued so convincingly that they have little use for democracy?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:22 AM

TRANSFUSION TIME:

Talk of Changes in White House Staff Turns to Its Chief (ELISABETH BUMILLER, 12/05/05, NY Times)

"I hope you know that coming into a new year, some people say, 'I want to move on,' " Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, said in a recent interview.

Mr. Card named no names, and he cast any coming change as part of the normal ebb and flow of presidential personnel. Still, some speculate about Mr. Card in particular and whether he will finally make the move to become Treasury secretary.

For more than a year now, Republicans close to the White House have said that Mr. Card was interested in the job. But the buzz picked up last week after Mr. Card and Dan Bartlett, the president's counselor, were hit by complaints about Treasury Secretary John W. Snow at a retreat of House and Senate Republican leaders on the Chesapeake Bay.

The grousing about Mr. Snow was so loud that even Democratic Congressional aides were aware that the House speaker, Representative J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, had complained to Mr. Card and Mr. Bartlett that the administration needed to be more aggressive in talking about the economy.


Good economic news and the coming election in Iraq should make it a perfect time for Mr. Card to bail with dignity.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

SNUB SHRUG:

Japan PM shrugs off China snub (BBC, 12/05/05)

Japanese PM Junichiro Koizumi has shrugged off China's postponement of annual talks allegedly triggered by his visits to a controversial war shrine. [...]

"As far as I'm concerned any time is OK," Mr Koizumi told reporters.

"China is the one who decided to postpone the talks. That is fine with me."


The best response to nationalism is always contempt.


December 4, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:59 PM

HEADLINE OF THE DAY (via Jonathan Kemp):

U.S. Missile, al-Qaida Death May Be Linked (U.S. Missile, al-Qaida Death May Be Linked (BASHIRULLAH KHAN, December 4, 2005, AP)


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:03 PM

CHEAPSKATES:

What Would J.F.K. Have Done? (THEODORE C. SORENSEN and ARTHUR SCHLESINGER Jr., December 4, 2005, NY Times)

WHAT did we not hear from President Bush when he spoke last week at the United States Naval Academy about his strategy for victory in Iraq?

We did not hear that the war in Iraq, already one of the costliest wars in American history, is a running sore.


Here's a question we might consider: if Iraq is the costliest war in American history at $224 billion and 2,000 dead when we have a population of 300 million and a GDP over $12 trillion, how can we justify not fighting more wars?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:15 AM

GOSH, YOU MEAN NIHILISM IS A TOUGH SELL?:

Sunni leader's slaying leads to tips (ANTONIO CASTANEDA, 12/03/05, ASSOCIATED PRESS)

SAMARRA, Iraq -- After keeping their distance for months, Iraqis in this Sunni Arab city suddenly began cooperating with U.S. troops, leading them to insurgents and hidden weapons caches. The reason: anger over the assassination by insurgents of a local tribal chief.

"That's when they decided to make a stand," said Capt. Ryan Wylie of Lincoln, Neb., commander of Bravo Company, 3rd Battalion, 69th Armored Regiment. "They definitely had an idea of the terrorists and where they hang out."

U.S. commanders cite other reasons for a lull in violence in this city 60 miles north of Baghdad. They include construction of an 11-mile berm around the city to block gun runners and a greater reliance by the military on covert monitoring positions.

But almost everyone agrees that the biggest reason for the reduction in violence here was the public backlash against the insurgents after the Oct. 11 assassination of Sheik Hikmat Mumtaz al-Bazi, chief of one of the area's seven tribes.


Buried in Amman's Rubble: Zarqawi's Support (Fawaz Gerges, December 4, 2005, Washington Post)
Amid the continuing bloodshed in Iraq, there is evidence of fresh thinking. The change is, ironically, brought about by Abu Musab Zarqawi himself, whose indiscriminate terrorism appears to have succeeded in uniting people there against his global jihad ideology. Since the hotel bombings in Zarqawi's native Jordan, more and more Sunni Iraqis and Arabs have condemned the terrorist leader's nightmarish vision for their societies -- one that promises further "catastrophic" suicide attacks. Their reaction represents an important turning point, both for the militants for whom this change of outlook represents a new predicament and for the U.S. government, which must recognize that securing Iraq's future stability is not up to foreign military forces but depends on local public opinion.

Now that the holy warriors are waging their struggle in the heart of the Muslim community, or ummah -- in shopping centers, residential compounds, hotels and restaurants -- Muslims are getting a closer look at the terrorists' lack of respect for life, and most don't like what they see.


Might we consider our victory in the Cold War to have been pre-emptive? The defeat of Marxism/Socialis/Bolshevism took away the only positive (though obviously wrong) political program that's shown any broad appeal in opposition to liberal democracy in the past century at least.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:02 AM

WORTH A TRY:

U.S. and Britain Try a New Tack on Iran (STEVEN R. WEISMAN and DAVID E. SANGER, 12/04/05, NY times)

In a new effort to pressure Iran to allow strict controls on its nuclear program, Britain and the United States are trying to persuade Russia and China to endorse their conclusion, derived from what officials call new evidence, that Tehran intends to build nuclear weapons, American and European diplomats said. [...]

The diplomats, who asked not to be identified to avoid any possible disruption of the delicate negotiations, say the new effort has been floated by Britain and endorsed by France and the United States, and seeks the declaration on Iran from the five major nuclear weapons powers that are the permanent members of the Security Council, which has the power to impose penalties.

The statement is the hoped-for result of arms specialists in China and Russia examining the evidence on Iran - including thousands of pages found on a laptop computer obtained by the United States last year - and concluding, as the United States, Britain and France have with varying degrees of certainty, that it points at least to an intent to build a weapon.

"If we could get China and Russia to agree that this bears all the hallmarks of a weapons program, it could have an enormous impact on Iran," said one senior European diplomat, because it might signal that if the issue reaches the Security Council, Iran could not count on Beijing or Moscow blocking action.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:56 AM

THE ADL CHOOSES SOME ODD ALLIES:

Christian Zionism: Terror In Jesus' Name (Yoginder Sikand, 04 December, 2005, Countercurrents.org)
Represented by literally hundreds of small denominations and churches today, particularly in America, Christian Zionism is today a formidable force and a major actor in global politics. Christian Zionism comes in various shades, but the core of its message is total, unflinching support to the state of Israel and the Zionist imperialist project. Christian Zionists today exercise an enormous clout in the Bush administration. Bush, too, may himself be characterised in some sense as a Christian Zionist, for his policies in the Middle East and elsewhere clearly reflect or tally with the Christian Zionist agenda.

War, conquest and imperialist domination, based on a fanatic insistence on the absolute truth of Christianity and the racial superiority of the Jews lie at the very heart of Christian Zionism.
The argument that Christians are acting to benefit a superior race is at least novel.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:50 AM

CAN'T CONTINUE THE POLITICS BY OTHER MEANS IF YOU DON'T WIN ON THE INITIAL POLITICS:

Bush's Speech on Iraq War Echoes Voice of an Analyst (SCOTT SHANE, 12/04/05, NY Times)

Despite the president's oft-stated aversion to polls, Dr. [Peter D. Feaver, a Duke University political scientist who joined the N.S.C. staff as a special adviser in June and has closely studied public opinion on the war] was recruited after he and Duke colleagues presented the administration with an analysis of polls about the Iraq war in 2003 and 2004. They concluded that Americans would support a war with mounting casualties on one condition: that they believed it would ultimately succeed.

That finding, which is questioned by other political scientists, was clearly behind the victory theme in the speech and the plan, in which the word appears six times in the table of contents alone, including sections titled "Victory in Iraq is a Vital U.S. Interest" and "Our Strategy for Victory is Clear."

"This is not really a strategy document from the Pentagon about fighting the insurgency," said Christopher F. Gelpi, Dr. Feaver's colleague at Duke and co-author of the research on American tolerance for casualties. "The Pentagon doesn't need the president to give a speech and post a document on the White House Web site to know how to fight the insurgents. The document is clearly targeted at American public opinion."


The Iraqis and the military have to defeat the Iraqi insurgency--the Administration has to defeat the domestic insurgency.

MORE:
Confidence in Terror War Jumps (NewsMax, 12/03/05)

President Bush's campaign to rebut claims by Democrats that the U.S. is losing the war on terror has already begun to pay big dividends - according to a new Rasmussen survey released Friday. [...]

Just 39 percent of Americans believed the U.S. was winning in a survey taken in mid-October - with 34 percent believing that the terrorists were winning.

But in a survey completed on Dec. 1, 48 percent were confident of a U.S. victory - and only 28 percent said the terrorists were likely to win.


Of course, gas is under $2 a gallon....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:37 AM

THE FROG CAN'T CHANGES ITS SPOTS EITHER:

A Transformative NATO (Jim Hoagland, December 4, 2005, Washington Post)

The relative political calm that has prevailed across the Atlantic this year will soon be tested by an ambitious U.S. effort to remake NATO into a global security organization able to go anywhere and do much more than fight wars. [...]

Outwardly, transatlantic relations have improved substantially. A new German government that does not owe its electoral legitimacy to opposing Bush's policies has taken power in Berlin. France's drive to limit U.S. hegemony abroad has been weakened by internal problems. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has turned U.S. sniping at the European Union's negotiations with Iran over nuclear arms into meaningful support for that effort.

"We are in complete agreement on the goals and the means of resolving the Iranian nuclear question," Frank-Walter Steinmeir, Germany's new foreign minister, told me shortly after he met with Rice here last week. "The enrichment of uranium within the borders of Iran is unacceptable to us all, and we are offering a reasonable alternative to Iran . . . .That unity will continue . . . whether Iran seizes this opportunity or not."

But the Bush national security team continues to see a world being swept by radical changes that must be mastered and channeled, while many in Europe see a world standing still -- that is, possessing a rough strategic equilibrium that must be maintained through gradual evolution.

Structurally, this difference shows up in the implicit creation of an alliance within the alliance: Bush's America, Tony Blair's Britain, Silvio Berlusconi's Italy and the formerly Soviet-occupied lands of Central Europe and the Baltics that have deployed troops to Iraq. They constitute a politically coherent group committed to advancing democratic freedoms abroad, through military means if necessary.


So Bush and Blair won the fight with Chirac and Schroeder--not that it was much of one--if France would rather pout about trade and security than be a part of the Axis of Good, why not just dump them?

They collaborated with the Nazis and De Gaulle made no bones about their not being an ally in the Cold War either. Why expect them to do the right thing this time?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:30 AM

THUS U.S. BONDS AND GOLD:

Chinese Peasants Turn Their Rage On Authorities: Villagers in a Southern Province Ransack A Government Building, Batter an Official In Anger Over Deaths in Police Operation (Edward Cody, 12/04/05, Washington Post)

[T]he villagers of Shangdeng said they were convinced the two men were killed deliberately by members of the anti-smuggling squad who were carrying iron bars. Outraged by the news, relatives, friends and fellow smugglers gathered shortly after dawn in front of Yantang city hall, demanding an explanation from municipal authorities with jurisdiction over local villages.

The white-tiled building was padlocked tight and nobody came out to face the crowd, recalled Deng Suilong, 54, Deng Silong's older brother. The number of protesters swelled quickly to several hundred, he said, which meant that most of the men from among Shangdeng's 1,000 residents were on hand and angry. "They were all yelling and screaming," said one of the men present, who declined to provide his name for fear of prosecution.

Their rage growing, the peasants broke down the door to city hall and burst inside, witnesses said. They rushed up to the main offices on the second floor, and some of them began sacking everything in sight. The building's blue-tinted windows were shattered on several of the five stories, the witnesses said, and tables, chairs and desks were broken into pieces.

When the Yantang Communist Party secretary, Liu Tangxiong, showed up with several other officials to try and calm the mob, a local official said, the peasants knocked his front teeth out and continued their rampage unhindered until it was time to go home for a late breakfast.

The violence in Yantang, although small in scale, was part of what officials say is a growing trend of assaults against police, officials and government property in China.


Totalitarians don't get to take just a little bit of responsibility for a few problems.

MORE:
Thousands march for HK democracy (BBC, 12/04/05)

Trade unions, activists and civic groups joined ordinary citizens, some carrying banners denouncing China.

They snaked round streets lined with sky-scrapers towards government offices chanting "now or never" and "do you want a clown or a chief executive?".

Campaigners say they want the Chinese autonomous territory's next leader to be elected by universal suffrage.

In response to mass protests in 2003 and 2004, Beijing made some concessions... [...]

The BBC's Chris Hogg in Hong Kong said the march appeared to be much larger than many had predicted, with many ordinary citizens and their families taking part.

"I just feel there are moments in one's life when you have to stand up and be counted," said Anson Chan, Hong Kong's former deputy leader and a first-time marcher.

Palu Cheung, 42, who brought his four-year-old daughter, said: "I want my daughter to know that I do this for her and for myself," he told Associated Press. "I think we have the quality to select our own government."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:27 AM

ROVE SMILES:

Dean Hammers Bush On War, Immigration: DNC Chief Gives Preview of '06 Race (Dan Balz, 12/04/05, Washington Post)

Speaking at the fall meeting of the Democratic National Committee, Dean pledged that Democrats would offer tax policies aimed at middle-class voters, a plan to provide health insurance to all Americans, immigration proposals that offer a path to legalization for illegal immigrants, and defense policies that would protect the nation and expose the "hollow promises" of the Bush administration.

With troop withdrawals underway and the economy doing well, that boils down to tax hikes, Hillary-care and immigration amnesty--every one of them a disaster with voters.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:20 AM

DAVID "W" CAMERON:

Try winning for a change (IAIN MARTIN , 12/04/05, Scotland on Sunday)

[T]here is about this week's result, if it goes as widely expected and as polls predict, a wholly different feel from any Tory leadership election since 1997. They look set to elect a leader who may not be a total dud in the eyes of the electorate and who might, just might, recast his party and make it to No 10 in the next decade. The climate has changed, a new era begins. [...]

He moves into the second phase, which can be summarised as making enough of Britain warm to him as a man of sound instincts. This is where his refusal to commit himself to on-the-spot policy makes sense. Instead he emphasises his character and judgment. The voter wanting to ditch Blair, but still wary of the Tories, might be tempted to reconsider if they trust and respect the man delivering the message.

If he is still standing by that point, he can put together a coherent policy programme which emphasises sensible reform of the public services and the tax and benefits system. Swing voters might tolerate radical ideas from a man who has established himself as likeable and a winner.

However, it is one of the oddest aspects of this 214-day-long Tory race that suspicion of Cameron is greatest among many of his own MPs and others on the right in think-tanks and the media. It might be thought an exciting moment in recent British political history: the Tories are about to elect their first leader in opposition who stands a chance of winning, but the spirit is one of distrust and nervousness. "What on earth does he believe in?" an academic of note, with impeccable free-marketeering credentials, asked me in London.

Cameron appears to believe, like Tony Blair before him, that there is not much point in being ideologically pure if you lose every election. In the 1980s it was the left who demanded purity, now it is the right.

It's a cliché, because it's true, that politics is the art of the possible. So, while David Cameron might not be able to deliver, right now, stage two of the Thatcherite revolution, he might have the potential to deliver 50% of it if he gets into power.

All of this is dismissed by some Conservative MPs as a sell-out. Opposition has provided a comfort zone for many - leaving them able to attack Blair but forgetting that Margaret Thatcher was quite a pragmatist in her own way. "It is historical amnesia," says an MP close to Cameron, who goes on to point out correctly that the right's heroine did not stand on a platform of privatisation and ultra-radical reform in 1979. If she had, she might well have lost.


It has to be comforting to Mr. Cameron to know that he's most hated by the Right, like President Bush, and as Bill Clinton and Tony Blair are most hated by the Left.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:10 AM

IF HE'D JUST CROSSED THE BORDER INTO CANADA THEY COULD HAVE MARRIED:

Man pleads guilty in horse-sex case (AP, November 30, 2005)

James Michael Tait, 54, of Enumclaw, was accused of entering a barn without the owner's permission. Tait admitted to officers that he entered a neighboring barn last July with friend Kenneth Pinyan to have sex with a horse, charging papers said. Tait was videotaping the episode when Pinyan suffered internal injuries that led to his death.

Tait pleaded guilty Tuesday and was given a one-year suspended sentence, a $300 fine, and ordered to perform eight hours of community service and have no contact with the neighbors.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:05 AM

THE EVEN MORE RADICAL SOLUTION....DEMOCRACY:

Sunnis seek seats, voice via ballots: In shift, leaders end boycott, back election (Thanassis Cambanis, December 4, 2005, Boston Globe)

Rival Sunni leaders have abandoned their past boycotts and have set aside their power struggles, creating electoral coalitions that bring together former religious groups, secular Iraqis, Ba'athists, and resistance sympathizers. Tribal Sunni Arab leaders even say they have an informal agreement with the insurgency to curb attacks in the Sunni heartland to maximize turnout in the vote on Dec. 15.

''If we enter the political process, we can push away the dangers that have massed against us in the last year, the revenge, the torture," said Hussein al-Fallouji, a leader of an Islamic Sunni group that has joined forces with other Sunni political blocs to run in the election, which will choose the first Iraqi government under the new constitution. [...]

At many radical mosques, imams who once counseled civil disobedience, election boycotts, and armed resistance against the US occupation now say voting can help Sunni Arabs claim their rightful place at the political table.


The Sunni still face a psychic break when they boost their turnpout percentage and then realize they're only 20% of the population, but that's the point at which they finally realize that federalism favors them.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:56 AM

NO MAN IS A NET:

Blast in Pakistan Kills Al Qaeda Commander: Figure Reportedly Hit by U.S. Missile Strike (Craig Whitlock and Kamran Khan, December 4, 2005; , Washington Post)

The killing of an al Qaeda commander in a U.S.-led operation in a remote corner of Pakistan marks an advance in the struggle to locate and eliminate the network's leadership, which has managed to replenish its ranks after suffering key losses in recent years, counterterrorism officials and experts said Saturday.

Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, said that Hamza Rabia, a top operational planner for al Qaeda, was killed Thursday in an explosion in a tribal area along the border with Afghanistan. Although there were conflicting reports about the details of Rabia's death, Pakistani intelligence sources said U.S. operatives killed him and four others with a missile fired by an unmanned Predator drone.

Pakistani and U.S. officials described Rabia as a major figure in al Qaeda's murky hierarchy and said he would have been responsible for plotting large-scale attacks against U.S. or European targets. At the same time, however, his rapid rise in the network shows how al Qaeda has been able to regenerate after similar setbacks in the past.


It doesn't show that there's a void that any Johnny-come-lately is allowed to fill?


MORE:
Senior Leader of Al Qaeda Is Killed in Blast: Egyptian believed responsible for global planning died last week in Pakistan, government says. The circumstances of his death are unclear (Paul Watson and Ken Silverstein, December 4, 2005, LA Times)

Rabia is said to have taken over Al Qaeda's international operations after the capture of Libyan Abu Faraj Farj in early May. Farj was handed over to U.S. authorities a month later, and his whereabouts have not been disclosed. Farj had been seen as the successor to Sept. 11 planner Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was captured in Pakistan in 2003.

Contrasting reports quickly emerged about the circumstances surrounding Rabia's death.

Pakistani authorities said Rabia was killed along with five other militants when bomb-making material exploded in a house where they were hiding in the village of Asoray, east of Miram Shah, the region's administrative capital.

However, Pakistan's English-language Dawn newspaper reported that the explosions were caused by several missiles from a drone around 1:45 a.m. Thursday.

Residents heard six explosions, and "three foreigners of Middle Eastern origin," including Rabia, were later pulled from the rubble and buried in an undisclosed location, according to the Dawn report. It quoted unnamed "officials and tribal witnesses."

The U.S. has repeatedly flown drones armed with missiles along the rugged border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. But armed operations by foreign forces are a sensitive political issue for Musharraf, so if the U.S. was involved in Rabia's death, Pakistan's government would be unlikely to confirm it.

Rabia suffered a slight leg wound in a similar attack on Nov. 5 that killed eight people, including his wife and children, the Dawn report said.

Pakistan has called Rabia one of a group of extremists involved in attempts to assassinate Musharraf in 2003. In August 2004, the government offered rewards for Rabia and others, with experts saying at that time that Rabia ranked eighth in Al Qaeda's hierarchy.


Air assault kills Qaeda top plotter (Munir Ahmad, December 4, 2005, ASSOCIATED PRESS)
Al-Libbi twice tried to assassinate Gen. Musharraf for making the Islamic nation a key ally of the United States in its war on terrorism. Al-Libbi was captured in northwestern Pakistan on May 2 and later turned over to the United States for further investigation.

The Dawn newspaper, citing sources it did not identify, reported that the attack on a mud-walled home near Miran Shah may have been launched from two pilotless planes, or drones.

Miran Shah is a strategic tribal region where remnants of al Qaeda are believed to have been hiding and where Pakistani forces have conducted several operations against them.

Military officials have said hundreds of Arab, Afghan and Central Asian militants are in North and South Waziristan.

Pakistan has deployed thousands of troops in the area, fighting intense battles with militants and killing and capturing several of them.

Attack Kills a Top Leader of Al Qaeda, Pakistan Says (MOHAMMED KHAN and DOUGLAS JEHL, 12/04/05, NY Times)
By some measures, the American official said, Mr. Hamza, an Egyptian in his 30's, ranked behind only Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri in the terror network's hierarchy. He took on the top operational role this summer after the capture of his superior, Farraj al-Libi, the official said.

"Al Qaeda has been resilient, and has been able to replace those who have been taken out, but this is a very, very significant development, and it will not be easy for Al Qaeda to recover from," said the official, who spoke under his agency's ground rules of anonymity.


They never recovered from Osama's death in Tora Bora.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:38 AM

THEN REALITY DAWNED ON THE REALITY-BASED:

On Climate Change, a Change of Thinking (ANDREW C. REVKIN, 12/04/05, NY Times)

A major reason the optimism over Kyoto has eroded so rapidly is that its major requirement - that 38 participating industrialized countries cut their greenhouse emissions below 1990 levels by the year 2012 - was seen as just a first step toward increasingly aggressive cuts.

But in the years after the protocol was announced, developing countries, including the fast-growing giants China and India, have held firm on their insistence that they would accept no emissions cuts, even though they are likely to be the world's dominant source of greenhouse gases in coming years.

Their refusal helped fuel strong opposition to the treaty in the United States Senate and its eventual rejection by President Bush.

But the current stalemate is not just because of the inadequacies of the protocol. It is also a response to the world's ballooning energy appetite, which, largely because of economic growth in China, has exceeded almost everyone's expectations. And there are still no viable alternatives to fossil fuels, the main source of greenhouse gases.

Then, too, there is a growing recognition of the economic costs incurred by signing on to the Kyoto Protocol.

As Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, a proponent of emissions targets, said in a statement on Nov. 1: "The blunt truth about the politics of climate change is that no country will want to sacrifice its economy in order to meet this challenge."

This is as true, in different ways, in developed nations with high unemployment, like Germany and France, as it is in Russia, which said last week that it may have spot energy shortages this winter.

Some veterans of climate diplomacy and science now say that perhaps the entire architecture of the climate treaty process might be flawed. ,/blockquote>
Expect major editorials in the MSM about how W was right all along and they were wrong, no?


Posted by David Cohen at 1:54 AM

A GOLDEN OLDIE

A Military Quagmire Remembered: Afghanistan as Vietnam (R. W. APPLE Jr., The New York Times, 10/31/01)

Like an unwelcome specter from an unhappy past, the ominous word "quagmire" has begun to haunt conversations among government officials and students of foreign policy, both here and abroad.

Could Afghanistan become another Vietnam? Is the United States facing another stalemate on the other side of the world? Premature the questions may be, three weeks after the fighting began. Unreasonable they are not, given the scars scoured into the national psyche by defeat in Southeast Asia. For all the differences between the two conflicts, and there are many, echoes of Vietnam are unavoidable. Today, for example, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld disclosed for the first time that American military forces are operating in northern Afghanistan, providing liaison to "a limited number of the various opposition elements."

Their role sounds suspiciously like that of the advisers sent to Vietnam in the early 1960's, although Mr. Rumsfeld took pains to say of the anti-Taliban forces that "you're not going to send a few people in and tell them they should turn right, turn left, go slower, go fast." The Vietnam advisers, of course, were initially described in much the same terms, and the government of the day vigorously denied that they were a prelude to American combat troops.

In the most famous such denial, Lyndon B. Johnson vowed that he would not send American boys in to fight the war for Vietnamese boys.

Despite the insistence of President Bush and members of his cabinet that all is well, the war in Afghanistan has gone less smoothly than many had hoped. Not that anyone expected a lightning campaign without setbacks; indeed, both Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld have often said the effort would be long and hard.

But signs of progress are sparse. A week ago, the Pentagon said the military capacity of Taliban leaders in Afghanistan had been "eviscerated" by allied bombing raids; now ranking officials describe those leaders as "tough characters" who remain full of fight. The sole known commando sortie into enemy territory produced minimal results and ample evidence that American intelligence about the Taliban is thin.

The Northern Alliance, whose generals bragged for weeks that it was about to capture the pivotal city of Mazar-i-Sharif, has failed to do so. Nor have its tanks made any progress toward Kabul, the capital. Abdul Haq, the Afghan soldier to whom many had looked to unify anti-Taliban factions, was captured and killed by his enemies almost as soon as he returned to the country.

So influential voices have begun to call for something more than bombing, special forces raids and covert action. Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Republican whose views on military matters carry unusual weight with his peers because of his service as a naval pilot in Vietnam and his years as a prisoner of war, called on Sunday for the deployment of American ground troops "in force" in Afghanistan.

Air power alone, Senator McCain and some colleagues in both parties argue, will never force Osama bin Laden into the open. They believe that only ground troops, operating from a secure base within Afghanistan, will do the trick. That might well involve tens of thousands of troops, hundreds of casualties and many months of effort, they concede, but they see no viable option.

Conservative columnists like Charles Krauthammer and William Kristol have criticized the administration, in Mr. Kristol's words, for trying to fight a war "with half-measures."

The administration has been careful not to rule out the prospect of ground troops, mindful, no doubt, of the leverage that the Clinton administration lost by doing so in the Balkans. Asked about the idea over the weekend, Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, responded, "let's not go there yet." But it is not known whether it is under serious, active consideration.

Clearly, the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, with the horrific loss of American lives they entailed, would give any United States decision to dispatch ground forces a kind of moral imperative that American involvement in Vietnam lacked, even if fighting a land war in Afghanistan would weaken the broad coalition that has been assembled to fight terrorism.

At least at first, American public opinion would present no problem. The latest New York Times/CBS News poll shows that a majority of Americans are prepared to accept the deaths of several thousand American troops there, although there were the first suggestions that many Americans think that the war is not going too well.

Strategically, the United States could benefit in Afghanistan from the Taliban's unpopularity with many Afghans, but American bombs falling on civilian targets will not win Afghan "hearts and minds."

The terrain in Afghanistan might in some ways be more favorable to the United States than in Vietnam. Tanks could play a much larger role, for example. But the Soviet Union, with good tanks in great numbers, was nonetheless stalemated and eventually defeated by Afghan rebel forces.

Finally, in Afghanistan as in South Vietnam, there is a huge question about who would rule if the United States vanquished its foe. Washington never solved that issue satisfactorily after the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963, and solving it in Afghanistan, a country long prone to chaotic competition among many tribes and factions, will probably not be much easier.

Kabul fell to the Northern Alliance two weeks later.


December 3, 2005

Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:59 PM

FROM THE ARCHIVES: THE FOUNDER:

Politics and Piety: A review of a Vergil's Empire: Political Thought in the Aeneid, by Eve Adler (John E. Alvis, Fall 2004, Claremont Review of Books)

Adler's reading of the Aeneid gives us a Vergil whose hero Aeneas has been so conceived as to surpass Epicurus as well as Achilles and Odysseus. In the process, Adler's Vergil brings to sight what he finds unpersuasive in the teaching of Epicurus-Lucretius and suggests a corrective that is partly political and partly religious. Adler sees the Aeneid as a foundational poem written to provide philosophical justification for the Roman Empire under Augustus. Rome achieves the best of Lucretian ends—peace, proliferation of practical and liberal arts, leisure and freedom for philosophers—by rejecting Lucretian means. The empire assures its universality by imposing its religion upon subject nations. That ecumenic religion, in turn, contributes to the moderation of those unhappy passions which Lucretius had mistakenly thought to be exacerbated by religion.

Adler perceives a regime founded on Lucretian principles in Vergil's portrayal of Carthage and its founder, Queen Dido. Adler's highly original interpretation of the first third of the Aeneid collects evidence to support her contention that Carthage offers an atheistic alternative to Rome. Vergil's Carthaginians rely on their own efforts to cultivate the arts and conduct commerce. They acknowledge no gods and maintain a court poet whose poetic account of the cosmos resembles Lucretius' famous poem. Rome's great rival for universal empire lacks adequate provisions for war, however, and the sad fate of its queen makes a case against Lucretius' assumption that skepticism of religion will moderate passions. Dido's skepticism, abetted by her sister's indifference to piety, removes every check upon her love for Aeneas while it blinds her to the inevitable separation from him, which she could have foreseen in his several references to the divine mission awaiting him in Italy. On such grounds, Adler concludes that the first movement of the Aeneid conveys Vergil's doubt that Lucretius had appreciated the strength of passions in the absence of piety; to this doubt Vergil adds a demonstration that irreligion obviously fails to induce moderation.

In the final movement of the poem Adler discovers Vergil's positive corrective to the Lucretian defects exposed in the first movement. Aeneas' victory over the native Italians results in a political settlement emblematic of the settlements Rome will subsequently arrange with the nations it brings under its imperial rule. The distinctive feature of the peace Aeneas accomplishes is his combining a prudent regard for local civil life with firm insistence upon a universal principle of union: native tribes will retain their particular laws and customs while submitting to the religion Aeneas professes. The practical superiority of Aeneas' religion to that of the native Italians lies in the supremacy attributed to Jupiter in the Trojan pantheon. Vergil's Jupiter exerts his providence on behalf of law, whereas the aboriginal Italians believe they live under the care of Saturn and owe their virtue not to law but to their own spontaneous sense of justice. Rome will extend Aeneas' law-favoring universal religion simultaneously with its empire, thereby justifying its empire on grounds precisely the opposite of those that underlie the Lucretian project. [...]

Adler understands...that she is concerned with a perennial question of political philosophy: whether religion is indispensable to civil society. As she remarks,

[Vergil's] questions are alive for us too because we too live in a world in which materialist or atheistic science claims to offer a general improvement of human life…in the reformation of the human spirit, the dismantling of religious fears and comforts in favor of human autonomy, human courage and prudence in the face of our unprotectedness.

Post-revolutionary France and the post-revolutionary Soviet Union were confident that enlightenment required attacks upon religion. J. S. Mill acknowledged that public and private morality could find sustenance in traditional religion but gave the credit to tradition rather than religion. The American Revolution justified itself by a double appeal to "laws of Nature and Nature's God." But Americans today divide over the question whether their political morality requires a foundation in religious belief, or, for that matter, in nature. American students of the same philosophers Cicero and Vergil studied now divide over the question whether nature may suffice and religion be dispensable, or if indispensable, whether this is because it is true or simply because it is salutary for the non-philosophic. Within this same school one finds disagreement over the foundation of inalienable rights. Are rights to be respected because they derive from man's nature or because they are endowments conferred by God? Americans acknowledge no foundational poem, but their founding Declaration speaks of a "Creator" who has "endowed" us with "rights." Adler rightly has perceived that Vergil's contention with Lucretius anticipates our own contentions.


It's a marvelous book.


[originally Posted in BrothersJudd Blog on September 8, 2004]


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:58 PM

FROM THE ARCHIVES: AGAINST THE LUCRETIAN PROJECT:

Politics And Piety: A review of Vergil's Empire: Political Thought in the Aeneid, by Eve Adler. (John E. Alvis, Claremont Review of Books)

Eve Adler takes a refreshingly novel approach in her recent study of the Aeneid. She proposes to determine where Vergil stands with respect to the aggressively atheistic teachings of the Epicureans, particularly Lucretius. Vergil knew quite intimately Lucretius' philosophical poem De Rerum Natura ("On the Nature of Things") and frequently echoes the thought, and at times the language, of Lucretius. But scholars have disagreed regarding the extent of Vergil's sympathy with his predecessor: Did Vergil intend to advance or oppose Lucretius' project of discrediting traditional religion? On Adler's reading, Vergil opposes the Lucretian project and subjects it to a disabling critique, while at the same time aligning himself with, or at least leaving unchallenged, the materialistic cosmology from which Lucretius had launched his polemic against religion. According to Adler, there is no necessary connection between Lucretian physics and Lucretian political thought; she can therefore absolve Vergil of inconsistency in accepting the one while rejecting the other.

Lucretius had identified the substratum of everything that is with homogeneous atoms too small to be perceived. These atoms aggregate by chance to produce the visible world, and by chance they will eventually disperse, demolishing the cosmos as we know it. There are no permanent beings beneath, within, or above the heavens. There are no gods, and the universe manifests no final cause. Although Lucretius denies the existence of divinities, he blames religion for a great part of the ills besetting mankind. To the afflictions human beings suffer in common with other animals men add sufferings occasioned by their baseless yet powerful opinions about the gods and the afterlife. Though death is in truth a mere extinction of consciousness and need not prompt us to fear, the religious beliefs of men cause them to dread punitive sufferings inflicted by gods on the shades of men who have departed this earth for the underworld. If only men would free themselves of this self-inflicted dread, they might avail themselves more amply of the bodily pleasures common to all animals as well as the intellectual pleasures believed to be unique to mankind.

Lucretius proposes to push back the frontiers of superstition and extend the frontiers of enlightenment by exposing credulity, on the one hand, and, on the other, propagating his science of natural causes. Both efforts serve to liberate men from the unnecessary fear inspired by religion. And there is a moral benefit, as well. Conventional religion, according to Lucretius, not only intensifies fear but stirs up all the passions. The terrifying anticipation of posthumous sorrows provokes extravagant ambitions for immortal fame, and desperate lusts for any pleasure that may afford distraction from the terror. Although Lucretian teachings may appear to give license to every sort of pleasure, Lucretius claims that they will moderate passions and thus should placate moralists. He recognizes, though, that his materialistic hedonism must fend off a further objection: that it undermines heroism and the poetry of heroic deeds. On this score, he defends himself in De Rerum Natura, by enlisting poetic charm in the service of Epicurean doctrine. The poem celebrates a new kind of hero in Lucretius' teacher, Epicurus, who surpasses the heroism of Homer's Achilles and Odysseus by braving priests to enlighten humanity.

***

Adler's reading of the Aeneid gives us a Vergil whose hero Aeneas has been so conceived as to surpass Epicurus as well as Achilles and Odysseus. In the process, Adler's Vergil brings to sight what he finds unpersuasive in the teaching of Epicurus-Lucretius and suggests a corrective that is partly political and partly religious. Adler sees the Aeneid as a foundational poem written to provide philosophical justification for the Roman Empire under Augustus. Rome achieves the best of Lucretian ends—peace, proliferation of practical and liberal arts, leisure and freedom for philosophers—by rejecting Lucretian means. The empire assures its universality by imposing its religion upon subject nations. That ecumenic religion, in turn, contributes to the moderation of those unhappy passions which Lucretius had mistakenly thought to be exacerbated by religion.


Sound familiar?

[originally Posted in BrothersJudd Blog on November 24, 2004]


Posted by Peter Burnet at 6:43 PM

THIS IS WHAT WE CALL THE THIRD WAY


Harper vows: no two-tier care
(Allan Woods, National Post, December 3rd, 2005)

Stephen Harper promised yesterday to guarantee patients receive medical treatment within acceptable wait times and vowed there would be no two-tier health care in Canada.

The Conservative leader announced part of his health care plan in Winnipeg, saying that cancer treatments should start within 10 days of seeing a specialist, while hip and knee replacements should occur within 10 months.

"We will reduce waiting times," Mr. Harper said, adding national standards will be worked out with the provinces and enforced.

He also tried to head off the criticism that dogged him in the last election -- that he had a "hidden" agenda -- saying "there will be no private, parallel [health] system."[...]

Mr. Harper said a Conservative government would require the provinces to pay bills if a patient has to travel to another jurisdiction in Canada or to the United States to get treatment in a medically acceptable time frame.

Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh said his party will release a beefed-up plan of its own during the election campaign to tackle wait lists. The Liberal formula, however, will call for Ottawa to cover the cost of travelling to the U.S. for treatment.

It works for national defence. Why not for national healthcare?



Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:29 PM

ANTI-ZIONISM WILL TAKE CARE OF THE REST:

Europe’s “Good Jews" (Emanuele Ottolenghi, December 2005, Commentary)

One evening last spring, the UK branch of Peace Now hosted a debate on the Israel-Palestinian conflict at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies. Taking the Israeli side, ironically enough, was Benny Morris, the pioneer New Historian. (In recent years Morris has found himself at odds with some of his colleagues since he still supports Israel’s right to exist; he has also begun to entertain second and third thoughts on the issue of Zionism’s “original sin.”) Opposing him was Ahmed Khalidi, a Western-educated scion of Palestinian aristocracy and a “moderate” who is willing to negotiate Israel’s demise diplomatically rather than advocating its destruction through violence.

During the question-and-answer period, a frail student stood up to make an impassioned plea. “I want to express my gratitude to you, Dr. Khalidi,” said this young woman, “for your willingness to share Palestine with the Jews as a common patrimony.” (“Common patrimony” was the anodyne catchphrase Khalidi had coined to promote his one-state solution, i.e., the dissolution of Israel.) Such conspicuous, large-hearted charity, the student went on, heedless of her choice of ancient religious antinomies, stood in sharp contrast to the miserly approach of Benny Morris, who had insisted on Israel’s right to continue its national existence. “As a Jew,” she concluded her address to Khalidi, “I feel ashamed that your land was taken away from you in my name and that of my ancestors. It is my duty as a Jew to stand up for justice.” If indeed she stood up in shame, she sat down to thunderous applause.

In statements like this, one cannot but notice the recurrence not only of those enduring theological tropes but of a certain very dangerous dance in which European Jews have long participated. Today, as yesterday, Jewish “particularism,” then religious, now national, remains a thorn in Europe’s side. Today, as yesterday, removing the thorn involves a renunciation of particularism followed by an espousal of the regnant form of universal salvation—then Christianity, now the tenets of humanistic liberalism.

This is not 1930’s-style anti-Semitism; in that narrow sense, anti-Israel Europeans are correct in protesting that they are not anti-Semites. Nevertheless, it is an age-old form of anti-Semitism, and one that has always called forth a typical pattern of response on the part of the Jews under scrutiny. For most, the choices are to lie low in hopes that the trouble will pass, to pick up and seek life elsewhere, or to resist and oppose to the extent they can. We have seen all three responses in European Jewish society over the last years, each bearing its cost. Some, however, take a different route, finding favor and reward by exerting every effort to assimilate themselves to whatever is required of them, including to the point of publicly dissociating themselves from their people’s history and fate. As ever with such maneuvers, exculpatory rationalizations must be found, and are readily at hand.

Unlike the case in pre-Enlightenment Europe, present-day anti-Semitism does not expect Jews to abandon their religion. Today’s Europe is a self-consciously multicultural society. Although it cherishes secularism above all, it respects, if somewhat warily, religious pluralism. What the enlightened sector of today’s Europe would like Jews to do, in exchange for fully approved membership in the circle of approved opinion, is to renounce a core component of their identity: that is, their sense of Jewish peoplehood as expressed through their attachment and commitment to the democratic state of Israel and to the Zionist enterprise.

What remains constant is that, as in both pre- and post-Enlightenment Europe, today’s European elite has its good Jews and its bad Jews. There are the Jews whom it embraces, encourages, and celebrates; and then there are the Jews whom it chastises and condemns. For the former, there will always be a place of honor in the European sun. On the latter, today’s officially pluralist and tolerant Europe has turned its back. Is it any wonder, then, that some “good Jews” have chosen to live in the light, stopping only to burnish their qualifications by noisily joining the chorus that has consigned their fellow Jews to the dark?


A Jewish state is objectionable to them for the same reason that our Judeo-Christian one is--belkief in anything larger than the self is threatening to the secular project.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:19 AM

HOWARD PULLS INTO THE LEAD IN THE THIRD WAY SWEEPSTAKES:

Reformers required (The Australian, December 03, 2005)

IT has been a good week for the Government, excepting Peter Costello. Yesterday, John Howard won his third reform race when the Senate approved the workplace reform legislation. With the GST in place, the sale of Telstra legislated – if and when its share price improves – and now the august industrial relations club sacked, the Prime Minister has seen three policy winners roar home. As with the first two, a great deal of guff has been written about the workplace changes. The weak will be exploited. Nobody will ever see their families. We will all be compelled to work on Christmas Day, critics complain. We have heard this sort of hysteria before, when Kim Beazley and his pals warned that the introduction of the GST was an accounting armageddon. But, as with that tax, the Australian way of life as we know it will not end with the workplace changes. The package that passed the Senate yesterday will lead to neither nightmare nor nirvana. Supporters and opponents have both oversold the outcome of the reforms. It is simply another stage in the deregulation of the labour market – begun by the last Labor government.

The new laws allow employers and their staff to work out arrangements that suit the circumstances of the enterprises where they work. The impact of the old system of awards, awash with arcane rules intended to enforce uniformity in working conditions across industries, with no regard to the circumstances in different parts of the country, or the needs of individual businesses, is reduced. Certainly, some employers will use the new opportunity to exploit their staff. But not the ones who want to hold onto productive workers whose presence adds value to a business.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:49 AM

IS THERE A PACKAGE WITH JUST FOX NEWS, NESN, C-SPAN AND PBS?:

Conservative groups push à la carte cable menus (Jennifer C. Kerr, December 3, 2005, Associated Press)

Conservative groups love the idea of letting television viewers pay for only the channels they want on cable and are happy it's back on the table in Washington, where lawmakers and regulators are fed up with raunchy television.

While the cable industry generally loathes the notion of an à la carte pricing system, at least one cable company and a potentially big cable competitor have embraced it.

À la carte would allow cable subscribers to pick and pay for individual channels rather than being forced to buy packages. A parent, for example, could pick Nickelodeon and the Cartoon Network -- and not have to take MTV or other channels they may find objectionable as part of a bundled package.

The idea attracted attention this week on Capitol Hill when the Federal Communications Commission chairman, Kevin Martin, told industry leaders they need to give parents more tools to help navigate the hundreds of channels on cable and satellite television.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:06 AM

WHAT DEMOCRATS COULD DO FOR US:

Surgery delayed to save money (Nigel Hawkes, 12/03/05, Times of London)

HOSPITALS have been ordered to delay operations and remove patients from waiting lists in order to save money, The Times has learnt.

The move comes a day after Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, admitted that the NHS was more than half a billion pounds in the red.

A letter seen by The Times reveals that a group of London hospitals has been told by NHS managers to postpone surgery for as long as possible in order to cut the trust’s debt. Other hospitals are telling patients that they are no longer eligible for operations in order to make savings.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:41 AM

MOVE THEM TO KANSAS:

Must the UN stay in Manhattan? (Alexander Casella, DECEMBER 2, 2005, International Herald Tribune)

Is it necessary for a cash-strapped organization whose mandate is to preserve world peace and fight poverty to occupy one of the most expensive pieces of real estate in one of the world's most costly cities?

This is the question that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan failed to address when he requested that the General Assembly approve a disbursement of $1.6 billion for the necessary refurbishment of the UN headquarters building in New York. A subsidiary question, which has also not been entertained is why imaginative and less onerous solutions have not been investigated. [...]

There is nothing in the UN charter that provides that the UN headquarters must imperatively be in New York. Indeed, when a site was determined in 1946, the preferred location was really Boston. New York was chosen only because John D. Rockefeller Jr. donated the land for the building.

Moving UN headquarters from New York should therefore be considered, provided that some minimum requirements are met. These entail that the new site should be in a developed, foreigner-friendly democracy with a good infrastructure and communication network in an uncongested environment where English is either spoken or commonly understood.

Such a site exists, less than 400 miles from New York - I nominate Montreal.

Why not get them out of the city altogether and into a setting where they'd have to live with real people? Of course, you have to strip them of diplomatic immunity first...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:33 AM

PAGING ERIC ALTERMAN:

MoveOn Protests Cuts in Tribune Co. Newsrooms (James Rainey, December 3, 2005, LA Times)

MoveOn.org has launched a petition drive to protest job reductions at the Los Angeles Times and three other Tribune Co. newspapers ... [...]

The organization — known for its opposition to the war in Iraq and its support of liberal Democratic politicians — plans to expand its protests to encompass other newspapers, in an industry beset by layoffs.


Perhaps now the Left will stop pretending the media isn't biased in their favor?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:30 AM

THEY DESERVE THE FRENCH:

Merkel to Steer Germany Back Toward U.S.: 'Let the battles of the past rest,' the new chancellor says of ties with the United States, which were strained under her predecessor. (Jeffrey Fleishman, December 3, 2005, LA Times)

New German Chancellor Angela Merkel is moving quickly to improve relations with the United States that were damaged over the Iraq war and by Berlin's increasingly independent and sometimes erratic voice in world affairs.

Merkel has been in office less than two weeks, but she has sent strong signals to Washington that she values transatlantic ties more than her predecessor, Gerhard Schroeder, did. She will not give President Bush what he wants most — German troops in Iraq — but Merkel is not inclined toward the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis honed by Schroeder's Social Democratic government. [...]

Raised in communist East Germany, Merkel appreciates the U.S. role in building democracy in this once-divided nation.


But won't, in turn, help build them in the Middle East? Who needs such "allies"?


MORE:
In Germany, Muslims grow apart (Peter Schneider, DECEMBER 2, 2005, The New York Times)

There is a new wall rising in Berlin. Looking over that wall, one sees the parallel world of the Islamic suburbs. It's a world in which women, unlike some Muslim women in Europe who have risen to expansive lives, are still subject to arranged marriages and the control of their families.

To cross this wall you have to go to the city's central and northern districts, to Kreuzberg, Neukölln and Wedding, and you will find yourself in a world unknown to most Berliners.

Until recently, most held to the illusion that living together with some 300,000 Muslim immigrants and children of immigrants was basically working.

Take Neukölln. The district is proud of the fact that it houses citizens of 165 nations. Some 40 percent of these, by far the largest group, are Turks and Kurds; the second-largest group consists of Arabs.

Racially motivated attacks occur regularly in Brandenburg, the former East German state that surrounds Berlin, where foreigners are few, accounting for only about 2 percent of the population. But such attacks hardly ever happen in Neukölln.

Stefanie Vogelsang, a councilwoman from Neukölln, says that residents talk about "our Turks" in an unmistakably friendly way, although they are less friendly when it comes to Arabs, who arrived after the Turks, often illegally.

But tolerance of Muslim immigrants began to change in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001. Parallel to the declarations of "unconditional solidarity" with Americans by the German majority, rallies of another sort were taking place in Neukölln and Kreuzberg.

Bottle rockets were set off from building courtyards, a poor man's fireworks: two rockets here, three rockets there.

Altogether, hundreds of rockets were shooting skyward in celebration, just as most Berliners were searching for words to express their horror.

For many German residents in Neukölln and Kreuzberg, Vogelsang recalls, that was the first time they stopped to wonder who their neighbors really were.

When a broader German public began concerning itself with the parallel Muslim world arising in its midst, it was primarily thanks to three female authors, three rebellious Muslims: Ates, the author of "The Great Journey Into the Fire"; Kelek, who wrote "The Foreign Bride"; and Serap Cileli, who penned "We're Your Daughters, Not Your Honor."

About the same age, all three grew up in Germany; they speak German better than many Germans and are educated and successful. But each had to risk much for her freedom.

Kelek was threatened by her father with a hatchet when she refused to greet him in a respectful manner.

Ates survived a shooting attack on the women's shelter that she founded in Kreuzberg.

Cileli, at 13, tried to kill herself to escape her first forced marriage. Later, she was taken to Turkey and married against her will, then she returned to Germany with two children from that marriage and took refuge in a women's shelter to escape her father's violence.

Taking off from their own experiences, the three women describe the grim lives and sadness of Muslim women in Germany.

Their books report almost unbelievable details that most Germans did not care to know. They describe an everyday life of oppression, isolation, imprisonment and brutal corporal punishment for Muslim women and girls in Germany.

Not that they can liberalize their own.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:28 AM

THE HIGH COST OF HUEYISM:

Image Problem Is Costing Louisiana: Whatever the reason -- its corrupt history, its demands, its Democrats -- sympathy on Capitol Hill is ebbing, and with it, maybe federal funds. (Mary Curtius, December 3, 2005, LA Times)

After battling in Congress for months to get more federal money for their hurricane-ravaged state, some Louisiana officials have come to believe they are up against something more than concerns about the budget deficit or conflicting visions of reconstruction.

Maybe, they speculate, their colleagues just don't trust them.

Maybe they are right.

What is clear is that the initial outpouring of sympathy for victims in the state hit hardest by Hurricane Katrina has been replaced on Capitol Hill by a climate of suspicion — even resentment — toward what is seen as an increasingly demanding supplicant.


"Vote for the crook, it's important" is so cute...until the endemic crookedness comes home to roost...

MORE:
Blanco's office scrambled to spin Katrina (Jan Moller, 12/03/05, New Orleans Times Picayune)

Gov. Kathleen Blanco and the Bush administration were locked in a pitched political battle to shape public opinion about the response to Hurricane Katrina at the same time they were trying to manage the rescue operation, documents released late Friday by the governor's office show.

E-mails turned over by the state to the congressional committees investigating the hurricane response show that the governor's senior staff was deeply involved in trying to preserve the governor's political standing and make sure that the White House was blamed for the slow pace of the initial response.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:25 AM

BALLON ROUGE, NON:

Marshall apologizes for 'red states' quip: SJC chief justice denies political cast (Jonathan Saltzman, December 3, 2005, Boston Globe)

The chief justice of the state Supreme Judicial Court yesterday apologized for a joke she made at the beginning of her commencement speech at Brandeis University in May, when she quipped to spectators gathered beneath blue and white balloons, ''No red states here."

The remark by Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, who wrote the court's landmark 2003 decision allowing same-sex marriage, triggered a confidential complaint to the Commission on Judicial Conduct. The commission released an extraordinary statement yesterday from the state's top jurist, who said she regretted making what might have been construed as a political statement.


Maybe she just hates the f'in movie too?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:07 AM

JEB WILL HAVE THE EASIEST TIME OF THE THREE:

Father Knew Best (PAUL C. NAGEL, 12/03/05, NY Times)

From the outset, father and son were close. At the age of 10, John Quincy Adams went to Europe with his father, who was the representative of the Revolutionary Continental Congress. After John Quincy returned to Massachusetts in 1785, he and his father overcame the barriers of time and distance by writing innumerable letters - and, of course, they talked endlessly when they were both in Quincy, Mass., the family headquarters.

The son knew he owed his career in politics to his father. When John Adams was defeated for re-election by Thomas Jefferson in the presidential campaign of 1800, his son, who was then the American minister to Prussia, became so disgusted by the extreme partisanship of the election that he returned to America vowing never to enter politics. The senior Adams objected strenuously, insisting that his son was meant for public service.

Obediently, a reluctant John Quincy Adams went forth to become a senator, a Harvard professor and successful author. In 1809, President James Madison sent him to Russia and then to England, where he scored a series of brilliant diplomatic successes. In 1817, he was appointed secretary of state by President James Monroe. These achievements occupied more than 25 years during which the two Adams statesmen continued to listen and learn from each other, mostly by letters.

Well before 1825, when Monroe's second term ended, many citizens assumed that John Quincy Adams would succeed to the presidency. After all, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe had been secretary of state before becoming president. But the younger Adams still had mixed feelings and needed his father's encouragement. In fact, a decisive factor behind the younger Adams's decision to run was his belief that another Adams administration that sought to ignore parties could bring a new appreciation of his father's term.


Consider his father's greatest failures--Dan Quayle, raising taxes, leaving Saddam in power, David Souter, the failure to support liberty in Eastern Europe and China, losing his re-election bid, and weakening the GOP electorally--and you can see that much of George W. Bush's presidency has been about avoiding and fixing same.

History will likely be kinder to George H. W. Bush than we are--given that he had to deal with the complicated end of the Cold War and the transition out of fifty years of wartime economy--but that will only raise him to the ranks of the mediocre. [Of course, had Ross Perot not run in '92 and Bush Sr. gotten to enjoy a second term, in which we reaped the benefits of the post-Cold War period, he'd have a shot at near-great.]

The son, on the other hand, is going to be recalled as a historic figure for the rapid reform he's brought to the Middle East and for laying the initial groundwork of a Third Way welfare system.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:58 AM

THERE'S A REASON IT'S CALLED HUMANTARIAN INTERVENTION:

U.S. cancels food aid to North Korea (Nicholas Kralev, December 3, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The Bush administration has canceled a planned shipment of 25,000 tons of food aid to North Korea later this month, citing concerns that the food will not reach those who need it.

"We still think there are serious humanitarian needs in North Korea, but we cannot continue to supply food if we cannot even minimally assure that it will reach its intended recipients," the State Department said yesterday. [...]

The WFP program delivers about half a million tons of food a year in North Korea and aims to feed about 6.5 million of the nation's 22.5 million people.


To our discredit, we killed half a million Iraqis via sanbctions before having the decencvy to just change the regime instead--we oughtn't make the same mistake in North Korea.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:55 AM

ANOTHER WAY IT DIFFERS FROM 'NAM:

Raid 'kills al-Qaeda commander' (BBC, 12/03/05)

Pakistan says that it has killed a top al-Qaeda commander in the country's tribal belt along the Afghan border.

Egyptian-born Abu Hamza Rabia, described as al-Qaeda's operational commander, was among five men killed in a raid in North Waziristan on Thursday.


Their commanders are at continual risk.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:45 AM

HOLE IN THE WALL GANG:

China Fires Environment Agency Chief Over Handling of Toxic Spill (Philip P. Pan, December 3, 2005, Washington Post)

In a rare public admission of failure, China's Communist government fired the country's environmental protection chief Friday, saying his agency underestimated the impact of a massive chemical spill and mishandled the response to a disaster that poisoned the water supply of millions of people.

The dismissal of Xie Zhenhua, director of the State Environmental Protection Administration, followed nearly three weeks of conflicting and often misleading government statements about a toxic spill that polluted the Songhua River in China's northeast. The spill forced the shutdown of running water in Harbin, a city of 3.8 million, and continues to threaten residents downstream in neighboring Russia.

Journalists and Communist Party sources said the decision came after a prolonged internal debate among China's top leaders over who should take the blame for the catastrophe, which was triggered by an explosion Nov. 13 at a state-owned petrochemical plant in Jilin province.


Once the Party starts being forced to accept blame for the stuff it's messed up where does it end?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:38 AM

"HEAVIER THAN A MOUNTAIN":

Blast in Falluja Kills 10 Marines; 11 Are Wounded (JOHN F. BURNS, 12/03/05, NY Times)

The peninsula where the bombing occurred Thursday lies at the western end of the steel trestle bridge where insurgents hung charred bodies taken from an attack in the center of Falluja in March 2004 that killed four American security guards, an incident that prompted a first, aborted American military attempt to recapture the city from insurgents who had made it their principal bastion in Iraq.

The second offensive, eight months later, was the most relentless American attack against the insurgents. It ended with American forces in control of the largely devastated city, but with many of its 300,000 residents having fled.

American commanders said their forces had killed 1,200 insurgents in that offensive, while taking more than 500 American casualties. But insurgent groups said later that many of their fighters had left the city for Ramadi, Mosul and other insurgent strongholds before the American assault.

Under a pledge to rebuild the city and compensate those who lost their homes, the Americans have spent about $100 million. But insurgents who never left under the American bombardment, or who infiltrated back through the tight cordon that American and Iraqi troops have thrown around the city, have kept up a steady stream of attacks, including suicide bombings, roadside explosions and assassinations of Iraqi government officials and others who have drawn the insurgents' wrath.

Earlier this week, a leading cleric in Falluja, Hamza Abbas al-Issawi, 70, considered the city's grand imam, who had urged Sunni Arabs to defy the insurgents and vote in the Dec. 15 elections for a full four-year national government, was shot and killed. He had received insurgent death threats in recent months.

Tensions appeared to be rising ahead of the election, when American and Iraqi officials are hoping for a repeat of the October constitutional referendum, when 170,000 votes were cast in Falluja, the strongest turnout of any Sunni Arab area in Iraq. Iraqi election officials calculated that 80 percent of the votes were against the constitution, but celebrated the fact that the city had chosen to take part in the political process.

In Falluja's mosques, angry residents have vowed in recent days to avenge the clerics' killings by hunting down Islamic extremists loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, America's most-wanted man in Iraq. The anger spread on Friday to fiery condemnations at the main weekly prayers at two of Baghdad's most militant Sunni Arab mosques.

At the Mother of All Battles Mosque in the west of the city, the preacher, Sheik Ali Abu Hassan, called the killers "murderers" and said believers should respond by voting in large numbers. At the Abu Hanifa Mosque in the eastern Adhamiya district, a stronghold of support for Iraq's ousted ruler, Saddam Hussein, the preacher, Sheik Ahmad al-Samarrai, said, "The election is both legitimate and necessary, and your duty to vote is heavier than a mountain."

MORE:
U.S. Goals for Iraqi Forces Meet Success and Challenges in Najaf (EDWARD WONG, 12/03/05, NY Times)

"I don't think I'd go so far as to recommend that we totally pull out," said Lt. Col. James Oliver, the commander of the First Battalion, 198th Armor of the 155th Brigade, a National Guard unit from Mississippi that is the main American force here. Nothing less than an American battalion, up to 1,000 troops, should remain in the area through 2006 and perhaps longer, he said.

Yet, for the most part, American officers here praise the work of the Iraqi security forces, saying they have trained well and kept the number of major attacks on American and Iraqi troops to an average of one per month.

The American commanders say their soldiers have largely halted combat missions and now play a training and backup role for the Iraqi forces - a model, perhaps, for the 160,000 American troops in other parts of the country.

In early September, the 500 soldiers of Colonel Oliver's battalion moved from a forward base on the outskirts of this city to a larger headquarters in the desert about a 40-minute drive away. A 900-person battalion of the Iraqi Army moved into the old American compound.

It was one of the 28 American forward bases in Iraq that had been shut down by mid-November, with 15 of those having been transferred to Iraqi forces, said Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, a spokesman for the American command. He said the military expects to close four more of the remaining 82 forward bases within three months.

Colonel Oliver's unit, backed by 700 soldiers from a logistics battalion, acts as a guarantor of last resort for the Iraqi forces, remaining on call in case of overwhelming trouble. Emergency requests from the Iraqis come in about once a month, officers say. American advisers also work with Iraqi officers at a security command center inside Najaf, and, since last spring, one company each has been assigned to train and advise the Iraqi police and army.

"They were receptive; they actually wanted to take control of their own area," said Sgt. First Class Paul Bedford, part of a reconnaissance platoon that patrols the roads outside Najaf. "Assessment would be more the word than training at this point."

Many people in this city of a half million, home to some of the world's most revered ayatollahs, support the handover of security duties to the Iraqis.

"They're spread well throughout the city," said Qasim Said, 43, a schoolteacher in a grocery store with his 7-year-old son. "I don't think any decent Iraqi is happy to see foreign forces, whatever their nationality, in his street. Thank God that the presence of the Americans has gone down in Najaf. The city is rejoicing."

The governor of Najaf, Assad Abu Ghalal al-Taiee, echoed that sentiment at a pre-election debate in a hotel here on Thursday, saying that "there's freedom in Najaf, but there's lack of freedom in Baghdad."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:28 AM

BIRTH OF A SALESMAN:

Sales-in-Chief (Larry Kudlow, Dec 2, 2005, Townhall)

Message repetition. Without it the mainstream media will fill the void with their usual brand of pessimism. But the reality is that the economic story is an optimistic one. GDP growth is steady and significant. November jobs expanded by 215,000 (238,000 including prior revisions) and unemployment remains at a historical 5 percent low. Earlier in the week a slew of new economic reports all came in above Wall Street estimates: rising consumer confidence, strong new home sales, expanding business investment in capital goods, and continued manufacturing growth according to the Institute for Supply Management. The stock market, meanwhile, is in the midst of a big year-end rally. These are great economic signs, but Bush must get the message out again and again.

The same holds true for the Iraq war. Things are going far better in the Middle East than the mainstream media would have us believe. Bush did himself a lot of good with his Iraq speech at Annapolis this past Wednesday. It was filled with facts and figures and made the case that Iraqi-ization is moving forward. The president laid out a comprehensive and easy-to-understand strategy of “clear, hold, and build.” Bush rightly refused to schedule a withdrawal timetable that would only help the terrorists. He provided plenty of numbers, such as 120 Iraqi army and police battalions today, where there were virtually none a year ago. Eighty of these are fighting side by side with U.S. troops, while 40 others are taking the lead in various fights. Thirty Iraqi battalions are now controlling specific geographic areas. On the economic front, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) expects Iraq’s GDP to grow in real terms by 3.7 percent in 2005 and nearly 17 percent in 2006.

Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi essentially called Bush a liar on all this, saying “the fact that the president says it’s so doesn’t mean it’s so.” Really? Even Bush military critics like Gen. Barry McCaffrey now believe that significant progress is being made on turning the fighting over to the Iraqis.

Supposedly Bush will follow up with several more speeches on the war. If so, the new communications and marketing approach will yield high dividends -- not only for Bush’s political standing, but more importantly for the health and security of the entire United States.


All the White House has to do is think of selling the economic story like an election campaign, something at which the President and his staff have always excelled.

MORE:
Pump Up the Volume: Finally the "nonpolitical" White House gets wise. (Fred Barnes, 12/12/2005, Weekly Standard)

WE NOW KNOW WHAT WAS behind President Bush's mysterious refusal for so many months to respond to Democratic attacks on his Iraq policy--a refusal that came at great political cost to himself and to the American effort in Iraq. It wasn't that Bush was too focused on Social Security reform to bother. Nor did he believe Iraq was a drag on his presidency and should be downplayed. Rather, Bush had made a conscious decision after his reelection to be "nonpolitical" on the subject of Iraq. It is a decision he now regrets. And has reversed.

Here's how a senior White House aide explains the decision not to answer criticism of the administration's course in Iraq: "The strategic decision was to be forward-looking. The public was more interested in the future and not the past, since it was just hashed over during the election." The president didn't ignore the subject of Iraq entirely. He delivered a half-dozen speeches on Iraq and the war on terror, including an evening, prime-time address, in the first 10 months of 2005. He just didn't rebut partisan attacks.

Harm was done. "Obviously the bombardment of misleading ads and the earned media by MoveOn et al. had an impact," the Bush aide says, "and culminated during the Libby indictment and the [Democratic] stunt of the closed session of the Senate" on prewar intelligence. "That's when we pivoted."


Boy, the Beadle will write anything Karl Rove tells him to.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

ROUNDING FIRST AND HEADED FOR THIRD WAY:

Tories have voted two to one for Cameron as leader (Toby Helm and Anthony King, 03/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

David Cameron will be declared the next Tory leader on Tuesday after winning twice as many votes among party members as his rival David Davis, according to a YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph.

The survey shows that Mr Cameron has the support of 67 per cent of Tory voters compared with 33 per cent for Mr Davis. [...]

Last night there was speculation that William Hague, the former leader, will confirm his willingness to serve in the Cameron team this weekend.


Nice to bring Hague back in a job he's better suited for than leader, but IDS seems to be the one with the best grasp of how to follow the Blair/Bush/Howard example.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

NAFTA BECKONS:

Blair and Brown hatch plan to make France the EU villain (David Rennie in Budapest and Toby Helm, 03/12/2005, Daily Telegraph)

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown launched a dramatic move to isolate France in the EU budget row yesterday as eastern European nations indicated that they might accept British proposals to cut their funds from Brussels.

In a clear attempt to paint President Jacques Chirac as a brake on reform and the only leader unwilling to give ground, the Prime Minister and the Chancellor insisted that reform of Europe's bloated farm subsidy regime - which France opposes - was a top priority for the EU and world trade.

Mr Blair's demand that France agree to change the Common Agricultural Policy at the World Trade Organisation this month came as he spelled out which part of the British rebate he is prepared to sacrifice in order to secure an EU budget deal.

British diplomats said the Prime Minister wanted to contrast his willingness to compromise with French intransigence in EU and WTO talks - in order to put pressure on the French over CAP reform.


There's an easier way to isolate France--break the EU.


December 2, 2005

Posted by Peter Burnet at 7:12 PM

IT S BEHIND THE HEARTBREAK OF PSORIASIS TOO

Health effects of climate change felt worldwide (CBC, December 2nd, 2005)

Climate change could be responsible for as many as 150,000 deaths around the world every year, according to health experts at the UN climate change conference being held in Montreal.

The biggest culprit is diarrhea caused by contaminated water...

Remember, your kids are learning this sort of stuff every day. Sleep well.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:16 PM

NOW THEY GET IT...:

Progress in the Mideast: Peace without treaties (Charles Krauthammer, 12/02/05, JewishWorldReview.com)

Because we Americans tend to gauge Middle East success by White House signing ceremonies complete with dignitaries, three-way handshakes and pages of treaty provisions, no one seems to have noticed how, in the absence of any of that, there has been amazing recent progress in defusing the Arab-Israeli dispute.

First, the more than four-year-long intifada, which left more than 1,000 Israelis and 3,000 Palestinians dead, is over. And better than that, defeated. There's no great Palestinian constituency for starting another one. In Israel, tourism is back, the economy has recovered to pre-intifada levels, and the coffee shops and malls are full again.

Second, the Gaza withdrawal was a success. On the Israeli side, it was accomplished with remarkable speed and without any of the great social upheaval and civil strife that had been predicted. As for the Palestinians, without any fanfare whatsoever, their first-ever state has just been born. They have political independence for 1.3 million of their people, sovereignty over all of Gaza and, for the first time, a border to the outside world (the Rafah crossing to Egypt) that they control.

Third, on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian line, vigorous electoral campaigns are underway. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has abandoned Likud, established a new centrist party that leads all others in the polls, effectively marginalized those remaining Israelis who want to hold on forever to all the territories, and set Israel on a path to a modest and attainable territorial solution to the century-old conflict.

As a result, Israel's regional isolation is easing, as Islamic countries from Pakistan to Qatar to Morocco openly extend or intensify relations, while anti-Israel rejectionists such as Syria and Hezbollah are isolated and even condemned by name in the U.N. Security Council.

How did this come about? Israeli unilateralism and Palestinian maturation.


Geez, even the neocons have figured out that W and Sharon were right? Remember the Weekly Standard's regular series about how they were betraying Israel by creating a Palestine, or Mr. Krauthammer himself saying they were surrendering?


Posted by Peter Burnet at 5:35 PM

BUT, BUT...DID THEY READ HIM HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS.

Saddam must get real justice (Geoffrey Robertson, The Spectator, December 2nd, 2005)

The moral claim of the Iraqi people to exact retribution sounds fine in theory — as President Bush argues, ‘They were the people who were brutalised by this man.’ But if justice can neither be done nor be seen to be done in Baghdad, in the midst of a civil war in which the defendant’s ‘people’ are killing the ‘people’ of the judges, then Iraq’s claim must give way to the moral and legal right of the international community to try international crimes. The genocide charges which Saddam faces for the gassing of the Kurds and for mass-murdering the Marsh Arabs are crimes ‘against humanity’ because the very fact that they can be conceived and committed by fellow human beings demeans us all, wherever we live and whatever our nationality.

After all, Saddam and his henchmen are only in the dock because of action by a coalition led by the United States. The US established the Iraqi Special Tribunal (at a cost of $75 million), trained the judges, and arrested all the ‘playing-card’ suspects, while the evidence was amassed by the Justice Department’s Regional Crime War Liaison Office. The tribunal’s original statute, drafted by American and British lawyers, was based on UN court models and provided fair trial, with the prospect of international jurists sitting with the Iraqi judges. Last year I helped to train these courageous men who told me they wanted to sit with international colleagues, like the UN’s court in Sierra Leone.

But strange things have happened to this court since the handover. Its name has been changed, to the Iraqi Higher Criminal Court, and its statute has been rewritten to exclude the possibility of international judges (except in rare cases where a foreign state is a party). And there is a sinister new provision: ‘No authority, including the President of the Republic, may grant a pardon or mitigate the punishment issued by the court.’ Article 6(4) of the Human Rights Covenant (which the US, the UK and Iraq have ratified) insists that anyone sentenced to death must have the right to seek commutation or pardon after conviction, so this is a breach of international law at which all coalition partners seem to have connived. But merciless Iraqi politicians want Saddam executed, and this new provision will prevent President Talabani from ever considering clemency.

There is a prospect that Saddam will be executed speedily after conviction on the first charge, which accuses him, with senior officials, of killing villagers at Dujail as a reprisal after some of them made a botched attempt on his life. Many of these villagers admitted involvement in the plot and, comparatively speaking, this is the least serious of the charges which Saddam faces. His immediate execution would deprive the world of any trial, and hence any authoritative judgment, on his responsibility for genocide.

He sounds like a man who is petrified that either he will lose his job or that Saddam will be convicted. Or one who sees them as one and the same.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:57 PM

EXHIBIT "A" IN WHY YOU SHOULDN'T JUDGE BY A COVER:

Here's the final version of how the book's cover will look. Thanks to Julia Gignoux.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 3:30 PM

HEY! WHERE'D THAT AXIS COME FROM?:

The Big Four Alliance: The New Bush Strategy: Over the past six months, the Bush administration has upgraded its budding “strategic partnerships” with India and Japan. Along with the steady "special relationship” with Great Britain, what is beginning to emerge is a global coalition system--it is too soon to call it a true alliance--for the post-Cold War world. Much work remains to be done to translate the expressions of similar political interests and values into usable military strength. Still, the prospects for expanding the number of genuine “stakeholders” in the Pax Americana are quite bright. (Thomas Donnelly, December 2005, AEI: National Security Outlook)

It used to be the fashion to pillory the Bush administration for its unilateralism. The worst offense was not removing Saddam Hussein from power, but “going it alone” (never mind the British and the other members of the coalition). And even in Afghanistan, the snub of NATO’s offer to slow the operation down to a Kosovo-like pace was thought to cloud the justice of the war.

Now, the editorialists of the New York Times have discovered:

[T]he Bush administration has been going out of its way to build up its military ties with countries surrounding China. India and Japan are the two most troubling examples. Washington has pressed ahead with an ill-advised initiative to share civilian nuclear technology with India, despite that country’s refusal to abide by the restrictions of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. And it has actively encouraged an already worrisomely nationalist Japanese government to shed postwar restraints on its military and embrace more ambitious regional security goals. Washington has also taken steps to strengthen military cooperation with Vietnam and Indonesia. Mr. Bush’s stopover in Mongolia [was] likewise . . . aimed at cementing a new security partnership.

The reactionary Left is shocked, but there has been an even larger pattern of alliance-building that has been going on out of sight of the newsrooms of the mainstream media. Indeed, far from maintaining a unilateralist approach to American security, the Bush administration has been cementing a globe-spanning structure of strategic partnerships that has the potential not only to “contain” China, but also to sustain and enhance the liberal international order of the post-Soviet era.

You might call this emerging set of alliances the “four-by-four” strategy. It is built around four great powers--the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and India--who share four basic strategic principles--that the dangers of radicalism, failing despotic governments, and nuclear proliferation in the greater Middle East are too great to ignore; that the growing military strength and political ambitions of Beijing’s autocrats make it far from certain that China’s “rise” will be a peaceful one; that the spread of representative forms of government will increase the prospects for a durable peace; and that military force remains a useful and legitimate tool of national statecraft.

It is no accident that the four pillars of this emerging alliance stand in roughly similar geostrategic position relative to the Eurasian landmass.


Though it's obviously small by comparison to these four, Australia is already such a firm pillar it seems absurd not to include them. Smaller still, but perhaps the firmest pillar of all when you consider the enemies, is Israel.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:30 PM

WHEN PIGS FLY:

Gift from Canada? (Patrick Basham, December 2, 2005, Washington Times)

Why does President Bush hope Christmas comes a little late this year? Because on Jan. 23, Canada may elect the most pro-American leader in the Western world. Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative. Move over Tony Blair: If elected, Mr. Harper will quickly become Mr. Bush's new best friend internationally and the poster boy for his ideal foreign leader. [...]

If Martin's Liberal Party is re-elected for the fourth consecutive time, Canadian taxpayers will continue footing the bill for an expensive welfare state epitomized by its archaic government-run health-care system. Social policy experimentation on issues such as drugs and homosexual rights will continue in an incremental but decidedly progressive direction.

What will happen if Mr. Harper's Conservatives win? Most important, Canada will have its first leader in living memory who actually believes Big Government is a real problem.


Where is the evidence that Canadians aren't perfectly happy on their way to oblivion?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:55 AM

CONSERVATIVE LIBERALISM (via Matt Scofield with thanks to James Panero):

Living with liberalism : a review of Bertrand de Jouvenel: The Conservative Liberal and the Illusions of Modernity by Daniel J. Mahoney (Robert Kraynak, December 2005, New Criterion)

When reflecting on the political options available to us in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, I often say to myself with a certain resignation, “Liberalism—it’s all we’ve got.” What I mean, of course, is that for anyone in the modern world who wants a sane and decent political order, the only realistic choice is liberalism in the classic sense—a regime dedicated to individual liberty based on democratic institutions (liberal democracy, in other words), with a social order shaped by mass culture and an economy driven by industrial and technological progress. Those who reject this order entirely—utopian dreamers, nostalgic reactionaries, anarchists—may get credit for defiant courage, but they usually wind up doing more harm than good. We are left with little choice but to live with liberalism and to make it as noble and as just as we can. [...]

[Daniel J. Mahoney, professor of political science at Assumption College] argues for something called “conservative liberalism,” which he finds in the political thought of such seemingly disparate figures as Alexis de Tocqueville, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Charles de Gaulle, Raymond Aron, Aurel Kolnai, Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin, Pierre Manent, and now Bertrand de Jouvenel. Mahoney’s thesis is that these figures are genuine lovers of liberty, but they are not “liberals” in the sense of embracing the philosophical liberalism of John Locke, Immanuel Kant, J. S. Mill, John Dewey, Isaiah Berlin, or John Rawls. Conservative liberals reject philosophical Liberalism because it fosters the “illusions of modernity”—a notion of autonomy which admits no higher authority than the human will (“the self-sovereignty of man”) as well as blind worship of progress that destabilizes society, undermines virtue, and tempts modern man with utopian ideologies that lead to totalitarian systems of government.

Instead of following progressive liberalism, conservative liberals draw upon pre-modern sources, such as classical philosophy (with its ideas of virtue, the common good, and natural right), Christianity (with its ideas of natural law, the social nature of man, and original sin), and ancient institutions (such as common law, corporate bodies, and social hierarchies). This gives their liberalism a conservative foundation. It means following Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Edmund Burke rather than Locke or Kant; it usually includes a deep sympathy for the politics of the Greek polis, the Roman Republic, and Christian monarchies. But, as realists, conservative liberals acknowledge that classical and medieval politics cannot be restored in the modern world. And, as moralists, they see that the modern experiment in liberty and self-government has the positive effect of enhancing human dignity as well as providing an opening (even in the midst of mass culture) for transcendent longings for eternity. At its practical best, conservative liberalism promotes ordered liberty under God and establishes constitutional safeguards against tyranny. It shows that a regime of liberty based on traditional morality and classical-Christian culture is an achievement we can be proud of, rather than merely defensive about, as trustees of Western civilization.


No one has made the case of conservative liberalism better than Professor Kraynak himself, in his own book. But this review is quite the best thing you'll read this month and just one more reason why the New Criterion is invaluable.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:33 AM

ANOTHER ARAB STATE, ANOTHER ELECTION:

UAE to Hold Elections to National Council (Arab News, 2 December 2005)

The United Arab Emirates yesterday announced partial elections to the Federal National Council (FNC). The announcement was made on the eve of the country’s national day and 13 months after the founder of the UAE, Sheikh Zayed ibn Sultan Al-Nahayan, passed away. [...]

The move comes amid growing American pressure on Arab countries to adopt democracy. [...]

Sheikh Khalifa said the move aimed at allowing wider participation of the citizens of the country in decision-making. “Through a gradual, organized course, we have decided to start activating the role of the FNC through electing half of its members through councils for each emirate and appointing the other half,’’ Sheikh Khalifa said.

“By doing this, we will embark on a march that culminates into more participation and interaction from all the citizen of the country,” he said.


Reality is what we make it.

MORE:
Yes, we have opened Pandora's box in Iraq - but freedom has sprung free (Gerard Baker, 12/02/05, Times of London)

[S]uccess in Iraq, intangible as it is, was never just going to be confined to the country itself. Look at the broader map of the Middle East.

In neighbouring Syria, another unlovely old regime is cornered. The push for freedom that began in Iraq is steadily wresting Lebanon away from its status as a fief of Damascus. The Syrian dictator is feeling the painful consequences of his attempt to halt the spread of liberty by the old fashioned method of assassination.

In Iran, the proximity to a liberated Iraq is alarming the theocratic thugs who run the country and energising their enemies in the rest of the population.

In Israel, the one people in the region for whom freedom is no novelty, will go to the polls early next year. It looks likely that they will give a new mandate to Ariel Sharon to pursue his unlikely mission of unilaterally settling with the Palestinians.

This, the same Sharon who has been demonised by the same critics of the Iraq war, especially in Europe, is breaking the mould, not only in his own nation, but in the region too. He will push ahead, it seems, with a bold strategy in the teeth of fierce irredentism from the Right, that could result in a Palestinian state on more than 90 per cent of the West Bank and the whole of Gaza, perhaps even with a part of Jerusalem as its capital.

This may not be a direct outcome of the Iraq war, but does anyone really think it would have been possible while Saddam Hussein was actively promoting Palestinian terrorism? The critics of the war were right to say three years ago that it represented the high-risk option. There’s no doubt, as they said at the time, that not invading would have been the safer option.But over time, repeatedly exercising the easy option rarely produces long-term stability. By repeatedly deferring difficult decisions, repeatedly seeking accommodations with an ever more unacceptable status quo, we make the ultimate crisis that much larger, its consequences that much more devastating. The fluid of all those easy decisions crusts eventually into a hard carapace that can only be cracked with explosive force.


Posted by Peter Burnet at 10:27 AM

EVEN MORE OUTRAGEOUS, THE USELESS LITTLE NITS COST US SLEEP

Can Kids Destroy Your Sex Life? (MSN Video, December 2nd, 2005)

Perhaps the tragedy of the modern West can be summed up by noting that just about every other generation in history asked that question the other way around.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:01 AM

YEAH, BUT OTHER THAN THAT THEY'RE IDENTICAL (via Mike Daley):

Iraq Is Not Vietnam (Frederick W. Kagan, Dec/Jan 2006, Policy Review)

An insurgency was underway in Vietnam for nearly two decades before Lyndon Johnson committed large numbers of American ground forces to the fight in 1965. The U.S. had nevertheless maintained hundreds and then thousands of “advisors” there for years before that in an effort to help the South Vietnamese government of Ngo Dinh Diem fight off an attempt to remove him that had both internal and external components. The Viet Cong was a terrorist/guerrilla force recruited from within South Vietnam and operated there. It was heavily supported by the communist government in North Vietnam, which sent advisors, equipment, and supplies, and which provided a safe haven. Ho Chi Minh’s government also supplied troops, however, and the first major battle U.S. forces in Vietnam fought on their own (now immortalized in print and on the screen as We Were Soldiers Once . . . and Young) was the Battle of the Ia Drang Valley; the enemy were North Vietnamese soldiers.

The presence of North Vietnamese troops in South Vietnam, and the enormous logistics train the North maintained for the benefit of its Viet Cong partners, complicated the development of American counterinsurgency strategy enormously. Throughout the war, American leaders had difficulty deciding whether the main enemy was the North Vietnamese Army (nva) or the Viet Cong (vc). In the initial phases of the war, the U.S. leadership focused more on the nva and therefore on using conventional American military capabilities to defeat the external threat. This was a convenient decision that allowed the U.S. to bring all its military power to bear: Troops fought the nva on the ground; aircraft and “swift boats” attempted to cut off North Vietnamese supply lines; bombers attacked targets within North Vietnam in an attempt to dissuade Ho Chi Minh from continuing the fight.

Efforts to conduct a real counterinsurgency within the South were generally overwhelmed by this focus on a more or less conventional struggle against North Vietnam. Thus critics then and since have complained that the Combined Action Platoons (caps) program pioneered by the Marines would have been much more successful if only it had been better resourced, for example. Such claims are plausible, but they generally ignore two defining factors of the South Vietnamese insurgency: the presence of sizable enemy units maneuvering throughout the country, and the illegitimacy of the South Vietnamese government.

U.S. involvement in the military struggle in Vietnam followed the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, apparently with President Kennedy’s knowledge and consent, and his replacement by a series of military rulers with no real basis for legitimacy. This development is easier to criticize than it would have been to correct. Kennedy and his advisors were quite right that Diem was neither sufficiently popular nor sufficiently talented to serve as a key to political success, but at the same time it is difficult to imagine any government replacing him following an assassination that would have been able to gain the support of the people rapidly. The political circumstances of this war were extremely unpropitious.

But the military circumstances were even worse. Not only were there vc units roving the countryside and taking over villages periodically, but nva regular formations also maintained a continual presence in the South throughout the period of American involvement. The famous Tet Offensive of 1968 was a military disaster for the Vietnamese communists, but it was nevertheless a large-scale conventional military attack that posed a major challenge to American forces before they were able to crush it. And the war ended, of course, when North Vietnam launched a massive conventional offensive that defeated the South Vietnamese army in conventional battles in 1975, seizing the country and subjugating it.

American forces in Vietnam certainly did face many of the problems common to insurgencies, including fighting for the “hearts and minds” of the populace, combating guerrillas who do not wear uniforms and who blend into the local population when not shooting, and so on. For many American soldiers, these were the standard problems of day-to-day existence, and there are no doubt many lessons to be drawn on this tactical level. But the defining events and movements of this war depended upon the presence of an inviolate sanctuary (no American president was ever willing to invade North Vietnam, and even the bombing was narrowly constrained in its targeting, if very heavy) and of large numbers of indigenous and external soldiers organized into military units of up to division size. This fact shaped the counterinsurgency problem and American strategy so profoundly that comparisons to Iraq today, in which neither factor is significant, are inappropriate. [...]

Are there, then, no lessons that we can learn from Vietnam to improve our strategy in Iraq? Of course, there are. But many of them have already been implemented, and we must be as concerned about the danger of applying false lessons as about the risk of not applying valid ones. The importance of minimizing civilian casualties and collateral damage emerges clearly from Vietnam, and centcom has taken that lesson very much to heart. It is doubtful that any military organization could do better in this regard than the coalition has in Iraq, despite a certain number of mistakes. The importance of integrating planning for humanitarian assistance and reconstruction efforts into military operations is also clear from Vietnam, and here again centcom has done an outstanding job by comparison with any other such conflict. We have already considered the numerous political lessons the Bush administration clearly learned from that failure three decades ago, and that it has applied intelligently and with an astonishing degree of success in Iraq. Much of what has gone right in Iraq is the result of reactions of one sort or another to the experience of Vietnam.

It is unlikely, however, that plumbing Vietnam for additional examples, for strategies to defeat the insurgents, or for other insights into this very different conflict will be helpful.


The most important thing to learn from Vietnam is that the most dangerous enemy is across the aisle on the Hill.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:45 AM

A SCRAPPY ONE THOUGH:

Pat Putnam: Ringside observer with soul of a poet (George Kimball, 12/01/05, The Sweey Science)

When China entered the Korean Conflict in the fall of 1950, the Red Army came pouring across the 38th Parallel and quickly overwhelmed remnants of the United States Marine Corps at Chosin.

The massive counter-attack had been directed toward the South Korean army, which had promptly fled en masse, leaving its American allies to be slaughtered or taken prisoner. When Pat Putnam reflected on that experience late one night at the old Flame bar in Las Vegas, he described it as having been reduced to "two million Chinese and one little Irishman."

Already wounded, Putnam, along with several hundred of his comrades, was captured and shipped off to a POW camp in Manchuria, where he spent the next 17 months surviving on a diet of maggots and rice. When he was released, at the conclusion of the hostilities, he weighed 85 lbs.

For the rest of his life he refused to darken the door of a Chinese restaurant, but he harbored even more ill-will toward the Koreans, who had abandoned him to his fate, than to his captors themselves.

Thirty-five years later, Pat was covering a boxing match at Caesars Palace when the promoter, Bob Arum, introduced him to a visiting dignitary from the South Korean Boxing Federation – "Lieutenant General Kim of the Army of the Republic of Korea".

"Turn around," Cpl Putnam ordered the general, "so I can see if I recognize you." [...]

For a quarter-century he reigned as Sports Illustrated's boxing writer extraordinaire. He authored more than 50 cover stories for the world's preeminent sports magazine, and in 1982 he was the recipient of the Nat Fleischer Award for Distinguished Boxing Journalism.

The 1987 "Fight of the Century" between Marvelous Marvin Hagler and Ray Charles Leonard was shrouded in some controversy. Sugar Ray was returning to the ring after an absence of three years, and the medical community was divided over the question of whether, having undergone surgery for a detached retina, he should be fighting at all.

When the boxers appeared at a press conference on the eve of the fight, Arum preceded the question-and-answer session with a decree ruling out any questions about Leonard's eye. From far in the back of the room, Putnam raised his hand and was duly called upon.

"Hey, Ray," he asked. "How many fingers am I holding up?"


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:36 AM

CALLING ALL NATIVISTS--YOUR NATION NEEDS YOU:

A drought of farm labor (Daniel B. Wood, 12/02/05, The Christian Science Monitor)

Imperial Valley lettuce farmer Jack Vessey says it's the worst in his lifetime. Farther north in California's Central Valley, orange grower Manuel Cunha calls it the most constrained since before World War II. Coastal tomato grower Luwanna Holmstrom constantly worries about a repeat of two years ago, when she had to plow under $2.5 million in tomatoes left unpicked.

California and Arizona farmers - producers of half the nation's citrus and 90 percent of its vegetables and nuts - are struggling with an acute labor shortage. The situation, worsened by crackdowns on illegal immigration since 9/11, also extends to other states and is no longer just a matter of possible price increases on lettuce, oranges, or almonds, farmers say. Rather, it is a turning point in the nation's ability to produce its own food - and possibly the loss of major parts of its agriculture industry.


If the Minutemen really want to alleviate the immigration "problem," they should go pick crops.


MORE:
Most of what goes into the American salad bowl was picked by illegals (JULIANA BARBASSA, 12/02/05, Associated Press)

Men and women who have crossed the border illegally - mostly from Mexico - may number as high as 20 million, with 12 million to 15 million holding jobs, according to analysts at Bear Stearns in New York. An analysis by Barron's estimated they account for about $970 billion of the goods and services produced by the real economy.

While other industries - service, construction, food processing - have larger total numbers of undocumented immigrants, the majority of farmworkers are illegal immigrants.

They make up 53 percent of the approximately 1.8 million farmworkers in the country, up from about 12 percent in 1989-1990, according to the Labor Department's Agricultural Workers Survey.

"The fact is, the fresh produce industry couldn't exist without a foreign work force, but we don't have a mechanism to bring in foreign workers," said Tom Nassif, president of Western Growers Association, which represents more than 3,000 farmers in Arizona and California.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:32 AM

WELL, HE WAS A SECULARIST...:

Dems Back Saddam Hussein in New Poll (NewsMax, 12/02/05)

Democrats have given Saddam Hussein a shocking vote of confidence in the latest Fox News Opinion Dynamics survey, with a solid plurality saying the world would be better off if the Butcher of Baghdad was still in power.

Forty-one percent of Democrats gave Saddam a thumbs up, while just 34 percent said Iraq is better served with the murderous dictator gone, reports the New York Post.

In stark contrast, 78 percent of Republicans said toppling the mass-murdering leader left everyone better off. Just 10 percent said they wished Saddam still ruled Iraq.


That makes the divide between the two parties a bit too clear.


MORE:
It's propaganda time (Walter Jajko, December 2, 2005, LA Times0

CRITICS OF THE Iraq war are outraged over the revelation that the U.S. military has been paying millions of dollars to plant pro-American, Pentagon-written propaganda articles in Iraqi newspapers and to buy off Iraqi journalists with monthly stipends.

But in my opinion, it's about time. Information is a critical part of any war, and the U.S. has for too long — to its own detriment — ignored this powerful and essential tool, a tool especially well-suited to the globalized Information Age.

Even third-rate countries routinely use information and disinformation as an instrument of foreign policy, often against the United States. The U.S., in turn, cannot win the war of ideas by speaking softly or keeping its mouth shut. But we have been doing just that.


It seems unsafe to assume that critics want to win the war of ideas or even see America more than a fourth-rate country.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:30 AM

W FULFILLS OUR POTENTIAL:

Job growth springs back after hurricanes (Reuters, 12/02/05)

The U.S. job market sprung back last month from a hurricane-induced slowdown as nonfarm employers added 215,000 workers, according to a government report on Friday that showed the economy on solid ground.

In its monthly employment report, the Labor Department also said the unemployment rate held steady in November at 5 percent.

"This fits with an economy which is just humming along here at close to potential," said Kathleen Stephansen, director of global economics at Credit Suisse First Boston in New York.


70 in '06?


MORE:
President Discusses Strong Economic Growth and Job Creation (President George W. Bush, The Rose Garden, 12/02/05)

Thanks to good, old-fashioned American hard work and productivity, innovation, and sound economic policies of cutting taxes and restraining spending, our economy continues to gain strength and momentum.

Our economy added 215,000 jobs for the month of November. We've added nearly 4.5 million new jobs in the last two-and-a-half years. Third-quarter growth of this year was 4.3 percent. That's in spite of the fact that we had hurricanes and high gasoline prices. The unemployment rate is 5 percent. And that's lower than the average for the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.

We have every reason to be optimistic about our economic future. I mean, when you think about the news that's come in, the jobs report, the recent report on strong economic growth, low inflation, strong productivity, lower gasoline prices, a strong housing market, increases in consumer confidence and business investment, our economic horizon is as bright as it's been in a long time.

The foundation for growth is strong. It's based upon low taxes and restrained government spending, legal reform, incentives for saving and investment.

The small business sector is vibrant. Most new jobs in America are created by the small business sector, and our entrepreneurs are doing well. We got the best work force in America -- in the world. People are productive, they're hardworking. Our ingenuity and know-how and -- is vibrant. This economy is in good shape.

We're not going to rest until every American who wants a job can find one. We're going to continue to work for good policies for our workers and our entrepreneurs. I'll continue to push for pro-growth economic policies, all aimed at making sure every American can realize the American Dream.

Thank you very much.


Humility is a fine thing, but he needs to keep talking up his economy.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:22 AM

WE'LL PAY YOU NOT TO KILL OUR FUTURE:

Pay women not to have abortions, say Italian MPs (John Hooper, December 2, 2005, The Guardian)

A proposal to pay women in Italy not to have abortions was rapidly gaining momentum yesterday as politicians of right and left alike gave it their endorsement.

The scheme - put forward by the left - came against a background of mounting pressure from the Roman Catholic church for a rethink of the country's 1978 abortion law. [...]

The language issuing from the Vatican has grown stronger in recent weeks with one cardinal describing abortion as "the worst kind of murder". On Wednesday a parliamentary committee gave the go-ahead for a commission of inquiry into the workings of Italy's act, passed at a time when the feminist lobby in Italy was stronger and more active than today.

One reason why the latest initiative has gathered support is that it addresses Italy's failure to produce enough children. In 2003 the fertility rate - the number of children per woman of childbearing age - was only 1.27, one of the lowest in the world. A slight increase in recent years has been due to immigrant mothers.

The low fertility rate threatens to undermine competitiveness and make Italy's welfare system unsustainable.


Macabre, but necessary, even if too little too late.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 9:11 AM

IF YOU WERE ZBIG WOULD YOU BE OFFERING YOUR EXPERTISE ON HANDLING IRAN? (via Kevin Whited):

A Zbig Deal: Democrats need a coherent foreign policy. Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski is here to help (Tara McKelvey, 12.01.05, American Prospect)

Some Democrats, such as Senator Joseph Biden, say they regret their decision to support the Iraq war. What do you think Democrats overall should be saying and doing?

The Democrats have a responsibility vis à vis the American people: to act as an alternative and to provide a vision of a strategy that avoids the pitfalls of what the Bush administration has created. [...]

What kind of alternative should Democrats offer?

In my view, the Bush administration has slid into unilateralist posturing. The administration's definition of American leadership is, essentially, "We direct, and you follow". Its most extreme form involves a slogan the president has become fond of: If you’re not with us, you’re against us. It’s a self-defeating posture that undercuts America’s capacity to lead. Democrats in particular should promote consensus-building. Consensus means compromise. Consensus means joint action. Consensus means responding to problems with one’s trusted friends. Consensus excludes the notion of condemning one’s friends as weaklings or weasels if they don’t agree with us. That is a prescription for self-isolation.

The president never misses an opportunity to revile the Iranian government and to talk as if we favor regime change in that country. We have refused to participate in multilateral talks, demanding instead that Europeans conduct negotiations with Iranians, on the grounds that U.S.-Iranian talks would legitimate the Iranian regime. And we’re taking the posture that we’ll not be part of any quid pro quo. Yet we expect Iranians to make substantial concessions. This is a good illustration of how not to conduct a serious international effort.


Mr. Brzezinski tees himself up perfectly for a Big Bertha-wielding Mark Steyn, HMM. WHAT COULD HE POSSIBLY MEAN BY THAT?.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:57 AM

IF THERE ARE TWO STATES AT PEACE WHO CARES ABOUT AN AGREEMENT?:

Go Your Own Way (MARTIN INDYK, 12/02/05, NY Times)

American interests might be better served by mustering international support for the establishment of a Palestinian state in Gaza first. Egypt is already quietly adopting the role of custodian in Gaza, putting Egyptian colonels in control of Palestinian border brigades, training the security services and leaning on terrorist organizations to cease their activities. With Egypt in the lead, the international community could help rebuild the institutions of governance in Gaza and reconstruct its economy. At the same time, Mr. Wolfensohn could focus his considerable energies on helping Gazans reorient their trade through Egyptian ports, across a border that is no longer controlled by Israel, and on generating foreign investment in Gaza.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration could prepare to negotiate with the next Israeli government over the extent of its withdrawal from the West Bank and the Arab suburbs of East Jerusalem. American negotiators should pay close attention to how a West Bank withdrawal will affect the contiguity of Palestinian territory and its connection to East Jerusalem.

This process is not a substitute for hammering out a final Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, which could be facilitated once a Palestinian state in Gaza extends its writ to the newly liberated areas of the West Bank. Rather, such steps would constitute a recognition that practical separation - between Israel and the Palestinians, and between Gaza and the West Bank - may serve as a precursor to peace. Only when Egyptians and Jordanians put their own separate interests first was peace forged between those countries and Israel. Perhaps the time has come for Gazans to do the same.


Funny how unilateral democratic hawkishness has become the default position when just a few years ago it was irresponsible.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:51 AM

FREE-FLOATING ANGST ISN'T A GOVERNING PHILOSOPHY:

Profusion of Rebel Groups Helps Them Survive in Iraq (DEXTER FILKINS, 12/02/05, NY Times)

Here is a small sampling of the insurgent groups that have claimed responsibility for attacks on Americans and Iraqis in the last few months:

Supporters of the Sunni People. The Men's Faith Brigade. The Islamic Anger. Al Baraa bin Malik Suicide Brigade. The Tawid Lions of Abdullah ibn al Zobeir. While some of them, like the Suicide Brigade, claim an affiliation with Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and Al Qaeda claims them, others say they have acted alone or under the guidance of another group.

While on Wednesday President Bush promised nothing less than "complete victory" over the Iraqi insurgency, the apparent proliferation of militant groups offers perhaps the best explanation as to why the insurgency has been so hard to destroy.


It also though explains why the insurgency isn't a long term threat--they have no unified purpose nor plan and nothing to offer the Iraqi people.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:29 AM

THE VATICAN AND THE THUGOCRACY:

Five Chinese Nuns Hospitalized After Land Dispute (Philip P. Pan, December 2, 2005, Washington Post)

At least five Catholic nuns resisting a government plan to sell land claimed by their church to a real estate developer are hospitalized in the Chinese city of Xian after thugs armed with sticks and clubs assaulted them, a witness and others familiar with the incident said Thursday.

One of the nuns, identified as Cheng Jing, 34, was blinded in the attack and has recovered the use of only one eye, and another nun was scheduled for surgery on her spine, according to people who have visited them. A third was recovering with a broken arm, and two others incurred serious head injuries.

The attack occurred on the night of Nov. 23 on a parcel of disputed land in downtown Xian adjacent to the city's main state-sanctioned Catholic church, the Southern Cathedral. About 30 to 40 nuns were trying to stop workers from demolishing an elementary school there when the thugs began beating them, injuring at least 16, the sources said.

Violent conflicts over housing and land have become common in Chinese cities as developers, often backed by Communist Party officials, seek to evict whole neighborhoods to make way for lucrative real estate projects.


It's long past time to turn up the heat on the Pope for putting the Church in bed with the PRC.

MORE (via Qiao Yang):
I believe it was (Richard John Neuhaus, First Things: On the Square)

I believe it was the nineteenth-century Swiss historian Jakob Burckhardt who said that you can always count on Rome to come to terms with the barbarians. He did not intend it as a criticism but merely to observe that the Church will make political accomodations necessary to securing its mission. The observation is pertinent to the long-standing desire of the Vatican to normalize relations with China.

John Allen spoke recently with Ambassador Chou-seng Tou of Taiwan. The Holy See is the last remaining European state to maintain relations with Taiwan. “Once the people of mainland China enjoy religious freedom, the demand for other freedoms will follow,” Tou said. “The regime is afraid that it will become a tidal wave and things will get out of control.”

“We are somewhat the victims of the Holy See’s strong desire for rapprochement with the mainland,” Tou said.

He cited the fact that the Holy See has not appointed a nuncio, or full ambassador, to Taiwan since 1979. The pope is represented in Taipei by a chargé d’affaires, in what many see as preparation for an eventual shift to Beijing. “We’re the victims,” Tou repeated, “but we also understand.” Perhaps Mr. Tou has read Burckhardt.

President Bush was in China last week and was outspoken about the imperative of religious freedom. According to the Italian daily La Stampa, anonymous Vatican sources called his efforts unschedued and unhelpful. “If we go to Beijing, it will certainly not be on the back of the U.S.,” a Vatican official was quoted as saying. “The Chinese authorities will not grant us greater religious freedom on the basis that Bush asked for it.”

This is a typically churlish expression of the anti-Americanism that is to be found in some Vatican circles.

>


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:52 AM

ODD THAT THE CONSTITUTION ASSUMES THE UNTHINKABLE:

Bushwhacking the Constitution:
U.S. Senate proves as disdainful of the Constitution as George W. Bush. Be forewarned. (Nat Hentoff, November 28th, 2005, Village Voice)

These are weighty and momentous considerations that go far beyond the detainees at Guantánamo. . . .[This amendment] . . . takes away jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States. It is untenable and unthinkable and ought to be rejected.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter , on the floor of the Senate, November 15, objecting to an amendment to the defense authorization bill by Lindsey Graham, Carl Levin, and Jon Kyl that would effectively close our federal courts to any charges of abuse, including tort ure, of Guantánamo prisoners. The amendment passed 84 to 14.

I learned long ago not to say the sky is falling when it's only raining. However, the hard rain on our fundamental liberties....


"our"?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:29 AM

EVEN PAT BUCHANAN WILL HAVE A LEGIT GREEN CARD SOON:

Ireland backs U.S. legalizing illegal aliens (Stephen Dinan and Jerry Seper, December 2, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Ireland's government wants the United States to legalize Irish illegal aliens in the United States, underscoring the intense interest foreign governments are showing in the immigration debate now playing out in Congress.

Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern met yesterday with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and told reporters the Irish parliament has endorsed Mr. Kennedy's bill to grant illegal aliens now here a multistep path to citizenship.

"We do support it ... completely and on an all-party basis, and I want to tease out with him how he sees this matter progressing, particularly given the recent developments, not least the speech by President Bush," Mr. Ahern said.

There's no way the mics and wops can ever be assimilated into our fundamentally Protestant culture....

MORE:
Chertoff Pushes Guest-Worker Program: The Homeland Security chief proposes that the plan be combined with tougher enforcement (Nicole Gaouette, December 2, 2005, LA Times)

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Thursday that any overhaul of immigration law must include a guest-worker program to accommodate businesses' need for labor and to ease pressure on law enforcement.

His comments to reporters came as the administration promotes President Bush's vision for border security, which differs from immigration proposals to be considered in the House.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:27 AM

NOW?:

Now, there's proof: Men, women different (Jennifer Harper, December 2, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Attention, Dr. Frankenstein, and maybe Gloria Steinem: There are girl brains, then there are boy brains. But there's not one generic human brain, no matter what hand-wringing feminists may insist in their quest for sexual equality.

Some stark new clinical evidence shows that men and women are just not the same upstairs.

"The comedians are right. The science proves it. A man's brain and a woman's brain really do work differently," a research team from the University of Alberta in Canada announced yesterday.

After analyzing magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs) of 23 men and 10 women, the team found that the sexes use different areas of the brain even when working on exactly the same task.

Although, the team was stumped when Eric and Julia Roberts used exactly the same parts of their brains for similar tasks....


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:22 AM

SO THE DEMOCRATS ARE INDEED THE ONES HURT:

Storm victims praise churches (Audrey Hudson, December 2, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Louisiana residents gave churches higher marks than government agencies in responding to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and most prefer that the federal government control rebuilding funds rather than local officials, according to a Louisiana State University study.

On a scale of one (not effective) to 10 (very effective), residents gave churches the highest mark of 8.1, and New Orleans city agencies and state agencies received the lowest rating of 4.6. [...]

Nonprofits overall received the second-highest relief rating with 7.5, as did the religious-based Salvation Army, slightly ahead of the American Red Cross' 7.4 rating. Insurance companies scored 5.2.

As for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) -- whose former director, Michael D. Brown, lost his job over the agency's response to Katrina -- and the federal government, which was criticized for its handling of the natural catastrophes, Louisianans gave them better scores than they gave both the state and New Orleans.


In a less backwards region, like Mississippi, you'd expect local and state government to beat the feds, otherwise the order is what you'd expect in America.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:12 AM

YOU CAN'T SELL AMERICANS HOPELESSNESS:

Democratic split on war pleases GOP (Bill Sammon, December 2, 2005, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

The White House moved aggressively yesterday to exploit a growing rift among Democrats over the question of a pullout from Iraq, while other Republicans cheered the split as "chaos."

One day after President Bush gave a major speech outlining his plan for victory in Iraq, the Republican Party expressed delight that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi endorsed a pullout plan proposed by fellow Democratic Rep. John P. Murtha. Such a withdrawal is opposed by most Democrats, especially White House contenders and members of Congress facing competitive elections.

"While Nancy Pelosi and the left wing adopt a defeatist position of retreat in Iraq, many other Democrats are scrambling to distance themselves from their pessimism," Republican National Committee spokesman Danny Diaz said yesterday.

Torn by internal divisions, stuck in Iraq, with the worst economy since the Great Depression and a Supreme Court nominee headed to defeat, the Republicans face...oh, wait, that was last month...


MORE:
Democratic Lawmakers Splinter on Iraq: Many Surprised as Pelosi Calls for a Fast Pullout (Jonathan Weisman, December 2, 2005, Washington Post)

The move caught some in the party by surprise. It threw a wrench into a carefully calibrated Democratic theme emerging in the Senate that called for 2006 to be a "significant year of progress" in Iraq, with Iraqi security forces making measurable progress toward relieving U.S. troops of combat duties. Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said last month that "it's time to take the training wheels off the Iraqi government."

What's more, House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) issued a statement Wednesday that was in marked contrast to Pelosi's. "I believe that a precipitous withdrawal of American forces in Iraq could lead to disaster, spawning a civil war, fostering a haven for terrorists and damaging our nation's security and credibility," he said.

Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:06 AM

AS THE PUPILS BECOME TEACHERS:

Malawi rejects 'pro-gay' bishop (BBC, 12/02/05)

African Anglican bishops have blocked the appointment of a "pro-gay" bishop in Malawi.

Liberal British vicar, Rev Nicholas Henderson, was rejected for his support for gay rights, the Anglican Church of Central Africa said in a statement.

He was bishop-elect of the Lake Malawi diocese, but his association with the theologically liberal Modern Church People's Union made him "unsuitable".

The Anglican Church in Africa takes a conservative view of homosexuality.


If by "conservative" you mean Judeo-Christian...


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:03 AM

IF THE STANS CAN DO IT...:

Kazakhs set to vote for stability (Ian MacWilliam, 12/02/05, BBC News)

Kazakhstan goes to the polls on Sunday to elect a president, in a distinctly upbeat mood.

While the other Central Asian republics struggle with repressive presidents and sluggish economies, this vast country - the ninth largest in the world, by area - is on a roll. [...]

To the north, the new Kazakh capital, Astana, is rising from the steppe, a post-modernist showcase for a country which is proudly emerging at last from the shadow of its domineering Soviet-era master, Russia.

Recent elections in other post-Soviet republics - Georgia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan's neighbour, Kyrgyzstan - have triggered popular protests which drove presidents from power. But few people expect such an outcome in Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan certainly shares some of those countries' problems - a corrupt elite, sharp divisions between rich and poor, and an opaque electoral system which favours the incumbent. But unlike Kazakhstan, those three republics were all still deep in post-Soviet torpor.

On the streets of Almaty, most people seem to think their country is on the right track.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:21 AM

THE ALLY WHO MATTERS:

India to get over 60 warships (Times of India, December 02, 2005)

Admiral Arun Prakash, the Indian Navy chief, on Friday said the role played by his force in mounting relief operations after tsunami had led to greater respect for the nation and a desire among other naval powers to forge closer ties with New Delhi. [...]

The swiftness with which it had mobilised 32 warships, 30 aircraft and over 5,000 personnel for the operations had established the navy as a "powerful instrument of state policy", he remarked.

After having conducted joint exercises during this year with the navies of US, Russia and France, the Indian Navy had signed pacts with Thailand and Indonesia to carry out coordinated patrols in regional waters.

"We also have good ties with the navies of Singapore and Vietnam and are in the process of establishing closer ties with Myanmar and Malaysia," Prakash said.

The navy chief also disclosed that his force had ordered 27 warships ranging from patrol boats to frigates and had "in-principle" clearance from the government for 36 more vessels.

"There is probably no other navy with a shipbuilding programme of such magnitude," he said.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:09 AM

THE PLUMBER'S UKRAINIAN?:

Poland is the New Germany: Cheap Labor from the East (Marion Kraske and Jan Puhl, 11/28/05, Der Spiegel)

Csaba and János are just two of several hundred thousand from the Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, Moldavia, Romania and Bulgaria eking out a living in the new European Union states. The overwhelming majority of them are day laborers -- poverty having pushed them across the borders into the new boom economies of Eastern Europe. Sixteen years since the Iron Curtain disintegrated, the new kids on the EU block are now experiencing growth rates of between 4 and 9 percent.

Prior to 1989 and in the turbulent phase that followed in the 1990s, those moving west seeking prosperity were predominantly Hungarians, Poles, Czechs and Slovaks. Many in the western media predicted a veritable flood of immigrants from these very countries once they had joined the EU on May 1, 2004. And yet, according to estimates of the German Institute of Economic Research, in the year following Eastern Europe's accession, the number of those entering Western Europe was a mere 100,000 to 150,000 -- far fewer than had been feared.

Partly, of course, the small size of the influx was due to certain countries, Germany and Austria in particular, taking advantage of EU rules that allow member countries to open their borders slowly, step by step.

But as their economic success increases, Europe's former problem children have now become attractive destinations themselves for migrant workforces from further east -- from former Soviet states. The International Organization for Migration, active all over the world, notes that "immigration is a whole new phenomenon for these countries."

Michael Jandl, of the International Center for Migration Policy Development in Vienna, points out that Poland and the Czech Republic have especially experienced a rapid rise in illicit, foreign labor crossing their eastern borders. An estimated 600,000 are working without official papers in Poland, the largest of the latest additions to the EU, while half that number are engaged in similar activity on Czech soil. Hungary's black market labor force numbers at least 100,000. "The Ukrainians are now doing the same work in Poland which the Poles took on in Germany in the '90s" says Justyna Frelak, an expert at the Warsaw Institute for Public Affairs.


So turns the virtuous economic cycle.


MORE:
East-to-West Migration Remaking Europe: Latvian's Journey to Ireland for Work Reflects New Dynamic of Enlarged E.U. (Kevin Sullivan, November 28, 2005, Washington Post)

Since Latvia and nine other countries joined the European Union in May 2004, almost 450,000 people, most of them from the poorest fringes of the formerly communist east, have legally migrated west to the job-rich economies of Ireland, Britain and Sweden. Germany, France and other longtime E.U. members have kept the doors closed for now but promise to open them in coming years to satisfy the bloc's principle that citizens of all member states share the right to move to any other.

Perhaps nowhere is this feeling stronger than in Ireland, a country of 4 million people with one of Europe's fastest-growing economies and memories of how the world took in destitute Irish migrants in generations past. About 150,000 new workers -- mostly Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians -- have registered with the Irish government in the past 18 months, statistics show, although officials say that some may have already been there.

Citizens of E.U. countries do not need Irish visas or work permits, and there are no restrictions on how long they can stay or what work they can do. They are generally eligible for government health care and other services. There is no special system for them to seek citizenship.

From Dublin to Donegal, it is now difficult to find a construction site, factory, hotel or pub where some of the workers are not speaking Polish, Russian, Latvian or Lithuanian. They are changing the country's ethnic character. Multi-language newspapers cater to the job-seekers. Banks have hired tellers who speak their languages. East European grocery stores sell meats and cheeses from home, and phone companies post flyers in Internet cafes listing cheap calls to Warsaw, Vilnius, Riga, Tallinn.

Immigration, of course, also brings social friction and occasional violence. In Ireland, as in other once-homogenous European societies, people are struggling to accommodate newcomers with different cultures, languages and religions, and make room in already strained welfare and school systems.

But many here see the movement of workers as pure opportunity, for themselves and for the immigrants.

"Our young Irish don't want to do these jobs anymore," said Alfie Lambert, who runs a fast-growing business in County Wexford, in southeastern Ireland, that makes door frames for the booming Irish building trade.

Lambert said only two of his 40 factory employees were Irish, and about half were Latvian. "Out of 10 Latvians, you'd have 10 good workers," he said. Lambert hired a Latvian woman to help him recruit more by placing ads in newspapers in Riga. Latvia, with 2.2 million people and a 10 percent jobless rate, has responded eagerly, sending 14,000 workers to Ireland in the past 18 months.

"We can't live without the Latvians," Lambert said. "We can't grow without them."


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:03 AM

COUNT THIS ONE AS A SQUANDER:

Summoned for Jury Duty, President Sends His Regrets (RALPH BLUMENTHAL, 12/02/05, NY Times)

There was a scheduling conflict, so a certain McLennan County rancher will not show up Monday in Waco for jury duty after all.

"The president has other commitments," said the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan.

No problem, said Judge Ralph T. Strother of State District Court, though President Bush's name had popped up on a random list of Texans summoned for jury service. Judge Strother said he had now given Mr. Bush, who owns a 1,600-acre ranch outside Crawford, a choice of six other dates from January to June 2006.


The White House is generally smarter than that.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

WE DON'T SHIP FUR TO BRITAIN ANYMORE EITHER:

Dreaming Big to Keep America Rolling (David Ignatius, December 2, 2005, Washington Post)

Economist Philip Verleger was traveling in Asia last month when the news broke that General Motors was slashing 30,000 jobs to try to reverse its death spiral. A Japanese economist he had known for many years asked him a stark question: "What great nation will allow its major manufacturing company to fail?"

Which is why Japan failed to become a great nation. The germane question is: what sort of nation defines its greatness by the number of its people doing parts assembly jobs?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:00 AM

GOOD POLITICS, BAD POLICY:

GST: Great Strategy by Tories (Toronto Sun, 12/02/05)

How can Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Liberals possibly object to Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's welcome promise to reduce the GST from 7% to 5%?

Yesterday, Harper said a Conservative government would reduce the national sales tax immediately to 6% -- and to 5% within five years.

Not only would this offer much-needed, if modest, tax relief to all Canadians, it would also help stimulate our economy by giving retail sales a boost.

As for the predictable attacks yesterday by Martin and Finance Minister Ralph Goodale, have they forgotten that Jean Chretien promised to scrap the GST during the 1993 campaign -- and blatantly broke that pledge once in power?


They ought to scrap other taxes and keep the consumption tax, but it's funny that the tax that helped knock them from power could help them now.


December 1, 2005

Posted by kevin_whited at 11:34 PM

THAT'LL SHOW 'EM

Lawyers in Bangladesh to protest bombings (Nicholas George, Financial Times, 11/30/2005)

Lawyers in Bangladesh have called a nationwide general strike on Thursday to protest a wave of bloody attacks against the legal profession which has been targeted by fundamentalist groups aiming to impose strict Islamic law in this south Asian nation.

Americans think we have a low regard for lawyers!

It's not clear that a general strike is the best response, though. One wonders if the French Embassy didn't provide the advice behind that move.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:58 PM

THIS TIME SHOOT EVERYONE IN THE CAR (via David Hill, The Bronx):

Activists Abducted in Same Spot As Italian (ROBERT H. REID and DONNA ABU-NASR , 12/01/05, AP)

Four Christian peace activists held hostage in Iraq were kidnapped at the same place where an Italian journalist was abducted, raising the possibility one group carried out both attacks...

Yes, the putative victims.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:12 PM

MARTINA LUTHER:

Muslim women take charge of their faith (Marlise Simons, 12/01/05, International Herald Tribune)

[Hanife] Karakus, 24, does not call herself a feminist; she simply says she is a French lawyer. But she qualifies as part of the quiet revolution spreading among young European Muslim women, a new generation that claims the same rights as their Western sisters while not renouncing Islamic principles.

For many, the key is education, an option often denied their mothers and grandmothers. These daughters of the poor immigrants from mostly Muslim countries are moving into universities, studying law, medicine and anthropology. They are getting jobs in social work, in schools, offices, business and media. French, English, German or Dutch may be their native languages.

Unlike their homebound elders, these emancipated Muslim women use the Internet and spend hours in the proliferating Islamic chat rooms. Web sites are now favorite trysting places, a chance for risk-free "halal dating" - that is, interacting with men in a way that violates no social or religious codes.

In the crowded immigrant suburbs ringing Paris, the scene of recent riots mostly led by young Muslim males, teachers say female students are the most motivated because they have the most to gain.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:30 PM

WHO'S GOING TO OFFER THEM ANY?:

Public wants change: new poll (Allan Woods and Norma Greenaway, with files from Anne Dawson and James Gordon, November 30, 2005, CanWest News Service)

As political leaders took to the campaign trail, a new poll shows a divided electorate that would likely return another minority government.

A new poll, conducted immediately after the defeat of the Liberal minority government, puts the Liberals and Conservatives in a dead heat - each with 31 per cent support.

The Ipsos-Reid poll, done for CanWest News Service and Global News, shows a public itching for change - 57 per cent of those surveyed agreed the "federal Liberal party is fundamentally corrupt and does not deserve to be re-elected."


Tony Blair, John Howard, George W. Bush, and Junichiro Koizumi have recently won historic victories running on Third Way reforms and a global crusade for democracy. But the EU constitution was defeated in France and Denmark (?) because it was seen to threaten that same kind of liberalization of the wefare state and then Angela Merkel and Civic Platform in Poland underperformed for the same reason. It seems unlikely that Canada's conservatives will even run on a platform of genuine reform, but if they did it would be interesting to see whether Canada voted like a part of the Anglosphere or like continental Europe.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 5:14 PM

SOMETIMES THE WITCHES FIGHT BACK:

Don’t Fear the Designer: Competing philosophies and beliefs. (Tom Bethell, 12/01/05, National Review)

If we discount trivial examples like bacterial resistance or "change over time" or small changes in beak size among the finches of the Galapagos Islands, we don't know very much about evolution at all. We don't see it happening around us, or in the rocks.

In my book, I quote Colin Patterson, a senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, telling a professional audience at the American Museum in New York that there was "not one thing" he knew about evolution. He had asked the evolutionary-morphology seminar at the University of Chicago if there was anything they knew about it, and, he said: "The only answer I got was silence."

Patterson, who died a few years ago, was an atheist and once told me that he regarded the Bible as "a pack of lies." There was no way he could be accused of Biblical primitivism. People would ask him, with a note of alarm, "Well, you do believe in evolution, don't you?" He would respond that science wasn't supposed to be a system of belief.

So let's look at the evidence adduced for evolution. The fossil record is sparse. Bats, for example — the only mammals capable of powered flight — appear suddenly in the fossil record, with their sonar systems already fully developed. "There are no half bats," as a world expert on bats once said. The experts have no idea what animal gave rise to the first bat.

The creatures that evolution purports to explain are fantastically complex. The cell, thought at the time of Darwin to be a "simple little lump of protoplasm," is as complicated as a high-tech factory. We have no actual evidence that it evolved — and yet we are asked, indeed obliged, to believe that it did.

In the human body, there are 300 trillion cells, and each "knows" what part it must play in the growing organism. To this day, embryologists have no idea how this happens — even though they have been trying to figure it out for 150 years.

Imagine an automobile company that came out with a new model that could do the remarkable things that living creatures do. How amazed we would be! The car would be able to repair itself, if not damaged too badly. Dent it and, in a few days, the dent is gone. It needs to rest for a few hours every day but it can keep going for 80 years on bread and water, with perhaps vegetables thrown in. And it can hook up with another version of the same automobile, and produce in a few months' time new, tiny versions of itself, which will then grow up to full-size autos with the ability to reproduce in turn.

We have been unable to do anything remotely like this in the lab. Yet we are surrounded by lowly creatures that do these things every day — and we express no amazement. We have been trained to be blasé about the marvels of creation. "Oh, evolution did that," we say. "It was just a matter of random mutation; nothing surprising there." "These things arose by accident and were selected for."

That phrase — "it was selected for" — is regarded as a sufficient explanation for . . . everything. The same mundane phrase is given as the explanation for everything under the sun. How did the bats get sonar? "It arose by an accidental mutation of the genes and was selected for. Next question?" How did the eye develop? "Piecemeal. There was a random mutation and it conferred an advantage so it was selected for. Then the same thing happened over and over again. Next question?" How did the camel get its hump? "Random mutations conferred some advantage and so they were selected for. Next question?"

This is the science before which all knees must bend? These explanations are no better than "Just-So stories" (as one or two Harvard professors have rightly said). No actual digging in the dirt is needed: The theorist merely contemplates the trait in question and makes up a plausible story as to how it might have been advantageous.


When secularism was in the ascendant, and where it remains so today, it made sense for its adherents to demand that everyone pay obeisance to Darwinism--societies demand conformity to their core principles as a minimum condition of membership. But with secularism in decline, its ideologies are destined to fade as well. No one today believes in Freudianism. No one today takes Marxism seriously. Darwin will just be the third of the bearded god-killers to be interred. And not even scientists will miss his dogma.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 4:08 PM

JUST BECAUSE IT'S INEVITABLE DOESN'T MEAN IT'S QUICK:

We're building a democracy from the ground up: And we're succeeding (Col. Jimmie Jaye Wells, December 1, 2005, Dallas Morning News)

I regret that stories of success upon success are not reaching my family, friends and co-workers.

Yet, I'm proud that a stable democracy is developing. As the constitution continues to take shape, it appears that political power will flow to governors and provincial leaders. Independent political parties are forming, and projects continue to move ahead. In late October, I examined a water-treatment plant in Nasiriya that will provide water for more than a million people in southern Iraq. It, like democracy, can't be thrown together in a matter of weeks.

Our own history has plenty of examples of positive returns on American investments in reconstruction. None was an overnight success. Reconstruction after the American Civil War took at least 10 years amid vigilantism and extremism. After the Philippine-American War of 1899, the U.S. Army built schools and hospitals and developed democratic institutions there.

After the surrender of Japan, ending the Pacific war, some 190,000 engineer troops went about rebuilding Japan. Again, with U.S. help, this moved from a militaristic, feudal culture into a modern democracy within seven years. In Germany, former Nazi die-hards and Waffen-SS miscreants waged a deadly terrorism campaign against international aid workers, Germans and Allied troops. But under the European Recovery Program of 1948, or Marshall Plan, work continued, and West Germany became a sovereign nation 10 years after the war.

I'm proud of a nation that supports its fighting citizens, and I'm proud to serve in a free society that promotes free speech. As author and retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters commented recently, "If the military fails to speak for itself, fools will gladly speak for it."

As a soldier and not a writer, I can only hope that achievements in Iraq have more than equitable billing with the daily death tolls.


Ten years? Did any black Southerner think Reconstruction had succeeded yet a hundred years later?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:13 PM

SOMEONE HAS TO LEAD THE FORCES OF SURRENDER:

Pelosi endorses Murtha's pullout call (Brian DeBose, 12/01/05, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said yesterday she now agrees with Rep. John P. Murtha's call to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq immediately, adding that a majority of House Democrats also agree. [...]

"I believe that a majority of our caucus clearly supports Mr. Murtha," she added.

But not the No. 2 Democrat in the House, Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat.

MORE:
U.S. military reports decline in suicide bombings in Iraq (Robert H. Reid, December 1, 2005, Associated Press

The U.S. military said Thursday that suicide bombings fell in November to their lowest level in seven months after joint U.S.-Iraqi operations west of the capital. [...]

Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch told reporters that suicide bombings fell to 23 in November, which he attributed to successful U.S.-Iraqi military operations against insurgent strongholds in the Euphrates River valley west of the capital.

"His weapon of choice is suicide bombers,'' Lynch said of the insurgents. "In the month of November: only 23 suicide attacks; the lowest we've seen in the last seven months, the direct result of the effectiveness of our operations.''


Posted by Orrin Judd at 2:07 PM

G. O. JOE:

Lieberman In Step With GOP On How To Run War (DAVID LIGHTMAN, December 1 2005, Hartford Courant)

In Bush's address on the progress of the war, the president described those who have called for withdrawal timetables - including 38 of the Senate's 44 Democrats - as "sincerely wrong."

Then he cited Lieberman.

"As Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman said recently, setting an artificial timetable would `discourage our troops because it seems to be heading for the door. It will encourage the terrorists. It will confuse the Iraqi people.'

"Sen. Lieberman is right," the president said at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

Not according to Democrats, who lined up at the Capitol and around the country to sharply criticize Bush's approach - and, in some cases, Lieberman's avid support.


If only he believed in the 10 Commandments, Mr. Lieberman could be a Republican.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 1:35 PM

IF THE WHITE HOUSE DOESN'T EXPLOIT THIS THEY'RE WASTING AN OPPORTUNITY:

President Bush Is Called to Jury Duty (AP, 12/01/05)

President Bush could get a new title: juror No. 286. The president is among 600 potential jurors who have been summoned to report to court Monday in McLennan County, where his 1,600-acre Crawford ranch is located.

State District Judge Ralph Strother said he expects to get a response about the summons but doesn't expect Bush to report for duty.


Why not?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 12:31 PM

WHAT'S IN THE LAMB'S NAME? (via Jim Siegel):

Stop attacking our friends (ISI LEIBLER, Nov. 29, 2005, THE JERUSALEM POST)

UNLIKE OTHER Protestant denominations evangelicals do not subscribe to replacement theology and regard Judaism as a component of the formation of Christianity rather than being replaced by it. Their attitude toward Israel also contrasts starkly with the disgraceful behavior displayed toward Jews by other Protestant churches, many of whom now lead the pack in demonizing, and even promoting, divestment from Israel.

Of course Jews differ radically on many fundamental aspects of their religious belief. In that context we would do well to hearken to the words of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, who warned Jews to avoid becoming involved in theological dialogue with Christians - as distinct from jointly supporting the promotion of our Judeo-Christian heritage in its broadest social sense and accepting their friendship toward Israel.

My discussions and correspondence with evangelicals over these past years have convinced me that during this difficult time for the Jewish people, when many of our liberal friends have forsaken us, we are fortunate to have the support of such a group who strongly back Israel and seek no quid pro quo in exchange for their friendship. I cannot recollect a single example of a mainstream evangelical leader making demands on the Jewish community in return for support for Israel.

And, contrary to what is frequently alleged, the attitude toward Israel of the vast majority of evangelicals is not related to ulterior motives such as a desire to convert Jews, or in order to hasten the Christ's return as the messiah. Most act unconditionally out of genuine love for those whom they consider to be God's chosen people.

These Christians pray regularly for the well-being of Israel and the Jewish people; they politically support our right to live in peace and security, including lobbying Congress to support us; and they even raise considerable funds to help Jews in distress.

Many Jews simply cannot comprehend that there are Christians who genuinely love them as the source of their own religiosity.


Most importantly, the theocons chief theologian can hardly be bettered on the matter.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:44 AM

ADAM SMITH IS LONG DEAD:

Rankin the toast of Scotland as fans sing his praises (LOUISE GRAY, 12/01/05, The Scotsman)

IAN Rankin, the UK's bestselling crime author, was last night named this year's Top Scot at a glittering award ceremony that saw a wave of young Scottish talent coming to the fore.

The writer is best known for his depiction of the dark streets of Edinburgh where his most famous creation, Inspector Rebus, solves gruesome crimes.

In a setting in which Rankin's dishevelled and dysfunctional character John Rebus would surely have been uncomfortable, last night's ceremony took place in the plush surroundings of Prestonfield House where the leading sports people, writers, broadcasters and musicians celebrated the best of Scotland.


The Rebus series is fabulous, but it's kind of sad that a pulp fiction hack is the best the formerly-great country can produce.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:01 AM

STRIKE THAT, REVERSE IT, STILL PROVES MY POINT (via bboys):

Early Birds Had Dinosaur Feet (Bjorn Carey, 12/01/05, Fox News)

Modern bird feet have a hind toe that points backward and helps the birds perch on branches, power lines and pirates' shoulders.

Until a recent discovery of an extremely well preserved skeleton of the earliest known bird species, Archaeopteryx, scientists believed it too had a "perching toe." [...]

But the Thermopolis specimen, discovered in the Solnhofen region of southeastern Germany, clearly shows that Archaeopteryx's first toe extends from the side of its foot, like a human thumb, instead of backwards. The middle toe could be extended, and it had a large claw at its tip.

This configuration is similar to some late Jurassic dinosaur families, including the claw-footed Velociraptor and its cousins. As scientists consider Archaeopteryx as the first bird, this discovery strengthens the argument that modern birds evolved from dinosaurs.

This new interpretation will force scientists to rethink how Archaeopteryx got around, however.

Scientists previously thought that it and other early dino-birds such as Microraptor gui climbed to tree tops, hopped off, and glided to nearby trees. But in lacking the hind toe, Archaeopteryx would have had a hard time perching on a branch and might have made a clumsy show of hopping off and gliding away.


Which would explain why WASPs came to rule the world despite being devoid of rhthym--natural selection chooses for clumsiness and vulnerability.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 11:00 AM

AN ANTI-CHRIST (via Kevin Whited):

Offering Abortion, Rebirth: Yes, an Arkansas doctor says, he destroys life. But he believes the thousands of women who have relied on him have been 'born again.' (Stephanie Simon, November 29, 2005, LA Times)

Dr. William F. Harrison] opened an obstetrics and gynecology practice, but after the Supreme Court established abortion as a constitutional right in 1973, he decided to take on an additional specialty. Now 70, Harrison estimates he's terminated at least 20,000 pregnancies. [...]

Debate over President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr., has centered on abortion. Activists on both sides warn — or pray — that if Alito is confirmed, the court may one day reverse Roe vs. Wade.

At least a dozen states, and perhaps as many as 30, would probably continue to allow most abortions. But abortion rights activists predict that terminating a pregnancy would become a criminal act across much of the South, the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain region.

In Arkansas, for instance, the state constitution sets out "to protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth." At least 10 other states — including Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Utah — have similar language in their constitutions or legal codes.

Harrison warns every patient he sees that abortion may be illegal one day. He wants to stir them to activism, but most women respond mildly. [...]

He calls himself an "abortionist" and says, "I am destroying life."

But he also feels he's giving life: He calls his patients "born again."

"When you end what the woman considers a disastrous pregnancy, she has literally been given her life back," he says.

Before giving up obstetrics in 1991, Harrison delivered 6,000 babies. Childbirth, he says, should be joyous; a woman should never consider it a punishment or an obligation.

"We try to make sure she doesn't ever feel guilty," he says, "for what she feels she has to do."


He's kind of an avatar of the entire ideological content of the abortion movement: he revels in the kill; the point of his killing is to defy societal convention; he thinks he's giving women a rebirth; and he thinks he can take away their guilt for the sin.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 10:54 AM

CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR, W MIGHT GIVE IT TO YOU (via Jim in Chicago):

Dershowitz and Chomsky battle it out (MATT RAND, Nov. 30, 2005, THE JERUSALEM POST)

Two noted academics offered vastly different views on the history and path forward in the Arab-Israeli conflict recently as Alan Dershowitz and Noam Chomsky debated each other at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. [...]

Chomsky alleged that, in 1976, Israel rejected outright a peace offer by Arab states. He said Israel missed a later opportunity when, in 1988, the PLO went from "tacit approval to formal acceptance of the two state solution." [...]

Chomsky said ultimately the United States was to blame. "The [settlements] will continue as long as Washington insists on marching along the road to catastrophe…by rejecting minimal Palestinian rights. And if that march to catastrophe continues, we will only have ourselves to blame," Chomsky said.


So shouldn't Mr. Chomsky support the Bush position, which imposes a sovereign state of Palestine on both sides? If we get the blame for opposing that solution in the past, don't we credit for causing it now?


Posted by Peter Burnet at 8:41 AM

PUTTIN’ ON THE WRITS

Black's bail in tens of millions (Theresa Tedesco, National Post, December 1st, 2005)

Conrad Black will plead not guilty today in U.S. federal court to criminal charges and is expected to post millions of dollars in bail as one of the conditions that would allow him to return to Canada.

Lord Black will travel to Chicago with Edward Greenspan, a prominent Canadian criminal lawyer, to voluntarily face the charges contained in an 11-count federal grand jury indictment.[...]

As part of an agreement with U.S. prosecutors, Lord Black has agreed to post millions of dollars as one of the conditions that he not be remanded into custody or be forced to stay in the United States following his arraignment on fraud charges before U.S. Federal Judge Amy St. Eve this afternoon.

It is believed that as part of a bail agreement with the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Lord Black will not post a cash bond. Rather, a series of liens will be placed on his Palm Beach mansion, which was put up for sale earlier this year with an asking price of US$37-million.

In addition, the former media baron's bail will also include the US$9-million already seized by the FBI in early October from the sale of his New York apartment.[...]

Lord Black, who is not a Canadian citizen, will not be prohibited from returning to this country by Canadian border officials after his arraignment on criminal charges. It is believed his lawyers were successful in satisfying the criteria necessary to allow applicants to re-enter Canada under the federal Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Last week, there was widespread speculation that the former chairman and chief executive of Hollinger International would be prevented from returning to Canada if he left the country to face the U.S. charges.

The Montreal-born businessman has been living in Toronto on a temporary basis after he renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2001 to obtain peerage in the British House of Lords. Since 2003, Lord Black, who is a British citizen, has been residing primarily in Toronto.

He has applied for permanent residency status in Canada, which is the first step toward reclaiming his citizenship.

Lord Black’s career path as successful magnate in both Britain and the U.S. recalls the quip made by a British barrister to an American colleague about successful lawyers: “In Britain, we knight them. In America, you indict them.”


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:28 AM

FISCHER'S ALREADY TAKEN TOO MANY BLOWS TO THE HEAD:

By Hook or by Rook: In chessboxing, contestants match moves on the board one round, in the ring the next. Checkmate is as good as a knockout. (Jeffrey Fleishman, December 1, 2005, LA Times)

Martin "Amok" Thomas is jabbing a right, but Frank "so-cool-he-doesn't-need-a-nickname" Stoldt is as elusive as a ribbon in the wind. He can't be hit.

Time.

The gloves come off, and the men hurry across the canvas to the chessboard. (You heard it right.) Amok took a couple of body shots, and he's breathing hard, but he'd better focus. That Stoldt, though, everyone in the gym knows he's this warrior-thinker, slamming the speed clock, cunningly moving his queen amid unraveling bandages and dripping sweat, daring Amok to leave him a sliver of opportunity.

Time.

Velcro rips. Amok slides back into his Everlast gloves, bites down on his mouthpiece, dances along the ropes. His king's in trouble, and his punches couldn't knock lint off a jacket. Stoldt floats toward him like a cloud of big hurt.

Such is the bewildering beauty of chessboxing, alternating rounds of four minutes of chess followed by two minutes of boxing. Victory is claimed in a number of ways, some of them tedious, but the most thrilling are by checkmate and knockout.


Get supermodels to play it in a tub of Jell-o and you've got an ESPN franchise.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:25 AM

PLUS FALLING RATES:

Low-priced Brokerage Is Shaking Up Real Estate CataList, an upstart run by an industry veteran, bucks the established way of selling homes and openly mocks its rivals. (Annette Haddad, December 1, 2005, LA Times)

[Hal Ellis, the 74-year-old founder and chief executive of CataList Homes Inc. ] strategy: Charge home sellers half what most commission-based brokerages do — 3% of the sales price instead of the standard 5% to 6% — without scrimping on service.

Ellis' plan bucks the established brokerage system further by paying his agents as full-time salaried employees instead of independent contractors and using the CataList website as a consumer-friendly portal for all local housing-price data that until recently had been for brokers' eyes only. [...]

He says it is only a matter of time before the market forces down the cost of residential real estate transactions, as it did with securities trading and travel reservations. Ellis also is banking on pure pocketbook economics: As the housing market slows down and values stop rising as fast, home sellers may think twice about forking over a big chunk of their equity to a real estate agent.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:21 AM

WHAT PROGRESS?:

Kurdish Oil Deal Shocks Iraq's Political Leaders: A Norwegian company begins drilling in the north without approval from Baghdad (Borzou Daragahi, December 1, 2005, LA Times)

A controversial oil exploration deal between Iraq's autonomy-minded Kurds and a Norwegian company got underway this week without the approval of the central government here, raising a potentially explosive issue at a time of heightened ethnic and sectarian tensions.

The Kurdistan Democratic Party, which controls a portion of the semiautonomous Kurdish enclave in northern Iraq, last year quietly signed a deal with Norway's DNO to drill for oil near the border city of Zakho. Iraqi and company officials describe the agreement as the first involving new exploration in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

Drilling began after a ceremony Tuesday, during which Nechirvan Barzani, prime minister of the Kurdish northern region, vowed "there is no way Kurdistan would accept that the central government will control our resources," according to news agency reports.


Forget the astonished Iraqis, didn't the Left promise us we'd steal that oil?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:11 AM

INTERESTING SEMANTIC TRICK:

Roberts Seeks Middle Ground: Court Hears Appeal on Parental Notification of Abortion (Charles Lane, December 1, 2005, Washington Post)

It's the middle of the night in New Hampshire, and a teenager, afraid to tell her parents she is pregnant, appears at an emergency room. A doctor diagnoses a spike in blood pressure that won't kill the girl but could render her sterile unless she has an immediate abortion. The doctor calls a judge for permission to perform the procedure, as state law prescribes -- and voice mail answers.

"What's supposed to happen?" asked Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who posed the hypothetical situation during oral arguments at the Supreme Court yesterday. [...]

Leading the search for a middle ground was the court's newest member, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who repeatedly suggested that the court could send the case back to lower courts for a narrower challenge to the law as it applies to emergencies such as the one Breyer outlined.

"Presumably the litigation would be very similar to what we've seen in this case," he told a lawyer representing Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, "but it would be focused on the provision that is causing you concern, rather than the statute as a whole."

The lawyer, Jennifer Dalven of the American Civil Liberties Union, urged the court to uphold the appeals court's invalidation of the entire New Hampshire law and leave it to the state legislature to make any changes.

"If this court rewrites it," she said, "it will give a green light to legislatures around the country to pass broad restrictions, and leave it to women and doctors to go to court and be the sole defenders of the right."


Notice that if her health is threatened she's a "girl," but when it comes to getting permission or killing the kid she's a "woman"?


Posted by Orrin Judd at 8:01 AM

YOU CAN'T BUILD A COHERENT SOCIETY ON HETERODOXY:

Indian culture, heterodoxy under scrutiny: a review of The Argumentative Indian by Amartya Sen (Kedar Deshpande, Asia Times)

For Sen, the widespread legacy of heterodoxy in Indian traditions is critical for understanding the country's past. "Indian traditions in mathematics, logic, science, medicine, linguistics or epistemology may be well known to the Western specialist, but they play little part in the general Western understanding of India. Mysticism and exoticism, in contrast, have a more hallowed position in that understanding." (p 155)

This persistent tendency to emphasize only the "exotic" negates the rational, scientific and non-religious (often openly agnostic or atheistic) schools of thought that pervade ancient Indian scholarship and philosophy.

Sen's frustration, however, is not limited to Western academics. He also condemns Hindu fundamentalists who aim to rewrite India's past and modify its present to reflect only Hindu beliefs and traditions. "[The Bengali poet] Rabindranath Tagore thought that the 'idea of India' militates 'against the intense consciousness of the separateness of one's own people from others'. Through its attempt to encourage and exploit separatism, the Hindutva movement has entered into a confrontation with the idea of India itself. This is nothing short of a sustained effort to miniaturize the broad idea of a large India - proud of its heterodox past and its pluralist present - and to replace it by the stamp of a small India, bundled around a drastically downsized version of Hinduism."


Sure, and being conquered by the Moors and recognizing the heterodox nature of the states that were brought together under one sovereign was critical to understanding Spain's past in 1492, but imposing an orthodoxy was what gave it a glorious future. If India tries just aping the liberal democratic forms it has inherited from actual English colonization and from virtual American hegemony without providing any spiritual and cultural content of its own then it will run into the same problems that plague secularized Europe. Better to start out with a reformed Hinduism that emphasizes its monotheism--real or imagined--and can serve as the moral basis for a decent society, while retaining something of the henotheism that allows for tolerance of other religions.



Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:59 AM

SO WHAT'S A LITTLE COLLATERAL DAMAGE?:

Article to kindle abortion pill fight: Report on deaths may hike pressure on FDA to curb sales (Diedtra Henderson, December 1, 2005, Boston Globe)

An article in today's New England Journal of Medicine could increase pressure on the Food and Drug Administration to restrict the sale of abortion pills associated with four fatal infections in California.

The FDA in September 2000 approved Mifeprex -- also called RU-486 and known generically as mifepristone. It is used with a second drug, misoprostol, to induce early-stage abortions.

But as early as 1992, scientists warned mifepristone could make women vulnerable to massive bacterial infections. Some doctors have routinely defied FDA recommendations by advising women to administer misoprostol vaginally. Some researchers say that could transport bacteria near the uterus, where they can grow unchecked.

Today's article says four young, otherwise healthy women in California died from such bacterial infections soon after using RU-486 and misoprostol.


You mean abortionists don't care about the women? Shocking.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 7:52 AM

WHICH WILL BOTHER THE FRACTION WHO THINK IT SHOULD BE UNRESTRICTED:

Alito memo set goal to reverse Roe v. Wade: '85 abortion view surfaces (Susan Milligan, December 1, 2005, Boston Globe)

Samuel A. Alito Jr., the Supreme Court nominee, wrote a memo in 1985 to his superior in the Reagan administration saying that the Justice Department should set a goal of overturning the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion, and in the meantime should weaken the law by supporting state restrictions.

''We should make clear that we disagree with Roe v. Wade and would welcome the opportunity to [present arguments on] the issue of whether, and if so to what extent, that decision should be overruled," Alito wrote in a memo to the solicitor general at the time, Charles Fried. The National Archives released the memo yesterday.

Abortion rights activists called the memo definitive evidence that Alito, if confirmed, would seek to limit abortion rights.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:48 AM

NOW THAT'S AMERICAN:

A national passion: Chili takes its place at the table of classic American dishes (Susan Campbell, Hartford Courant )

Chili - whatever its regional form - is pickup trucks and dusty roads. Chili is cold beer and hot nights. Chili is the great equalizer.

Movie star Elizabeth Taylor is said to have ordered hers from fancy-schmancy Chasen's, sent frozen to the "Cleopatra" set in Rome. Humorist and world traveler Will Rogers measured a town's worth by the quality of its chili. Outlaw Jesse James (the original, not the television star) ate chili. On the campaign trail, John Kerry once (famously) ate a bowl from a Wendy's fast-food restaurant (with a Frosty).

Chili is (flags up, drums rolling) universal yet uniquely American. In 1999, Connecticut's Jane and Michael Stern wrote a book about it ("Chili Nation") and called the dish the "one truly national shared food." That's not hyperbole. What other food has an entire cult grown up around it, with fierce discussions as to ingredients, its origin and its place on the table of classic dishes.OK, maybe barbecue, but still.

Chili has multiple festivals devoted to it, and if you live in America, you live within driving distance of a chili cook-off.

All this over a simple bowl of red. No other country - certainly not Mexico, where people mistakenly place chili's roots (and Mexicans wish they wouldn't) - could get so bent out of shape over such an easy dish. For all its lore, chili is, says Carol Hancock, owner and CEO of the International Chili Society, a bowl of meat, chili peppers, and spices.

"It doesn't take a genius to add spices to bad meat," says Hancock.


Working in the Permian Oil Basin on a geoseismic crew, we used to take cans of Wolf Brand Chili and put them on the manifolds of the crew pickup trucks for a few hours, then open them and eat it straight from the can.


Posted by Orrin Judd at 6:25 AM

MORE LIKE THE GREATER GOOD VS THE EVIL:

REVIEW: of The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror by Michael Ignatieff (Eve Garrard, Democratiya)

Which is most important, security or rights?

Ignatieff's answer is to find a middle way: neither rights nor security, he thinks, is always most important, can always act as trumps. The violation of rights is always morally wrong, in his view, but nonetheless it is sometimes necessary to preserve democracy against those who would bring it down. If it's necessary, we ought to do it, but all the same there remains something wrong in such decisions, and we must hedge about the policy of temporary rights-infringement with constraints and limitations (he particularly emphasises the need for ongoing adversarial review of such measures), to prevent us entirely losing our grasp of what it is we're trying to defend. This is the 'lesser evil' which he sees as an alternative to the two greater evils which, in his view, threaten us as we respond to terrorist attacks. One of these greater evils flows from the adoption of a purely consequentialist view of defence against terrorism, in which any action which protects democratic society should be adopted, no matter what rights it violates, since preserving democracies will ultimately give rights their best protection. Ignatieff quite plausibly argues that, given some well-known and pessimistic facts about human nature, this view will rapidly lead to the destruction of respect for rights and human dignity. The other greater evil which he discerns results from what he calls perfectionism – the view that rights must act as absolute constraints on action, so that we are never justified in violating them. The perfectionist believes that any failure to respect rights, particularly at the level of policy, is morally unacceptable, and will probably take us down a slippery slope to unrestrained tyranny. We must set our face against any weakening of our commitment to rights and liberties, and maintain our full array of liberal democratic practices unchanged by the threat from terrorism. Ignatieff thinks (again quite plausibly) that this approach will be so ineffective at protecting security that it will yield democracies up to destruction at the hand of terrorists. Rather than incurring either of these greater evils, Ignatieff argues that we should adopt a lesser evil approach, in which we allow some trade-off of rights against increased security, so long as we do this in ways which limit the threat to rights and human dignity as much as is compatible with effectiveness against terrorism. [...]

[T]he linchpin of the book is the claim that security and rights must be traded-off against each other, that such trade-offs are necessary to preserve democracies but must always be as limited as possible consonant with effective self-defence, and that necessary though they are, they're still in some way wrong. This is his conception of the lesser evil: it's preferable to the greater evils which are likely to follow from pure consequentialism or pure perfectionism, but it's evil nonetheless. The whole of the rest of the book stands or falls with this conception. It's not clear, however, that it can stand in the terms in which Ignatieff presents it.

Firstly, it's not at all obvious that the contrast Ignatieff draws between security considerations and respect for rights can really be sustained. The rights which are immediately threatened by increased security measures are liberties of various kinds, and liberty and security needn't be seen as entirely different kinds of things. After all, security protects people's liberty to exercise their rights, and indeed can be regarded as a necessary precondition of that exercise. So the trade-off between the two on which Ignatieff places so much weight may be better seen as a choice between different ways of promoting rights and liberties. If that is so, then there is no profound conflict here, and no tragic dilemma of the kind which might prompt thoughts about lesser evil.


Indeed, to pretend that the fight for democracy is tragic does little but serve the purposes of those who don't want to engage in it.