In the aftermath of the financial meltdown, 50 years’ worth of careful thinking and hard-won wisdom were erased, as the Reagan Revolution, the work of Milton Freidman, and the classical free-market ethos were suddenly Trotskyized. In their place, the government printed more money to cover its hourly check-writing. The only entertaining element of the tragedy was the sheer shamelessness of a Barney Frank and Chris Dodd — who both once peddled their wares to banks and Freddie/Fannie at Ground Zero of the meltdown — now with flashing eyes and sagging craws pontificating each evening about Wall Street greed and excess.Read it all.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Ms. Philips skewers him here. An excerpt:
The vast majority of Gazans who have been killed were Hamas terrorists. According to today’s UN figures, 364 have been killed of whom only 62 were civilians. Israel has been targeting only the Hamas infrastructure and its terror-masters, as detailed here. While some civilian casualties are unfortunately inevitable, Israel is clearly attempting to minimise them. It is Hamas which deliberately targets Israeli civilians when it fires its rockets and detonates its human bombs specifically at Israeli civilian targets. It is Hamas which deliberately turns its own civilians into targets by siting its rockets and other military equipment under apartment blocks and in centres of densely crowded population. Hamas tries to kill as many Israeli innocents as possible; Israel’s military operation is conducted solely to defend its people against such attack and is designed to minimise the loss of civilian life in Gaza. To draw an equivalence between the two is obscene.Read the whole devastating thing.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Your favorite blog, Primary Reason, in collusion with United Artists is proud to present the following clip from Valkyrie starring our favorite thetan, Tom Cruise.
9-MONTHS-PREGNANT PUCK SIGHS: You know what really, really sucks? That Hitler looks better in a slinky black dress than I do.
I'll let Yorick introduce himself further, but I should say I'm ashamed that I didn't invite his talent and his wit to augment this project much, much sooner.
Also, knowing Yorick as well as I do, I apologize in advance.
PUCK ADDS: Welcome, Yorick. I am sure your infinite jest and most excellent fancy -- to say nothing of your bitchin' cheekbones -- will be well-received.
KAILUA, Hawaii (AP) - President-elect Barack Obama thought he'd put the bowling jokes behind him. Not likely.Woodward and Bernstein, eat your hearts out.
On the golf course Monday, a woman waiting at the 18th green reminded Obama of his disastrous bowling during the presidential campaign. It was an unwelcome reminder for Obama, whose golf game during a 12-day vacation has been just as troublesome.
"That was pretty good, right?" Obama said to cheers as he finished a round of golf near his $9 million rented vacation home near Honolulu.
The woman sitting on a nearby wall shouted, "Better than your bowling." Obama smiled and went back to lining up his putt, which he got close to the hole but not in.
The woman's quip referred to Obama's embarrassing bowling outing in Pennsylvania, when he knocked down only 37 pins - with the assist during two frames from an 8-year-old. It was an effort to connect with working-class voters, yet he lost Pennsylvania's primary election to Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Likewise, Obama has struggled with his golf game. He told reporters during his first round last week that he wasn't that good; he asked other patrons for tips on his second. On Monday he joked that his final drive of the day went only 20 yards.
It was Obama's third trip to a course while on holiday. Accompanying him were Bobby Titcomb, a friend from high school in Hawaii, friends Martin Nesbitt and Greg Orme, and aide Eugene Kang.
Obama has sought to stay out of the public eye while here, opting for private meals at his vacation home or at a friend's house. Obama has no public schedule during his stay, although aides say he has been receiving national security briefings and speaking with transition officials.
Earlier in the day, Obama returned to a military gym where he has exercised every
morning except Christmas since beginning his vacation on Dec. 20.
Obama, his wife and daughters are due to return to Chicago on Jan. 1.
It's been a busy week around the world, so let's get rolling with some bullet points:
- Israel finally got tired of the Palestinian government (read: Hamas) lobbing rockets into Israeli towns. Israel is presently in process of dismantling the Hamas terror infrastructure. Predictably, the world -- having sanguinely tolerated the indiscriminant murder of Jews -- now screams bloody murder.
- Relatedly -- and awesomely -- crazy, race-baiting, anti-semitic, Capitol-police-officer-assaulting former U.S. Representative from Georgia, and most recently Green Party candidate for president Cynthia McKinney gathered up a whole bunch of her crazy, Jew-hating friends and decided to hop on a cruise ship in Cyprus and attempted to run the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. With predictably hilarious results! Said McKinney's similarly Jew-unfriendly father: “Her mother did not want her to go . . . . But I think that certain people have missions in life and you can’t deter them.” You are correct, sir. You can't deter crazy.
- Having gotten their man elected, some liberal journalists are beginning to discover what we've known all along.
- Mazel Tov to Bristol Palin, who is now a mom. It's probably fortunate that the birth occurred after the election, otherwise we reasonably could have expected to find CNN reporters scraping poop out of the little guy's diapers and running it through a centrifuge, looking for evidence to confirm the rumors that would have been first reported on the front page of the New York Times to the effect that Bristol nourishes her baby with Budweiser and baby seals' blood.
- Another tale of Utopian Health Care In Action.
- You know, Caroline Kennedy, you know, wants to be the next um, you know, Senator from, um, you know, New York.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
Osama is getting ready for his next dialysis session and hoping Muhammed brings some of his famous fig cookies to next week's Ramadan party.
Because if you do, it means you hate our planet.
Today, I'd like to add to the list. It's gotten so hot in Chicago, that the Windy City's experienced and capable winter-weather drivers are being literally begged by authorities not to drive, due to an onslaught of HeatIce and HeatSleet.
"We are literally at the point where we are pleading with the public to stay home," said IDOT spokeswoman Marisa Kollias. "The streets are like sheets of ice. It is a mixed storm; it's almost as if there are little ice pellets that are hitting my face when I stepped outside my house, and I will tell you, it's dangerous."Somewhere, a polar bear weeps.
IDOT rarely tells motorists to stay in altogether. Kollias said it has been about two winters since they last did so.
Unfortunately, keeping motorists off the road is not an entirely effective solution. Global Warming is affecting mass transit, too:
For those who can take public transportation, Metra, the suburban rail agency, says it can accommodate extra crowds.President-Elect Obama pledged to lower the oceans; perhaps he can melt HeatIce too.
But frozen wires posed a problem on the Metra Electric Line. Metra shut down service south of Kensington on the line, and delays were reported all along the line.
A train had to be stopped in south suburban Matteson. About 4:45 a.m., Metra Electric District train No. 100 had to stop near Matteson because of weather conditions, according to Metra's Web site. The train was scheduled to arrive at Chicago's Millennium station at 5:32 a.m.
Metra said the train stopped because of frozen wires.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
A rare winter storm swept through Southern Nevada Wednesday, dumping the most snow on the valley in nearly three decades, grounding flights at the airport, forcing the closure of major highways and closing schools for today.Because of the heat. I think we should begin to refer to snow caused by Global Warming as HeatSnow. And extreme cold temperatures caused by Global Warming should be called HeatCold. It's important to remain rhetorically consistent with The Consensus.
"This is the most snow we've had in Las Vegas in almost 30 years," said Chris Stachelski, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. "It's a significant historical event."
At 9:50 p.m. Wednesday, the weather service measured a record-breaking 3.6 inches of snow at its office location southwest of McCarran International Airport. It was the highest snow accumulation recorded in the month of December in Las Vegas since the start of official records in 1937. The previous record was 2 inches of snow, which fell on Dec. 15, 1967.
The weather service dubbed the storm as "the eighth greatest snowstorm ever in
official Las Vegas weather records for any month."
UPDATE: Thanks to the oven that is our planet, Southern California is also experiencing HeatCold and HeatSnow.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
But you know what they say . . . fifth time's the charm. Peterson is reportedly now engaged to another 23-year-old woman.
One potential snag . . . Stacy has never been found. So technically, they're still married. (Drew, that's what you get for hiding the body too well.)
The as-yet unidentified bride-to-be is reportedly practicing NEVER MAKING DREW ANGRY.
Wherein A Robust and Independent Media Exerts The Power of the Press to Doggedly Hold President-Elect Obama to Account
McCORMICK: Thank you, Mr. President-Elect. First of all, given the situation here in Illinois, do you favor or oppose a special election to fill your -- your vacancy, and secondly, you told us at your first press conference after the election that you were going to take a very hands-off approach to filling that spot. Over the weekend, The Tribune reported that Rahm Emanuel, your incoming chief of staff, had presented a list of potential names...
OBAMA: John, let me -- let me -- let me just cut you off, because I don't want you to waste your question. As I indicated yesterday, we've done a full review of this. The -- the facts are going to be released next week. It would be inappropriate for me to comment, because the -- the -- for example, the -- the story that you just talked about in your own paper, I haven't confirmed that it was accurate, and I don't want to get into the details at this point. So do you have another question?
McCORMICK: There's no conflict between what you said was your hands-off approach and the possibility that --
OBAMA: John --
McCORMICK: – aides presented somebody --
OBAMA: John. I said -- The U.S. attorney's office specifically asked us not to release this until next week.
McCORMICK: What about on a special election? Given the kind of chaos here in Illinois?
OBAMA: You know, I've said that I don't think the governor can serve effectively in his office. I'm going to let the state legislature make a determination in terms of how they want to proceed.
McCORMICK: Do you or [Secretary of Education-designate Arne] Duncan have a better jump shot?
Full story here.
I'm trying to think of something clever to say, but I'm just agog at the idiocy of these people. I'm all for avoiding ultrapopular names, but come on! If you, Herr and Frau Campbell, like the moniker "Adolf Hitler" so much, then change your own goddamn names and bear that burden yourselves. Don't do that to a child. That's just downright cruel.
And how about this bit of trivia? It turns out the Campbells live pretty close to where I grew up in rural New Jersey. I assure you, however, that I don't know them or their other kids: JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell or Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell. My dad being Jewish and all, I suspect we may have been unwelcome in their home. But that's just a guess.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Says their union rep: "Staffers recognize the tough times, but they also understand that quality journalism at AP means attracting and retaining the best employees."
Actually, "quality journalism at AP" would be better served by dumping the current staff and starting from scratch.
(But I don't think the union would go for it.)
And . . . a 10% raise? Really? In this economy? I think I'll just go into my boss's office and demand the same. (Actually, I won't. I'm not a member of a union, so I can't get away with being laughably unreasonable.)
Very quietly and without fanfare, one of my favorite actors has become Hollywood's most fervent, sincere, and dedicated supporters of our troops overseas. And just a few days ago, the man some are calling "this generation's Bob Hope" was recognized by President Bush for his good works.
One step in conferring this worthy title on the award-winning actor, director and producer occurred last week when President Bush bestowed on him the Presidential Citizens Medal, the second highest civilian honor awarded to citizens for exemplary deeds performed in service of the nation. Previous recipients include Henry "Hank" Aaron, Muhammad Ali, Colin L. Powell and Bob Dole.
While the White House ceremony flew under the radar of most of the media, most notably the entertainment press, word has trickled out to many of his countless admirers in and out of the military. And on the occasion of him receiving the award, they want America to take in their words of praise for, as Sharon Tyk in the USO of Illinois put it, this "gallant American patriot."
Michael Yon, a Special Forces vet and the pre-eminent war journalist of our time, communicated his admiration in a dispatch from Bahrain: "Gary is a true friend of the American soldier. He does not hesitate to travel into war zones to express his admiration and personal support for those who defend us. He visits wounded soldiers, some of whom I personally know. All love him.
"Soldiers from privates to generals admire Gary for his dedication to a cause greater than any of us. Gary's dedication went much further. He personally supported sending millions of dollars worth of school and clothing supplies to Iraqi children. I saw this effort with my own eyes. Gary Sinise is a Great American."
Even more refreshing, he does not toe the tired Hollywood line about "supporting the troops but not their mission":
"I have seen Iraqi kids climbing on our soldiers and hugging them and kissing them," Mr. Sinise said. "I have seen their smiling faces and their attempts to say 'I love you' in broken English. The folks I saw had hope in their eyes and gratitude in their hearts for what was done for them."
Our troops are equally grateful for his support, and many are quoted in this article about his humility, his sincerity, and his utter lack of pretension.
To get a sense of the scope of what Mr. Sinise means to soldiers like Spc. Hale, filmmaker and Army 82nd Airborne veteran Jonathan Flora followed him and his band to Afghanistan and Iraq in 2008. He recounts one time when he witnessed one of Mr. Sinise´s typical interactions with the troops.
"It was hot, Iraq hot when we stopped at a check point before entering an FOB (Forward Operating Base). Gary began speaking with a soldier through the window and soon we were all standing outside so he could have his picture taken with him and a few of his buddies. Soon there were at least fifty guys around him and he greets each one as he always does. This is an unscheduled stop and we are being urged to move on so as to be on time for his next stop, but Gary, still, meets with each one and gives them their time. Finally, we have to move on as he says good-bye to the last soldier.
"As we are about to get into the vehicle we hear the guys yelling and in the distance is one more soldier. He is dressed in full battle-rattle humping as fast as he can in this unbearable heat to get to Gary before he leaves. He had just been relieved from his point and heard that Gary Sinise had stopped by the check point, and he was determined not to miss him. Gary without hesitation stopped and waited and he greeted this young man as if he was the first man in line, full of enthusiasm and appreciation.
Why so dedicated, Mr. Sinise?
"When we did finally get into the vehicle I mentioned to Gary how I observe how he makes each and every man or woman feel special and appreciated, he paused in thought before answering, as he often does, and then says with a heavy heart, 'It's because we don't know what the next hour holds for them. As tired as I might get sometimes, and I do, it is nothing compared to what they go through day-after-day with the price they are so readily willing to pay.'"
I had known that Sinise had a band -- called, appropriately enough, "The Lt. Dan Band" -- and that he performed for the troops, but I had no idea he was so dedicated to this cause. Although I suspect that that is how he prefers it, I encourage you to read the whole thing, for a reminder of what it looks like to really support the troops.
Thank you, Gary Sinise.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Since Clinton's inauguration, summer Arctic sea ice has lost the equivalent of Alaska, California and Texas. The 10 hottest years on record have occurred since Clinton's second inauguration. Global warming is accelerating. Time is close to running out, and Obama knows it.
You can almost feel the "reporter's" excitement, can't you? Sadly, many of this person's facts are more like, um, fiction.
- Since 1998, the earth has been cooling, not heating up.
- Summer Arctic sea ice may be in decline, but globally, sea ice levels are up. Yes. Up!
- The role of the sun, and sunspots, in Earthly temperatures is not to be discounted.
There are more, but my time is limited.
The timing of this laughable piece of garbage could not be more suspect, coming as it does on the heels of a report wherein 650 preeminent scientists, many of them Nobel prize winners, one-time UN/IPCC committee members, and former global warming believers, announced that they think that the so-called global warming "crisis" is nonense. There is nary a word in this AP piece about the 650 scientists, sunspots, current cooling trends, historical warming and cooling periods, or the fact that temperatures on other planets are likewise in flux (and not due to us!).
This is nothing less than a propaganda piece -- a collection of lies and half-truths, with certain critical facts omitted -- the likes of which you'd expect from Pravda. I know at this point, nothing I read or hear in the media should surprise me, but I can't help it. I expect more from the people who are supposed to educate us.
You can read the whole AP "article" here. But I warn you: to do so is to put your brain cells at extreme risk. To paraphrase the principal in Billy Madison, "What the AP writes here is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever seen. At no point does this rambling, incoherent article even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who reads it will be dumber for having looked at it. ... May God have mercy on the AP's soul."
Thursday, December 11, 2008
But it's still too little:
Granting Israel a nuclear guarantee essentially suggests the U.S. is willing to come to terms with a nuclear Iran. For its part, Israel opposes any such development and similar opposition was voiced by officials in the outgoing Bush administration.
"What is the significance of such guarantee when it comes from those who hesitated to deal with a non-nuclear Iran?" asked a senior Israeli security source. "What kind of credibility would this [guarantee have] when Iran is nuclear-capable?" The same source noted that the fact that there is talk about the possibility of a nuclear Iran undermines efforts to prevent Tehran from acquiring such arms.
Precisely. When the nuclear adversary believes (1) that it has a Holy Mandate to destroy Jews and (2) that dying in the course of fulfilling that cause is honorable and promises eternal rewards, somehow promising to kill them after they've already killed the Jews seems . . . insufficient.
But, hey, I'm sure our silver-tongued president-elect can talk the Islamists out of their religious convictions.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
The word "evil" has been used twice today in the Corner to describe Blago's crimes. I'm not really disputing the use of the word. But that's not really the word that comes to my mind. Evil is too dark, too serious, too smart for what we're talking about. I agree with Kathryn that there's something almost wholesome or nostalgic about Blogo's criminal misdeeds. He wasn't found opening an umbrella in parts of his anatomy for money on the internet, or giving cash to terrorists who were going to have Santas wear suicide-padding at department stores around the country. He didn't check interns for a hernia without permission or spy for the Norks. He's just a crook. A good, old-fashioned, crook. I know I'm supposed to be outraged, and in a certain sense I am. If he's guilty of all that's alleged, I hope they throw him in the stoney lonesome until the Chicago Cubs win the World Series or 2025, whichever comes second. But in another sense, this is just plain enjoyable. It's like when you watch "Cops" and the idiot burglar tries to hide beside a tree in the dark, even though he's wearing light-up sneakers. It's like when Dan Rather dares the world to prove he's a clueless ass-clown. It's just good stuff. There's no tragedy here. No wasted potential. No undeserving victims. No profound and complicated symbolic issues (I somewhat doubt the Serbian-American lobby is going to cry racism). This is the sort of criminality we want the Feds to find, particularly in Chicago. Everyone gets what they deserve — at least so far — and all of the guilty parties are all the more deserving of punishment because they don't quite understand what the big deal is. I love it.
(At The Corner)
PUCK ADDS: I'm with the esteemed Mr. Goldberg. This is just frickin' delicious.
Cue puzzled self-delusion:
Robert Grant, in charge of the FBI office in Chicago, added: “Many, including myself, thought that the recent conviction of a former governor would usher in a new era of honesty and reform in Illinois politics. Clearly, the charges announced today reveal that the office of the Governor has become nothing more than a vehicle for self-enrichment, unrestricted by party affiliation and taking Illinois politics to a new low.”I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that a Chicago politician would stoop to such naked corruption.
Among the personal benefits he attempted to obtain in exchange for the Senate seat:
- A substantial salary for himself at a either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions.
- Placing his wife on paid corporate boards where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year.
- Promises of campaign funds — including cash up front.
- A cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.
"The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering," U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in a statement.Staggering corruption? By Chicago Democrats? The mind reels.
UPDATE: Uh oh! Looks like the federal investigation's scope includes the Rezko-Obama land deal that the media succeeded in burying until the election was over!
Nothing to see here; move along.
Monday, December 08, 2008
Because the government is, like, SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO totally awesome at everything else it gets its grubby little hands in.
Meanwhile, those morons among us who've been diligently paying off their cars, mortgages, student loans and other outstanding debts will get a big fat lump of coal in our stockings. And maybe some Vaseline under the tree. If we're lucky.
Fa la la.
I'm not saying all cats are bad, mind you. It so happens that I owned a very cool cat when I was a kid. But I have it on good authority that the victim dog in Chile was hit by none other than Toonces, who, after getting a three-year old Virginia boy lost in the woods in the bitter cold, decided he needed to make a quick international getaway, and seriously, if that dog didn't know better than not to cross a busy highway, it's not my fault. Right, Toonces?
Friday, December 05, 2008
Michael Brautigam was before Ruehlman representing himself in a contentious civil suit he had filed against his North Avondale condo association and other condo owners in the building who are represented by Cincinnati attorney Peter Koenig.
Brautigam asked Ruehlman for more time to file documents. Ruehlman gave it to him.
As Koenig and Brautigam turned to walk away from the judge, Brautigam called Koenig "a (bleeping) liar."
"He used the famous F-word," Koenig said. "(Ruehlman) asked Mr. Brautigam if he said that."
Brautigam admitted he had and had directed it at Koenig. Ruehlman cited Brautigam for contempt and sent him to jail for six months.
Turns out the judge left himself little choice, since he'd sentenced a gang member to six months for the same offense just a day earlier.
Sucks to be Brautigam. Of course, those of us who spend time in court on a regular basis know that dropping F-bombs in front of the judge is a really, really bad idea.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
All too often, the congested roads of Greater Boston conspire with the vagaries of childbirth to leave a mother-to-be in a car on the roadside at one of life's most critical moments. A hard-bitten state trooper shows up and morphs into a highway midwife, clearing the newborn's nose and mouth, cutting the cord, and sometimes even saving a life.Jack. Ass. Just wanted to make sure this clown's name gets a little more exposure.
This is not one of those stories.
Jennifer Davis was stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic on Nov. 18, her contractions just 3 minutes apart. Her husband, John, was trying to appear calm for his wife's sake, driving in the breakdown lane of Route 2. They pulled up behind a state trooper to ask whether they could continue using the lane to reach the next exit, near Alewife Station.
Not only did the trooper say no, he gave them a $100 citation for driving in the breakdown lane, made them wait for their citation while he finished writing someone else's ticket, and even seemed to ask for proof of pregnancy, Jennifer Davis said.
"He said, 'What's under your jacket?' I said, 'My belly,' " Davis said. "He waited and gestured with his head like, 'OK, let's see it.' He waited for me to unzip my jacket. I mean, it was so clear that I was pregnant."
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
The NY Times reports this afternoon that the United Automobile Workers union is graciously offering concessions in an effort to convince Congress to provide the sought-after sustenance.
Big surprise. Money for nothing? That’s the UAW’s spec-i-al-i-ty.
But I shouldn’t be too judgmental. The UAW isn’t offering nothing, exactly. In fact, it’s almost, on the surface, if you don’t ask too many questions about the details, giving a reasonable impression of offering something.
UAW president Ron Gettelfinger has graciously offered to suspend – not eliminate, mind you, just suspend – the “job banks” created in the 1980s to which thousands of laid-off workers report each day to drink coffee, watch television, and hone their crossword-puzzle-solving skills . . . with full pay and benefits. The job banks were a concession wrung out of management by the unions to permit – gasp – implementation of new technology. In other words, the union only agreed to permit the introduction of increased efficiency by negating it with a brand-new, counterveiling inefficiency.
Not that the UAW is defensive about it or anything:
Got that? The real issue in the auto makers’ economic collapse isn’t . . . you know, economics. It’s Backbone! The Backbone of America! Which must stay strong.
“The jobs bank has become a sound bite that people use to beat us up,” Mr. Gettelfinger said, who will join the auto executives at Congressional hearings starting Thursday. “It’s become a lightning rod that takes away the focus from what the real issue is, and the real issue is the backbone of America.”
Hence the bleating for mother’s milk on Capitol Hill, I suppose.
Congress should not bail these jokers out, period. Chapter 11 was written for a reason. When management and labor spend decades propping up an enterprise that accomplishes nothing but enriching people with remuneration they could not possibly earn in a true market, management and labor should not be rewarded with additional taxpayer money to squander in the same way.
Rather, they should be sent away from the table. Without supper.
Cash-strapped teacher sells ads on tests
Then I read the article. This is a teacher who routinely turns out students who score at the highest levels on Advanced Placement exams (wich are worth college credit). And the school in which he teaches limited him to about 300 bucks in copying expenses for an entire academic year. So he got creative, and even vetted the idea with his students' parents (who actually place the majority of the ads) before implementing this sly little scheme.
So now I don't think he's a schmuck anymore. In fact, I wish we had more teachers like him.
Facts Enough To Make A Hardened Feminist Throw Herself To The Floor And Kick And Scream And Hold her Breath UNTIL YOU TAKE IT BACK YOU BIG MEANIE!!!
He didn't suggest that women are inferior, or less diligent, or individually less capable of success. Simply that if you look at whole populations, and observe the undeniable difference in the spacing of men and women on a performance curve in certain fields, perhaps one should not overlook study of possible differences in hardware, given the measurable gaps in the highest and lowest percentiles.
In some respects, after all, physical differences between the sexes are obvious. Why foreclose the possibilities that those differences extend beyond the physical appendages of procreation?
Most readers of this blog will recall what followed: Pandemonium.
Feminist academics at the tops of their fields -- you know, the sort of women who are above the socialized vulnerability and hyper-emotionality often attributed by patriarchic misogynists to the "weaker sex" -- suddenly (in Jonah Goldberg's words), "got a touch of the vapors." Said MIT biology professor Nancy Hopkins, "I felt like I was going to be sick . . . My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow . . . . I was extremely upset."
Summers was forced into an endless and unseemly kabuki dance of groveling apologetics, which in the end could not suffice anyway to extinguish the flames of rage his suggestion had stoked among mainstream feminist (and otherwise political-correctness-obsessed) academics. He was banished from the Harvard presidency.
At the time, one (lonely) feminist commentator, Ruth Marcus, gently queried whether the offense taken was justified given the facts available:
Is it so heretical, though, so irredeemably oafish, to consider whether gender differences also play some role? As the daughter of two scientists and the mother of two daughters, I think not. After all, scientists are reporting day by day about their breakthroughs in understanding the genetic basis of diseases or personality traits.At that time Marcus's voice of reason fell on deaf ears. But in today's Washington Post, she's singing a similar melody -- and with a fuller accompanying score, namely a study published in the magazine Science in July 2008:
Brain studies of men and women show that the two genders use different parts of their brain to process language. (Men tend to be left-siders, women both-lobers.)
Summers drew fire for relating the story of how he bought a set of trucks for his daughter, only to find her naming them "Daddy Truck" and "Baby Truck." A clumsy and ill-advised anecdote perhaps, but one that resonated with legions of would-be gender-neutral parents of girls. I, for one, have a basement full of Brio train tracks, as pristine as they were pricey. We use the train table to fold our laundry.
Biology may not be destiny, but as we Brio-buyers and truck-swaddlers have discovered, its effects also can't be discounted.
Many of the same people denouncing Summers, I'd venture, believe fervently that homosexuality, for example, is a matter of biology rather than of choice or childhood experience. Many would demand that medical studies be structured to consider differences between men and women in metabolizing drugs, say, or responding to a particular disease. And many who find Summers's remarks offensive seem perfectly happy to trumpet the supposed attributes that women bring to the workplace -- that they are more intuitive, or more empathetic or some such. If that is so -- and I've always rather cringed at such assertions -- why is it impermissible to suggest that there might be some downside differences as well?
Summers (even in his earlier, unexpurgated form) wasn't saying that no individual woman could be a stellar scientist, or mathematician, or engineer, only that overall one gender might be more inclined in that direction than the other. Indeed, if that did prove to be the case, it would be all the more important for educators at every level to nurture and encourage girls and women with scientific promise, and it would make those who achieve at the highest levels all the more valuable in a modern university, or any modern workforce conscious of the cost of gender disparities.
The Summers storm might have been easy to forecast. But it says less, in the end, about the Harvard president than it does about the unwillingness of the modern academy to tolerate the kind of freewheeling inquiry that academics and intellectuals above all ought to prize rather than revile.
A group of researchers (all women, as it happened) looked at annual math assessments required by the No Child Left Behind law from 10 representative states that supplied details about gender and ethnicity, a total of 7 million students.Huh. Sounds like maybe this is something worth studying further. But we know from the example that was so energetically made of Summers what fate awaits any mainstream academic who would propose publicly to make an honest investigation of it. Marcus draws the right intermediate conclusion:
Their study, published in the July 25 issue of Science, found no differences between girls and boys in average performance -- not even, as earlier studies had found, once they entered high school. The gap between girls and boys on math SATs, they said,
could be explained by the fact that more girls than boys go to college and therefore take these tests.
But, echoing Summers's point, there was small yet significant variance between the genders -- the degree to which the scores of girls or boys differed from the average. At the very highest level, the 99.9th percentile, the difference meant 2.15 males for every female. This difference was large enough that, in an occupation requiring math skills at that level, the job ranks could be expected to be filled 68 percent by men, 32 percent by women -- enough to explain, as Summers suggested, part of the gender gap.
* * * *
In performance on a standardized math, science and reading test given to 15- and 16-year-olds in 40 countries, girls in every country performed far better than boys in reading. Conversely, boys in all but three countries did better, but by not nearly as much, in math. In all but three countries -- Britain, Thailand and Iceland -- more boys than girls scored in the 99th percentile in math.
Summers was boneheaded to say what he said, in the way that he said it and considering the job that he held. But he probably had a legitimate point -- and the continuing uproar says more about the triumph of political correctness than about Summers's supposed sexism.A triumph that is unlikely to be reversed anytime soon.
Query what other legitimate objects of scientific inquiry are smothered by politically correct gatekeepers, even as billions of dollars in funding for every imagineable pet emotional grievance and variant of the global-warming-threatens-dandelions strain of "science" mahogany-lines the offices of tenured professors from sea to (rising? really?) sea.
My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway . . . . In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true . . . . We have many bathrooms here, as you can see . . . . Souvenirs are available.This interview is typical of Senator Reid's unique ability to focus on petty, insignificant details in the course of demonstrating himself to be a tactless boob.
Good job, Nevada voters.
PUCK ADDS: The man's a marvel. How does someone so obviously lacking in basic social skills become Senate Majority Leader?
The heartbreaking photo of Moshe Holtzberg, a tiny little boy -- the same age as my own daughter -- who survived last week's terrorist attack in Bombay, screaming for his parents, who were tortured and murdered right in front of him, and whose blood he was drenched in when he was found. The full story, along with some very unsettling photos, is here.
In a land where Jews are a practical and political non-entity, why did the terrorists designate their community center a target? There can only be one reason, and Dennis Prager at Townhall nails it:
If one assumes that the terrorists primary goals were to destabilize India, weaken growing Indian-Pakistani cooperation in fighting terrorism, and greatly increase Indian-Pakistani tension, hopefully to the point of military war between the two countries, every one of the targets made strategic sense. Slaughtering as many people as possible in Indias major economic center, including as many foreign tourists as possible at Mumbais finest hotels, also made sense.
But one target seemed to make little sense. In fact, until the attack was over people were uncertain whether the terrorists attack on the Jewish center known as the Chabad House was part of the original plan or chosen spontaneously. Only when the lone terrorist who was captured told his interrogators that the Chabad House was planned a year earlier was it indisputable that killing the Rabbi, his wife, their children and any other Jews present was part of the plan.
The question is why?
Why would a terrorist group of Islamists from Pakistan whose primary goal is to have Pakistan gain control of the third of Kashmir that belongs to India and therefore aimed to destabilize Indias major city devote so much of its efforts -- 20 percent of its force of 10 gunmen whose stated goal was to kill 5,000 -- to killing a rabbi and any Jews with him?
The question echoes one from World War II: Why did Hitler devote so much time, money, and manpower in order to murder every Jewish man, woman, and child in every country the Nazis occupied? Why did Hitler -- as documented by the late historian Lucy Dawidowicz in her aptly named book The War against the Jews -- weaken the Nazi war effort by diverting money, troops, and military vehicles from fighting the Allies to rounding up Jews and shipping them to death camps?
From the perspective of political scientists, historians, and contemporary journalists, the answer to these questions is not rational. But the non-rationality of an answer is not synonymous with its non-validity.
For the Islamists, as for the Nazis, the destruction of the Jews -- and since 1948, the Jewish state -- is central to their worldview.
If "Never again" is to have any meaning, the idiots in this world who continue to wring their hands and whinge about how American foreign policy drives Muslims to this sort of thing, need to pluck their heads from their posteriors and take up the fight.
Or there will be many, many more Moshes.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
KENNETH CITY — Council members caved in to demands from an angry crowd and delayed approving a neatness ordinance until officials explain every word of the 26-page document to Kenneth City residents.(via Jonah himself at The Corner)
In what was estimated to be the largest crowd to ever attend a Kenneth City Council meeting, an outraged group of residents railed at the proposal that would regulate the upkeep of both the exterior and interior of all property in the town.
The proposal basically sets standards for upkeep and appearance and gives town officials the right to enter homes. If the owner refuses to allow the official to enter, the town can go to a judge for an "administrative search warrant" to allow access to the interior of buildings. Violations would cost up to $250 a day.
Angry residents likened the proposal to rules created by Communist or Nazi dictatorships. One person said the result would be to create a network of spies to snitch on neighbors to council members and other town officials. Someone suggested the town should change its name from Kenneth City to "Petty City."
Monday, December 01, 2008
Harrison (who was never drafted and who was cut by the Steelers and Ravens from consecutive training camps before signing on for good in 2004 to replace an injured Clark Haggans) has emerged as the most dominant linebacker in the NFL. It's difficult to stand out when your defense is as packed with talent as the Steelers' is (especially when you have perennial Pro Bowlers like Troy Polamalu and Casey Hampton on the field), but he's doing it.
And then some.
Even though the defense has been so terrific this year, I was, frankly, stunned to learn that after last night's game, Harrison and fellow outside linebacker LaMarr Woodley are the most productive pass-rushing linebacker duo in the team's long history: Harrison's two sacks upped his season total to 14. Coupled with Woodley's 11.5, the two surpassed the 24 registered by outside linebackers Kevin Greene (14) and Greg Lloyd in 1994 and equaled by outside linebackers Jason Gildon (13.5) and Joey Porter in 2000. Considering the other great linebackers who've worn the Black and Gold over the decades (Jack Ham, Jack Lambert, Andy Russell, LeVon Kirkland, and Chad Brown, to name a few) -- not to mention the terrific inside linebackers, Lawrence Timmons and James Farrior who share the field and the pass-rushing duties -- this is an amazing feat . . . made more amazing still because there are still four games left in the regular season to up the record total.
Keep an eye on #92 James Harrison. If he stays healthy, he's going to be enshrined in the Hall of Fame in Canton, OH. After not having even been drafted out of Kent State, OH.
The premiere was held at the same moment that, a few blocks away, Muslim terrorists began a three-day massacre of hundreds of innocent Indians and international travelers.
"The real question," Breitbart writes, "is when the people who make the world's most popular form of entertainment finally accept the truth: that the Islamist threat is real, growing and won't go away when George W. Bush leaves the White House in January." It's a question that extends well beyond Bollywood and Hollywood.
Don't hold your breath.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Thursday, November 27, 2008
But on this day especially, I am especially grateful for, and mindful of, those loved ones I won't be seeing. This quote is for them:
"Here at the frontier, there are falling leaves. Though my neighbors are all barbarians, and you, you are a thousand miles away, there are always two cups on my table."
And there are threats closer to home as well, as details of a possible al Qaeda attack on Penn Station and/or the NYC subway system begin to emerge.
Wherever you are traveling this holiday season, be safe.
BENEDICK ADDS: Come on. They don't want us dead. They want us to just submit to the will of Allah. We could end the violence tomorrow if only we'd stop this silly, constant defending of our liberties, values, and our way of life.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Obama Names Bill Clinton to Presidential Post:
Ending weeks of speculation and rumors, President-Elect Barack Obama today named Bill Clinton to join his incoming administration as President of the United States, where he will head the federal government's executive branch.
"I am pleased that Bill Clinton has agreed to come out of retirement to head up this crucial post in my administration," said Obama. "He brings a lifetime of previous executive experience as Governor of Arkansas and President of the United States, and has worked closely with most of the members of my Cabinet."
Clinton said he was "excited and honored" by the appointment, and would work "day and night" to defeat all the key policy objectives proposed by Mr. Obama during the campaign.
"I am gratified that the President-Elect has entrusted me with this important responsibility," said Clinton. "I'm looking forward to getting back behind, and under, the Oval Office desk again. As I have told the President-Elect, I pledge to do whatever I can to serve his historic administration by making sure that none of that bullshit he talked about during the campaign will ever see the light of day. Americans can rest assured that he will be safely confined to the East Wing, as far away as possible from any potentially dangerous office equipment or nuclear buttons."
The long anticipated naming of Clinton to head Obama's Oval Office team comes after a week that saw Obama appoint dozens of Clinton associates to his transition team including John Podesta, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Larry Summers, and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Hundreds of other Clinton Administration holdovers are rumored to be in line for remaining appointments, including Bill Richardson, Janet Reno, Webb Hubbell, Chelsea Clinton, zombie Vince Foster, and zombie Socks the cat.
"Let's face it, it's obvious I'm in way over my head here," explained Obama. "Anyone paying attention knows I am a disaster waiting to happen, and who can blame them? I mean, just look at the stock market. That's why I think it's in the best interest of the country that I hand over the reins to people who, whatever their ethical shortcomings, at least have a faint clue about what they're doing. Come on, man. I've got a 401-k, too."
While the naming of Clinton appears to have momentarily calmed jittery financial markets, it sparked ripples of disapproval at liberal websites like Huffington Post and DailyKos. The progressive blogosphere was an early key source of support for Mr. Obama's candidacy, but a steady stream of Clinton-era appointees since the election has left some charging that he had betrayed his campaign promises to bring them to Washington as part of a sweeping culture of change -- a charge that Mr. Obama vehemently accepted.
"Oh, for crissakes. Are you kidding me? Are you friggin' kidding me?" asked Obama. "Of course I betrayed those goddamned idiots. Have any of you actually spent five minutes with them? I have, unfortunately. Nothing personal, but I wouldn't trust these internet windowlickers with a plastic spork from Taco Bell, let alone a freaking $3 trillion dollar budget global superpower. Look, I may be naive, but I'm not stupid. And if Kose or Koz or whatever the fuck his name is thinks for one second I give a rat's ass about who he wants in charge of the Treasury Department, he's even stupider than he looks."
"Look, I'm sorry I kinda snapped there, and pardon my French," added Obama. "But I just spent the last two years surrounded by these starstruck moonbat retards, and I'll be goddamned if I'm gonna spend the next four with them parked in the next cubicle over."
Obama also announced that he had accepted his own appointment of himself as an Assistant Undersecretary in the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
"It's a fairly low-stress job that I'm reasonably qualified for," said Obama. "I really can't do much damage there, and it will give me plenty of free time for Oprah specials. Plus work on my next autobiography and re-election campaign."
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
The U.S. Attorney filed charges against Drew -- not for homicide, but for conspiracy and fraudulent misuse of MySpace computers. The trial began last week, and Reuters reports that closing arguments finished yesterday. Drew faces up to 20 years if convicted. More to come.
Levant reports today that a government-funded report just issued recommends the repeal of the statory basis for the Commissions. And thousands of legislators are mobiling to make it happen. There appears to be plenty of reason to hope this Canadian black eye will heal.
And then the Marines opened up about 10 cans of whoopass, sent 50 of these idiots to their virgin-riddled paradise and made the rest scurry home to ma.
Responsible for nearly 50% of the whoopass was an unnamed designated marksman (read: "sniper"), who killed 20 guys himself and didn't miss a single shot. Not an easy thing to do when shooting unencumbered at the target range - let alone when bullets are coming back and landing inches away from you.
The best part? Not one Marine was seriously injured.
Ace of Spades suggests that this sniper may be a badass.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
New York magazine's John Heilemann . . . offered another reason for all the positive press coverage Obama received.
"The biggest bias in the press is towards effectiveness," said Heilemann, who is authoring a book on the 2008 race . . . . "We love things that are smart."
Because Obama's campaign was generally so well run, he argued, the press tended to applaud even his negative tactics.
Heilemann went on to explain that modern journalistic ethics compel positive coverage of super-awesomeness, total-coolitude, and unchallengeable-perfectyness.
Me, I got 31 of 33 correct. That's an A (approximately 94%), so I feel pretty good about myself.
Unfortunately, elected officials who participated in the test scored an average of 44%. I don't feel very good about that at all.
BENEDICK ADDS: Meh. You beat me by one. But I plead the subjectivity of some of the questions.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Query how the blame will be apportioned between Bush and Global Warming. Wait -- who am I kidding? Global Warming is Bush's fault. Ergo, the predicted-but-not-yet-occurred earthquake will be entirely Bush's fault. Regardless of how far in the distant future it may occur.
For the record.
In other words, the state's citizens followed a constitutionally prescribed process to amend the state's highest law, and liberal activists now resort to the state's courts seeking a determination -- as Hinderaker so ably puts it -- that the state constitution is unconstitutional.
Which would, of course, be hilarious if it didn't portend future efforts by "progressives" to use what inevitably will be a more left-leaning judiciary to override the legislative process.
Me, I'm pretty laissez-faire when it comes to gay marriage. Live and let live. Indeed it's always struck me as rather hypocritical for social conservatives to denounce gays for living irresponsible, sexually promiscuous lives, and then to passionately thwart any effort to encourage gays to form lifelong, committed, responsible, monogamous relationships.
But when the laws throughout western civilization for thousands of years have recognized marriage as an institution between a man and a woman, it doesn't seem unreasonable that we should let our constitutionally prescribed procedures guide society's shifting values toward any change in that institution.
Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post mocked Bush’s “fantasy-based escalation . . . which could only make sense in some parallel universe where pigs fly and fish commute on bicycles.” At Time, Joe Klein ridiculed “Bush’s futile pipe dream.” Jonathan Chait, writing in the Los Angeles Times, found “something genuinely bizarre” about those Americans who actually supported the new strategy. “It is not just that they are wrong. . . . It’s that they are completely detached from reality.” The New Republic’s Peter Beinart predicted that, by 2008, American soldiers would “still be dying, and the catastrophe will still be deepening.” In sending more troops to Baghdad, Beinart wrote, “Bush is showing his commitment to win—except that the United States has already lost.”Even when General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker demonstrated the undeniable progress attributable to the surge, liberal critics crossed their arms, stomped their feet, and continued to bray:
Liberal politicians were just as certain that the surge was a doomed and irresponsible policy. On the night of the announcement, Senator Barack Obama proclaimed: “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.” Later in the month, Senator Joseph Biden declared: “If he surges another 20, 30 [thousand], or whatever number he’s going to, into Baghdad, it’ll be a tragic mistake.” Senator Hillary Clinton similarly insisted that “I cannot support [the] proposed escalation of the war in Iraq,” while Senator John Kerry said that sending in additional troops was not an “answer” but “a tragic mistake.”
Throughout the spring, even though the full complement of additional troops had yet to arrive in Iraq, the drumbeat of opposition continued, and so did intimations of American defeat. To Richard Cohen of the Washington Post, “the [American] lives lost in Iraq were wasted.” Former Ambassador Peter Galbraith, writing in the New York Review of Books, argued that Bush had embraced a plan that “has no chance of actually working. At this late stage, 21,500 additional troops cannot make a difference.” On Capitol Hill, Senator Christopher Dodd asserted that “there is no military solution in Iraq. To insist upon a surge is wrong.” Senate majority leader Harry Reid declared that “this surge is not accomplishing anything” and in April announced flatly that the Iraq war was “lost.”
While both Petraeus and Crocker were careful not to overstate the degree of progress in Iraq, and reminded everyone who would listen that the country remained a fragile place, they left no doubt of their belief that, in the words of Crocker, “a secure, stable, democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors is attainable.”Wehner cites numerous additional examples of this species of I-Refuse-To-Believe-It-ism before turning to the question of why:
But none of this mattered to the administration’s liberal critics, who to their earlier prognosis of failure were now adding charges of government cooking of the evidence. Even before the Petraeus-Crocker testimony, Senator Dick Durbin, the Democratic majority whip, warned Americans that “by carefully manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report will try to persuade us that violence in Iraq is decreasing and thus the surge is working.” After the hearing, Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts said the general’s testimony was “just a façade to hide from view the continuing failure of the Bush administration’s strategy.” To Representative Rahm Emanuel, the general’s written report deserved to win “the Nobel Prize for creative statistics or the Pulitzer for fiction.”
Paul Krugman, an influential columnist for the New York Times, could not have agreed more. The administration, he flatly asserted, was intentionally misleading the public by “creating the perception that the ‘surge’ is succeeding, even though there’s not a shred of verifiable evidence to suggest that it is.” Others were even more reckless. A Democratic Senator complained to the website Politico that no one was willing to call Petraeus “a liar on national TV,” hoping instead that “outside groups will do this for us.” As if in response, MoveOn.org, the left-wing political-action committee, promptly took out a full-page ad in the New York Times proposing, in giant type, a new name for General Petraeus: “General Betray Us.”
A generous interpretation is that by the end of 2006, many liberals had made a definitive good-faith judgment that the Iraq war was irretrievably lost. This then became the filter through which they viewed all later developments. Once convinced of the impossibility of substantial progress, never mind a decent outcome or an actual victory, they could not help receiving good news as anomalous and/or inherently unsustainable.But Wehner sees more behind it than innocent, bad judgment:
But the generous interpretation may be too generous, and also condescending. Reasonable and responsible adults are expected to assess the solidity of their convictions against the available evidence and in light of changing circumstances. Even at the time of the surge’s announcement, when things were going quite badly, should responsible adults not have been able to entertain the possibility that, given the enormity of what was at stake in the war, a fundamentally new approach merited at least a degree of support, however hesitant or conditional?
Instead, many pronounced the new approach a failure even before it was tried. Still worse was that they continued to pronounce it a failure even as the evidence began to amass that it was succeeding. Even those few who (like Richard Cohen and Joe Klein) eventually admitted they were wrong about the surge itself continued to insist they were right about the war. Others stuck more and more zealously to their original position the more it became falsified by reality. They, and not the President, were the ones who were truly “doubling down” on their bet—as if a decent outcome in Iraq threatened their entire worldview.
Nor was their blindness limited to the good news occurring in the lives of Iraqis. They seemed no less blind to the huge drop in American combat deaths. Those deaths, after all, had been said to be among the core concerns of the anti-surge critics, who along with their allies in the media had been focusing relentless attention on the numbers of American casualties in Iraq. Yet little was now made of the fact that—to take just one example—there were but five U.S. combat deaths in Iraq in July 2008.
(The previous monthly low had been eight in May 2003, after the invasion.)
Nor, finally, has much if anything been made of the fact that coalition forces have drawn down significantly. All five of the U.S. combat brigades committed to the surge, as well as two Marine battalions and the Marine Expeditionary Unit, have withdrawn. One could not ask for a clearer sign that the surge has been achieving one of the key declared objectives of the anti-war critics themselves—namely, a reduction of American combat troops in Iraq. It is a sign that remains, for the critics, all but unnoticed.
Enter, ignominiously, politics. For some liberals, hatred of the President was clearly so all-encompassing that they had developed a deep investment in the failure of what they habitually dismissed not as America’s war but as “Bush’s war.” To an extent, this passion was driven by merely partisan considerations: Iraq had become a superbly effective instrument with which to bludgeon Republicans. It had helped the Democrats take control of both the House and the Senate in 2006; might not a thorough “Republican” defeat in Iraq lastingly reshape the political landscape in their favor?Wehner too-hopefully concludes that, whatever the prejudices and motivations of pundits, media elites, and politicians, the citizens will, one day, get it:
This is, admittedly, an unpleasant line of speculation, and those foolhardy enough to venture upon it have been loudly condemned for questioning the patriotism of their political adversaries. But patriotism is not the issue—judgment is. When politicians acting in good faith misjudge a situation, nothing prevents them from acknowledging their error and explaining themselves. For the most part, we await such acknowledgments in vain.
In partial extenuation, it might be contended that politicians have an elementary obligation to be responsive to the opinions of their constituents; since Iraq had become a certifiably unpopular cause, stepping out of line on the issue was likely to be regarded as an offense punishable at the polls. But what, then, are we to say of the opinion shapers, the editorial writers of our great newspapers, the essayists and columnists and book authors who, unconstrained by petty interest, present themselves as stalwartly independent spirits willing to follow the truth wherever it may lead?
What was at work in them when the evidence of American progress—which started as a trickle, and then became a river, and eventually became a flood—could no longer be denied? For not only did they continue to deny it, but they actively promoted an alternative policy of withdrawal and retreat that would have made an American defeat, and a jihadist and Iranian victory, inevitable. Is it not fair to say that what was at work in them was an ideological antipathy not just to an American President, but to America’s cause?
Americans at large are not so ready to deny the evidence of their senses, and appear open to reasoned argument on the basis of that evidence. For a political leader in high office, this is a great blessing. Some eyes will refuse to open and some ears will refuse to hear and some voices will always be raised high in derision. To act rightly in such circumstances is difficult and often enormously costly; but it is the very essence of leadership. If a leader’s decision is wise, there are grounds for hoping that in time this wisdom will be vindicated and, perhaps, recognized—even in the case of a war once massively unpopular but now winnable.I hope he's right, but I think the calculatedly false narrative has too much traction to be undone anytime soon. Those of us interested in the truth, though, should study the names of the deliberate deniers listed by Wehner (and there are more in the full article, including Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi) and bear their track records for reckless, breathless, over-the-top, spectacular wrongness when they take to their soapboxes in the future.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Bad Idea Jeans: The CEOs of the "Big 3" American automakers flew to D.C. today to beg Congress for a bazillion dollar bailout. Given the cash-poor state of their companies, and out of respect for the working stiffs whose tax dollars they seek to use to prop up their arcane and suicidal labor contracts with the UAW, they flew commercial. Oh wait, no they didn't.
Whatever you do, don't ever feed it after midnight: Mogwai-like creature found in Indonesian rain forest. Bears striking resemblance to Gizmo.
And in the category of "Headlines I Could Do Without," from Drudge: "Bill Clinton Offers to Bare All for Ethical Review..." (Then again, it could be worse. It could be Hillary.)
Al Qaeda went there. They Went There:
Al-Qaida's No. 2 leader used a racial epithet to insult Barack Obama in a message posted Wednesday, describing the president-elect in demeaning terms that imply he does the bidding of whites.Oh. Oh no you di-in't.
The message appeared chiefly aimed at persuading Muslims and Arabs that Obama does not represent a change in U.S. policies. Ayman al-Zawahri said in the message, which appeared on militant Web sites, that Obama is "the direct opposite of honorable black Americans" like Malcolm X, the 1960s African-American rights leader.
In al-Qaida's first response to Obama's victory, al-Zawahri also called the president-elect—along with secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice—"house negroes."
Speaking in Arabic, al-Zawahri uses the term "abeed al-beit," which literally translates as "house slaves." But al-Qaida supplied English subtitles of his speech that included the translation as "house negroes."
First of all, let me say that I am all for Al Qaeda making an enemy in Barack Obama. I hope somewhere down deep inside, the president-elect takes this nice and personal.
But it certainly sets up a conundrum for the hard left-wingers. I mean, according to The Narrative, the radical Muslims -- oops, Militants . . . er, Freedom Fighters . . . yeah, that's right, Freedom Fighters -- hate the United States because the United States is an evil, oppressive, imperialist, zionist entity that to this day exists for the purpose of enriching and empowering Christianist white males at the expense of everyone else. The Narrative tells us that if we stopped being so evil, and if we stopped our unforgiveable and offensive objections to their culture (which is just as worthy as ours, notwithstanding all that stoning of rape victims and female genital mutilation, which it's better if we just ignore), the Freedom Fighters wouldn't want to kill us anymore.
So now, we have elected a President who embodies Change and who will remake America into a peaceful, just, tolerant nation that is friendly to the rest of the world, doesn't step on toes, and is willing to abdicate its position of economic and military dominance. Hooray! The Freedom Fighters will be so happy!
But, whaaaaa?! Instead of throwing down their IEDs and running to join the drum circle, the Freedom Fighters are calling The One a fucking House Nigger? But . . . . that doesn't . . . I mean, why would they . . . because if that's what's going to . . . don't they understand that . . . but now that means . . . except before, it was like . . . . AAAAAAAGH!!!!! AAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHH!!! THE PAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIN!!!!!!!
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct.
This is what happens when the media decides which candidate is "worthy" to win. Heaven help us all if the Fairness Doctrine takes hold.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
If you've heard the phrase, "drinking the Kool-Aid," but aren't sure exactly sure what it refers to, here's a retrospective. The piece focuses on the Leftist nature of Jim Jones' People's Church, as well as on the refusal of a left-leaning local government and a left-leaning press to take any reasonable steps to interrupt known child-abuse, sexual assault, and weapons crimes during the many years when Jim Jones' pulpit operated proudly in San Francisco.
If you're interested in a more detailed, events-oriented recounting of what happened when Jones and his followers to their cult south of the border, the wikipedia entry is rather thorough and well done.
By contrast, here's a complete triviality that took me by surprise. Prince -- er, the artist formerly known as Prince -- is a Jehovah's Witness. Read the New Yorker interview. If you've seen Dave Chappelle's impression of Prince, imagine the artist's quotes in the being uttered in that lusty alto, and enjoy the chuckles.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Not so fast.
A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by AlBut, like, whatever. There's a "consensus," after all.
Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.
This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.
So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all.
Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running. The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.
A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission: the figures published by Dr Hansen's institute are not only one of the four data sets that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher temperatures than the others.
Friday, November 14, 2008
There's nothing going on. I'm with the 10th Mountain Division, and about half of the guys I'm with haven't fired their weapons on this tour and they've been here eight months. And the place we're at, South Baghdad, used to be one of the worst places in Iraq. And now there's nothing going on. I've been walking my feet off and haven't seen anything. I've been asking Iraqis, 'do you think the violence will kick up again,' but even the Iraqi journalists are sounding optimistic now and they're usually dour.Via InstaPundit.
Good thing the folks who proudly and vehemently opposed the surge will be making the strategic decisions from now on.