Friday, April 29, 2005

DO YOU CARE?

Our public schools, especially our "big city" public schools, are in sad shape.

As a nation, we no longer just have to worry about the "outsourcing/offshoring" of low-wage assembly line and call center jobs. We are in much more serious trouble when it comes to the "outsourcing/offshoring" of relatively high-wage, high-knowledge jobs. The principal reason for this growing disequalibrium is the decline of America's public educational system relative to other countries.

Those who can afford a high quality education (a/k/a, a private college prep school) will make that financial sacrifice for their kids (I willingly do it). But we represent maybe a couple percent of the population. What about those who can't afford the tuition or just send their kids to public schools because they won't make the financial sacrifice?

A couple of months ago, Bill Gates delivered a speech to the National Governors Association. In it, he essentially said "I will not be able to hire the kids coming out of your high schools." In his speech he said:

America’s high schools are obsolete.

By obsolete, I don’t just mean that our high schools are broken, flawed, and under-funded – though a case could be made for every one of those points.

By obsolete, I mean that our high schools – even when they’re working exactly as designed – cannot teach our kids what they need to know today.

Training the workforce of tomorrow with the high schools of today is like trying to teach kids about today’s computers on a 50-year-old mainframe. It’s the wrong tool for the times.

Our high schools were designed fifty years ago to meet the needs of another age. Until we design them to meet the needs of the 21st century, we will keep limiting – even ruining – the lives of millions of Americans every year.

He's right and the sad thing about it is his words won't be heeded.

THE EURO "FAT ALBERT"


Perhaps you haven't seen a schematic diagram of the new Airbus:

SHOULD WE CARE?

Victor Davis Hanson poses an interesting question today -- do we care who doesn't like us? You know, Americans are so hated . . .

His parting comment:

Think about it. When Europe orders all American troops out; when Japan claims our textbooks whitewash the Japanese forced internment or Hiroshima; when China cites unfair trade with the United States; when South Korea says get the hell off our DMZ; when India complains that we are dumping outsourced jobs on them; when Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinians refuse cash aid; when Canada complains that we are not carrying our weight in collective North American defense; when the United Nations moves to Damascus; when the Arab Street seethes that we are pushing theocrats and autocrats down its throat; when Mexico builds a fence to keep us out; when Latin America proclaims a boycott of the culturally imperialistic Major Leagues; and when the world ignores American books, films, and popular culture, then perhaps we should be worried. But something tells me none of that is going to happen in this lifetime.

ACADEMIC HYPOCRISY

It's amazing to me how many academics single out who the bad guys are.

In this article (registration required) we hear about a previous history of lack of support of Middle Eastern academics by the British Association for University Teachers (AUT). When the subject was repression and imprisonment of university professors in Egypt and Iran, they were silent.

However, with little debate, they recently boycotted two Israel universities over alleged "restrictions on academic freedom".

THIS EXPLAINS A LOT

I thought American teenagers were clueless about history, but apparently they're not alone.

Given the current state of Euro-thought about the Middle East, that kids in the UK don't seem to know much about their's and Europe's history is eye-opening.

It reminds me of one of the Trivial Pursuit questions that was in the "teenage" version of the game: What group did Paul McCartney play in before Wings?

I feel old . . .

Thursday, April 28, 2005

NOT FUNNY !!

The losers at Air America got caught yesterday. They had to apologize.

If you or I had done this, we'd be headed to jail. Let's see if they get a free pass. I'd bet they do, but it's the last free pass they'll get.

SHINE THE SPOTLIGHT ON THEM

I've said over and over again (especially in last year's campaign) that the best remedy for political nonsense is an microphone and a spotlight.

Ann Coulter takes off on her favorite demons (Democrats) in her discourse on the current stonewalling in the Senate over Bush's judicial appointees. She does what no media source normally does -- she talks about a couple of the judges that the lib Dems have the most problems with.

Wouldn't it be great for every appointee who's being stonewalled to be profiled by some media source like 60 Minutes or 20/20 or Dateline? Or even Fox News?? We might discover that some of these jurists aren't all that crazy. My guess is the Dems wouldn't like it because some more moderate (a/k/a swing) voters would question the Dems sanity.

Perish the thought.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO WORRY ABOUT . . .

It never ceases to amaze me that some people find it necessary to quantify risks. It's one thing to quantify some risks -- if we weren't able to do that, insurance wouldn't exist.

But quantifying the risk of the Earth being swallowed by a black hole?

DO NOT READ THIS!!!

I'm not kidding!!

Reading this is hazardous to your mental health!

PROSELYTIZING

While many would like to see prayer in public schools, I'm uncomfortable with the idea. I'd just as soon schools be a place for education, not religious worship.

However, it appears there are some folks who believe they can promote their religious beliefs within the current restrictions against religious activities in public schools.

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

NUKE THE FILIBUSTER

I almost didn't believe my eyes when I read the title of this LA Times editorial.

They really mean it. Liberal as they are, they agree the filibuster should be done away with. In their words, we still think judicial candidates nominated by a president deserve an up-or-down vote in the Senate.

A SUCKER PUNCH?

I had this BFO this morning (Blinding Flash of the Obvious) that Karl Rove and company are smiling with glee these days.

After all, what happened last year? No, not the success of the President in November.

It was the failure of the Democrats to advance a single positive idea leading up to November that killed them. Rove managed to keep the Democrats on message -- Bush is a chimp, John Kerry is a brilliant war hero -- for so long that they were screwed when the Swift Boat Veterans showed that Kerry probably wasn't a big-time war hero. Even if Kerry had some truly brilliant ideas (he didn't), they would have been overshadowed by his lame defense of his enhanced "heroics" in Viet Nam.

Now, you have the Dems in the Senate basically stonewalling everything:

Judges -- have they proposed a compromise appointee for any of the seats that Bush is trying to fill? NO. They just refuse to approve his appointees.

Social Security -- has any Democrat provided any constructive advice on how to close the future gap in unfunded liabilies of the Trust. NO. They just prefer to say Bush's ideas will result in reduced benefits for most Americans.

John Bolton -- the Senate Dems don't want Bolton to be US Ambassador to the UN. Have they proposed someone who would be acceptable? NO. They just don't like Bolton because he's a pain in the ass. Come to think of it, haven't some of our best ambassadors been pains in the ass?

I could go on, but you get the point.

Maybe they just believe that the Dems will run out of energy and back off, but maybe the White House is purposely letting this one play out as long as it will play, allowing the Dems to continue to be the party of "no" -- no to anything Bush wants, no compromise, no constructive ideas.

Once we get to the real campaign season for the 2006 elections (which will probably start this Fall), the Republicans will have all the newsreel footage the need of Democrats making fools of themselves.

THERE'S HOPE FOR G.M. AND FORD

As I've ranted before, the labor contracts the morons in Detroit have agreed to for far too many years is a massive albatross around their pencil necks, especially regarding retirement benefits.

The US (meaning the US taxpayer) agreed to take over all four of United Airlines pension plans yesterday, which will presumably allow United to emerge from bankruptcy.

Given that sort of news, where's the motivation for GM and Ford execs to manage their companies' out of their current doldrums? Why not just fly them into the ground, file bankruptcy, repudiate union wage agreements and supplier contracts, and hand off the pension liabilities to the US taxpayers. Sort of an "extreme makeover" for Detroit.

WHAT THE HELL WAS HE THINKING?




Though holding hands is a socially-acceptable practice in Saudi Arabia, you gotta wonder what Bush was thinking.

BLOG POST OF THE MONTH

The guys at Power Line have teed up the morons in the mainstream media again; this time the Associated Press gets bitch-slapped for doing next to no due diligence before running with an article that tries to cast US Ambassador to the UN nominee John Bolton in a negative light.

The source of the AP's information, a supposedly unbiased "former colleague" turns out to be neither unbiased nor a former colleague.

I really liked the last paragraph:

So Frederick Vreeland's opposition to Bolton, which is being promoted as a non-partisan critique by a "former colleague," throws the issue of Bolton's nomination into stark relief. John Bolton stands for a certain set of opinons and values, which mirror those of President Bush: he doesn't think America is to blame for terrorist attacks; he doesn't think the U.N. is morally superior to the U.S.; he thinks the job of an American diplomat is to advance the interests of the United States, not other countries; and he sees neither virtue nor advantage in treachery toward American allies, especially Israel. Bolton's enemies hate him because of these values and opinions, not because he lacks the suave manners of the State Department clique that, for decades, has gotten everything wrong about the Middle East.

Monday, April 25, 2005

OUR BORDER PATROL IN ACTION !!

With the ongoing saga of our porous border to the South, we hear a daily barrage of stories about illegal immigration and drug smuggling. The Border Patrol always complains about the lack of resources.

Which makes it all the more embarrassing when they finally do bust a major smuggler of ---- bologna.

OBJECTIVITY AT THE BBC?

The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) was often called the "Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation" by many. Their reporting was rarely negative when it came to Saddam and, after the invasion of Iraq, is has been mostly anti-coalition in its reporting.

Don't know if this is indicative of a change, but at least this article shows some semblance of objective reporting -- you know, the type of reporting where you don't interject your opinion.

SOMEONE HELP ME

I need a word that expresses a state of mind that is a combination of cluelessness, denial and liberal.

Whatever that word me be, it aptly describes a whole host of folks who are now stammering faint praise for Bush, while still bashing him.

Victor Davis Hanson takes aim at a number of these "clueless, denying liberals" and hits them squarely in the kill zone.

I especially like the moronic comments made by Clintonite Nancy Soderberg who said (and I have to quote it directly, otherwise you wouldn't believe it):

“I have to say. . . . Well, there’s still Iran and North Korea, don’t forget. There’s still hope for the rest of us. . . . There’s always hope that this might not work.” (My emphasis.)

There's always hope this might not work!?!?!!?

There, you have it. An honest liberal. One who believes it would be a good thing if "Bush fails" in Iraq. Loads of sympathy for the Iraqi people in that little slip of the tongue.

COULD THEY BE ANY MORE CLUELESS?

Howard Kurtz, media numbnuts for the Washington Post writes today about the impact of "non-traditional journalism" -- you know, those things called "blogs" and all the other folks who aren't real journalists.

His comment about Matt Drudge (Drudge . . . is now treated more as an amusing diversion than a threat to journalistic integrity.) was a hoot.

Oh Howie, here are some statistics for you:

1. Circulation of The Washington Post -- "over" five million weekly.
2. Hits on The Drudge Report -- 9,394,917 - last 24 hours; about 50 million a week.

Hmmm.

Friday, April 22, 2005

WHAT'S WRONG IN SOME OF OUR MAJOR CITIES?

This.

You could do a search and replace using Cleveland, Detroit, etc.

It's sad, truly sad. Most of the industrial cities of the North are led by Democrat mayors who have no knowledge about how to create jobs, other than to tax their citizens and create new government jobs.

Of course, they blast "outsourcing" as the primary reason for loss of jobs, but much of this outsourcing is not to Delhi or Belfast, but to the American South -- a place where political leaders are grounded in the idea of collaborative partnerships between government and industry.

Unfortunately, the paradigm of "partnerships" in the American North is more akin to the "partnership" between labor unions and company management -- confrontation and conflict, not collaboration.

When will this "we vs. they" crap end?

THE CANADIAN CONNECTION

Wretchard writes a very interesting post about the connection between the UN "Oil for Food" scandal and Canadian PM Paul Martin.

Hmmmm.

"UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES"

To encourage "whistleblowing", Congress passed the False Claims Act, which was passed in hopes that encouraging whistleblowing (through offering financial rewards) would cut down on fraud and the resulting expense to the US taxpayer. Of course, like some legistlation designed to mitigate something, this law may be having the opposite effect.

GEE, MAYBE HE'S NOT SUCH A BAD GUY AFTER ALL

Big news from Havana today. El Presidente Fidel Castro announced that the minimum wage has been increased, giving low-paid workers a 100+% increase.

The punchline: Their monthly wage will increase from $4.20 to $9.40. Monthly. MONTHLY!!

UNCOMMON COMMON SENSE

Charles Krauthammer continues to be one of my favorites commentators today. His column today in the Washington Post should be a wake up call to conservative Republicans.

In his column he points out the idiocy of public pronouncements by some like Sen. DeLay.

DeLay's rantings about the judiciary do little to promote the President's agenda and only serve up fodder for the opposition.

I CONTINUE TO BE UNSURPRISED

I have fond memories of traveling to Little Rock in the early 1980's. I was calling on investment bankers (yes, in Little Rock). What I found, to my surprise, was that they were far less scrupulous than any New York investment banker. I know that may be a rather "left-handed" compliment, but it was true. Sleazy!

So >> fast forward >> in the early 1990's, when the Clintons came to Washington I was suitably cynical about their ethics. Eight years in the White House proved my cynicism to be less, well, cynical.

So >> fast forward >> in 2005, I almost don't consider this to be news. And niether, apparently, does the New York Times, who ran with this article that links one of the bad boys to Ted Kennedy, but only barely to the Clintons.

FOR ONCE, I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH PROF. HANSON

VDH begins his weekly essay today with "If we look back at the war that started on September 11, . . ."

I'd argue the war began long before that.

Some might say it started on March 10, 1991.

It was probably on November 4, 1979. But it could have been April 7, 1967. Or even March, 1095.

For sure, it was not on September 11, 2001.

You decide.

GO FIGURE . . .

A few months ago, I thought that whatever else would happen in Euro-land, the EU constitution would be ratified. I especially thought the French would slam-dunk their approval, but non!!! It looks like the French voters are more afraid of becoming less . . . French than they are of being able to join with their Euro-buds to compete against the big bad USofA and China (the rationale French politicians use as to why ratification is needed).

If the French reject the constitution, the EU will at least be temporarily dead in the water.

PEACE, MAN

You've got the image - - it's the 60's; some guy with long hair, vaguely looking like Dennis Hopper in Easy Rider, flashes a grin and a peace sign. You know what he means . . . don't you?

Make love, not war. Noble concept.

Except peace is not "no war".

Thursday, April 21, 2005

A WAKE UP CALL FROM NEWT

Great essay today by Newt Gingrich.

Money quote: A successful 21st century conservative movement is going to need the Reagan level of courage and the Contract level of cheerful persistence for it to succeed.

Too true.

WHO'S MORE LIBERAL?

Hillary Clinton or John Kerry?

The answer might surprise you.

Of humorous note is the fact that 8% of the people polled by Rasmussen said they thought that Hillary was a conservative (!!!). Yikes -- who are those people??

It now makes sense -- that lunatic, moonbat left who think Bush is Hitler/Atilla the Hun obviously see even Hillary as a conservative. Who/what would they consider liberal? The mind boggles.

WHY MY KIDS DON'T GO TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS . . .

Here are just two "wonderful" examples of what happens in public schools in Ohio.

In the school my kids go to, there hasn't been one incident of violence (and by violence, I don't mean gunfire -- I mean not one kid has even pushed another one, let alone gotten in a fight) in the two years they've attended the school.

It's clear that the teachers and administrators in public schools in Ohio just don't think it's their job to protect kids from violence by creating a safe environment. If they were told it's their job to do so, I don't think they would know how to do it.

IDIOCY ALIVE AND WELL ON THE AMERICAN CAMPUS

Sorry I missed this one when it first published in February. This, I believe, is from the same student newspaper where one of their young idiots wrote an editorial about a recent story from Iraq of a soldier who lost his life while saving many of his buddies' lives. In that piece the writer said he got what he deserved.

In this piece, it's closer to home -- it's about "supporting the troops", and why this little moron and his buddies enjoy ripping "support out troops" decals off cars. If I read a few more of these, I think I might begin to get excited about the idea of reinstating the draft, except doing away with student deferments. Last time around (you know, Viet Nam), most "draft dodgers" used the college campus as the best way to avoid the draft.

ANOTHER STORY YOU WON'T READ

OK, you'll read it -- you just won't read it in the New York Times.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

WILL YOU HAVE FRIES WITH THAT?

My dad would probably have said "I told you so!"

Turns out that being somewhat overweight is actually a good thing.

DAMN LIES

You know the old cliche about statistics . . .

A popular statistic, well publicised about the American military presence in Iraq, is that an overwhelming percentage of Iraqis want us the hell out of their country . . . immediately.

The truth is, well, not exactly what the mainstream media has reported.

I wonder what the comparative statistics are between Iraq and Europe (see post below)?

THE REAL QUAGMIRE

Yo liberals, you think Iraq is bad? What about this place?

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

INTERESTING CHOICE

Long live Pope Benedict XVI. Not trying to sound too cynical, he is 78, so his election was probably a version of the election of Pope John XXIII.

LEFT-WING TERROR

Quick, name three acts of terror and whether they were perpetrated by a right-wing or left-wing terrorist. I'd bet all three you name would be right-wing -- Islamists, Timothy McVeigh and Eric Randolph are three that come to mind. I'd bet some people, when asked this question, would say, "what is this, a trick question?" Everyone assumes terror is committed by some right-wing fanatic.

But why is it that the vast majority of acts of terror are perpetrated by left-wing groups, yet I didn't name a single one?

Is it because left-wing terrorist get a bit of a free pass?

After all, if you're an environmentalist and you firebomb a housing development, you're really not a bad guy, are you?

Of course, almost 40 years ago (as now), most terrorist acts were committed by left-wing groups. I'd bet a lot of "baby boomer" journalists had sympathetic feelings towards folks like that, so they see environmental terrorists and "animal rights" groups in a kinder, gentler, more sympathetic light.

ANOTHER BULLET DODGED

I think it was almost precisely four years ago that I had this cold sweat/ohmygod feeling. It dawned on me that we had come within a few votes of electing Al Gore. It was a scary feeling, thinking that he might have been our President.

This morning, I saw this series of photos and had almost the same reaction.

Monday, April 18, 2005

SGT HACKER?

I like it.

APPEALING TO YOUR PRURIENT INTERESTS . . .



WHAT THE . . .?

Read this. Then wonder what could have happened.

A CHINESE POPE?

That would be interesting.

OKLAHOMA CITY -- IT AIN'T OVER 'TIL IT'S OVER

Just by happenstance I was watching Fox News last night (not that I don't watch it, I just normally don't watch it later than 8.00PM or so). They ran a story about the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. You know, the building that Timothy McVeigh blew up (with a little assistance from Terry Nichols).

Did you believe that McVeigh did it all by himself? Me either.

Turns out there's some interesting evidence that might show a connection to, you guessed it, al Qaeda. If this evidence was available ten years ago, why are we just hearing about it now. Or is this another instance of the media covering up the negligence of Janet Reno?

And then there's this.

"TRAGIC IRONY"

I'm sorry I'm so cynical, but I just wonder if this was an accident (scroll down for the money quote by Ms. Ruzicka).

QUAKING IN THEIR BOOTS OR LAUGHING?

How did I miss this one? The UN has made it a crime ". . . for would-be terrorists to possess or threaten to use nuclear weapons or radioactive material."

We all know how effective the UN has been when it comes to enforcement, so I'm guessing the terrorists who might have such materials aren't worried.

BE AFRAID . . .

That's the message to "insurgents" (a/k/a Islamist terrorists) in Iraq. More and more, this sort of response is what they're getting.

SOCIALISM, OR AT LEAST A VERSION OF IT

Looks like an interesting form of socialism is still alive and well in Spain.

Normally, you'd expect to hear a story like this in a city or country that was dominated by conservatives. Property being seized by the government and virtually given to developers, who I assume then make millions and give chunks of it back to the politicians who made it all happen. At least that's the way the story usually plays out.

But here we have Spain, doing a version of the same thing, only they seem to be seizing single-family properties owned by "foreigners", handing them over to developers to beuild multi-family housing.

Hey, who said socialists can't also be capitalists?

This looks like a decent test case as to whether the EU is really a "U".

SHOULD WE WORRY?

When it looks like Venezuela and Iran are getting in bed, you bet we should worry.

Friday, April 15, 2005

LIBERAL MOONBAT ALERT

I just read a totally off the wall essay in (of all places) The Christian Science Monitor. The author is a professor at Rutgers University who makes the argument, by comparison, that the US today is no different than Cambodia under Pol Pot.

If he's right, I guess we should expect to see mass executions soon.

EVEN ATHIESTS SHOULD OBJECT

It's becoming more and more evident that one of the biggest, if not the biggest rants that Liberals are foaming about is religious belief.

This is a country that was created by extremely devout people, people who did not believe that this should be a country without religion. They believed it should be a country without a state religion.

Somehow, Liberals interpret the Constitution to be a statement against religion. For certain, they believe that a President or other elected official should keep their religious beliefs to themselves. They seem to have forgotten the mantra of the Democrats during the 1960 election, when religion was an issue (for those who've forgotten, Jack Kennedy was Catholic), when they said Kennedy's religious beliefs shouldn't be an issue.

So, when they begin to make an issue of someone's Catholic beliefs, there needs to be the equivalent of a "flag on the play". The mainstream media sure won't call them on it, so I guess it's up to the rest of us.

HEH, HEH, HEH

Marvelous. I guessed it might happen, but it was really more of a hope than a guess.

As Sen. Clinton has tried her best to claw her way towards a more centrist spotlight, her efforts seem to be having two effects:

1) The mainstream media is lovin' it. Hillary as a moderate is a story they will love to report on.

2) She risks alienating the moonbat left in the Democrat camp.

The first effect has been widely reported ad nauseum.

The second effect is finally rearing it's ugly head. Or should I say "ugly head"?

Friday, April 08, 2005

FOR THE RECORD, TODAY IS NOT APRIL 1ST

I'm guessing this story could have run on April 1st, but they delayed it so you would take it more seriously.

If true, this is beyond clever.

MOONBAT ALERT

I'm sure you've seen stories about various groups suing firearm manufacturers (who make things that are designed to kill people), aleging the manufacturers should be liable for subsequent deaths. The courts, of course, have adopted the simple logic of "guns don't kill people; people kill people."

Now, there is a group that is suggesting that Caterpillar should be held accountable because they make bulldozers that are used by Isreal to destroy homes "on Palestinian land."

If one were to use this logic, almost every manufacturer of anything that could be used to kill someone (guns, knives, hatchets, hammers, ice picks, screwdrivers, cars, trucks, motorcycles, prescription pills, knitting needles, whatever) would be liable for that death.

THIS CASE IS DIFFERENT

If you believed Terri Schiavo's husband, then you could rationalize the removal of water and nutrition -- though a truly benevolent person would have begun administering morphine to hasten a swift end.

As I suspected would probably be the case, the media is now beginning to sniff out cases like Terri's, but different. In this case, it appears the person trying to control another person's life is clearly doing so against the laws in their state.

How many other cases are there like this?

IT'S ABOUT F*#*ING TIME!

You're in rush hour traffic. It's a fairly light traffic day. You're cruising in the left lane at your usual 5-10 mph over the limit, just like almost everyone else in the left lane. Then it happens.

Up ahead, some dimbulb with their cellphone glued to their left ear is "camped" out in the left lane, going 2 mph under the limit. There's a quarter mile gap in front of them but they aren't going to move over. You cool down, but the guy in the tricked-out BMW in back of you gets pissed and does a couple of fast lane changes to get past the left-lane "camper". In doing so, he cuts off two or three people, causing a couple of near accidents. He makes sure he flips off the "camper" as he blows by him on the right, but he's so busy on his call he doesn't even see it.

In his 30 minute drive on that freeway, the "camper" unknowingly creates a dozen near accidents and impedes the natural flow of traffic.

Sound familiar? Happens every day, just about everywhere. I read a story a few months ago that a study done in the UK proved that left lane "campers" may diminish the traffic-carrying capacity of British motorways as much as 25%. Of course, I'm sure the "camper's" response would be "piss off, I'm driving the speed limit!" True, but even law enforcement recognizes that isn't the point. What causes accidents and traffic slow-ups isn't high speed or low speed, but cars in the same lane trying to travel at different speeds. It isn't democratic -- the slowest driver controls the lane.

So, what to do? More and more states are passing laws that say the only time you're permitted in the left lane is when you are passing another car (scroll down to the story titled "Road Rage"). That's OK, but still isn't the best answer.

What's the best answer? Be courteous. If you're cruising along in the left lane, even if you're traveling at 90 mph, and someone's on your bumper . . . move over!

Thursday, April 07, 2005

FREE SPEECH -- A SOMETIMES ELUSIVE CONCEPT

I don't think any American is willing to throw away major portions of the First Amendment. Love it or hate it, it's what distinguishes us from other "democracies" like the UK and Canada, where free speech is whatever the government decides it is.

However, there have been many definitions of free speech at the margin. E.g., the long-held maxim that yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is impermissible, inciting a crowd to riot is impermissible, etc.

So, why is it that a group whose avowed purpose is the furtherance of relationships between adult men and young boys is somehow allowed to openly broadcast their perverse mission?

Isn't this one of those cases where "free speech" should be curbed?

WAR, OLD-FASHIONED WAR

Throughout the Gulf War, Afghanistan and Iraq, we have all seen the impact of "technological" warfare. Smart bombs, night vision, laser-guided artillery, etc. The meme in the mainstream media has been that's what we know how to do. Old-fashioned, hand-to-hand guerilla combat isn't what we and our allies are trained to do.

Oh really? I guess these guys didn't get that memo.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

I'VE GOT TO BELIEVE THIS IS A GOOD THING

Surprising that Iraq is apparently going to have a Kurdish president. Tons of symbolism.

THE GANG THAT COULDN'T SHOOT STRAIGHT

No, this isn't about the Robert De Niro movie of the same name.

This is about a small group of men who stumbled upon the strategic plan of their arch enemy. This group of small men, even with their enemy's plans in front of them, proved incapable of winning more than a couple of skirmishes in the war. Though they knew their enemy's innermost secret strategy, it still didn't help them. They were soundly defeated, though they had a large, well-financed army.

Who are these men? Read this.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

THIS SAYS IT ALL


A REVOLT IN THE MAKING

If you read everything that's been written by Democrats about their political failures last year, they all seem to be pointing to what they believe is all but over -- the nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton as the party's candidate in 2008. It's their answer to "how do we win back the White House?" The only question not yet answered is who her VP running mate will be.

However, one bold Democrat has just said, in effect, that Democrats would be ill-advised to nominate Clinton unless they want to continue their trend of decline into marginal/minority status.

Monday, April 04, 2005

V.D.H ANSWERS THE SAUDIS

Last week, Victor Davis Hanson answered questions (not all of them were freindly) posed by the editor of a Saudi newspaper.

His answers are worth reading.

WWGD

What would George do?

George Patton, that is.

Or, better said, what would Patton say about the war in Iraq?

Here's the answer to that question, after it was posed to Victor Davis Hanson last summer.

A great summary of Patton's strategies versus the "common wisdom" of Eisenhower and the parallels to Iraq.

Enjoy . . .

HERE'S A SOBERING STATISTIC

50% of all the purchasing power of Mexican nationals is held by Mexicans in the US.

Ponder that for a minute.

Then read this.

R.I.P. JOHN PAUL II

Whether you agreed with his politics, you have to admire the courage and strength of John Paul II. I remember him best during the days of the fall of the "Iron Curtain", a Polish Pope cheering his countrymen to confront the tyranny of the Soviets.

In these days of European appeasement, they would do well to reflect on his life, what he fought for and what they should be fighting for.

Here's a great tribute by Charles Krauthammer.

Friday, April 01, 2005

POLITICS IMITATES LIFE?

How ironic.

In the same week that Teddy Kennedy mouths off about Terri Schiavo, his ex-wife Joan appears to be in a sad state of health and her kids are asking to be appointed her guardian.

PERVERSE COMIC RELIEF ITEM OF THE DAY/WEEK/MONTH?

This article speaks for itself ("Ms. Wheelchair stripped of title for standing up").

Of course, the comment of the official of the Ms. Wheelchair pageant is even more priceless:

We can't have title holders out there walking when they're seen in the public.

THE ONE THAT GOT AWAY

I always thought that Bill Bradley might be that rare Democrat that, depending upon who he was running against, I might actually vote for.

Turns out that he is as smart as advertised. I missed it Wednesday, but he wrote a terrific op-ed for the NY Times where he assesses the current state of the Democrats and tells them why they still don't get it. A sample:

(W)e are still hypnotized by Jack Kennedy, and the promise of a charismatic leader who can change America by the strength and style of his personality. The trouble is that every four years the party splits and rallies around several different individuals at once. Opponents in the primaries then exaggerate their differences and leave the public confused about what Democrats believe.

No shit.

WHO IS/ARE AL QAEDA?

And does Osama really run the show from a cave in Pakistan/Afghanistan? And what do they want, really? What are their goals?

Every once in awhile, I find a post on this subject that shows the speaker actually did some research and used original thought about the subject before writing. This post covers just such a person, a professor who spoke on al Qaeda at Princeton University last Monday.

What makes it doubly interesting is the professor was passed over for tenure a year ago. Gee, do you think his politics might have swayed the decision?

THE TEFLON PRESIDENT, BUBBA STILL SKATING

I find it interesting that this week we had the Commission on Intelligence Capabilities report that we were clueless from an intelligence standpoint about al Qaeda and Iraq prior to the invasion. Of course the "we" in this case is, for me, the Clinton administration.

Today, Sandy Berger, one of the Clinton insiders, copped a plea to stealing and destroying government documents that no doubt cast the Clintons in a poor light regarding the decisions that were made about intelligence gathering during Bubba's eight years in the White House.

How convenient. Clinton can continue to do what he does best -- deny.