« March 2005 | Main | May 2005 »

April 29, 2005

A Quick Analysis of the Prez's Presser

Some choice quotes from Bush's press conference last night:

Concerning high energy prices, among other government non-solutions, he said, "Here at home, we'll protect consumers. There will be no price gouging at gas pumps in America." Apparently instead he's going to force oil companies to sell at below-market prices, creating shortages. Hello, 1970s' gas lines!

"Franklin Roosevelt did a wonderful thing when he created Social Security. The system has meant a lot for a lot of people. Social Security has provided a safety net that has provided dignity and peace of mind for millions of Americans in their retirement." Now there's a conservative for you, applauding FDR's unconstitutional, socialist boondoggle!

"First, millions of Americans depend on Social Security checks as a primary source of retirement income, so we must keep this promise to future retirees as well. As a matter of fairness, I propose that future generations receive benefits equal to or greater than the benefits today's seniors get.

"Secondly, I believe a reformed system should protect those who depend on Social Security the most. So I propose a Social Security system in the future where benefits for low-income workers will grow faster than benefits for people who are better off.

"By providing more generous benefits for low-income retirees, we'll make this commitment: If you work hard and pay into Social Security your entire life, you will not retire into poverty.

"This reform would solve most of the funding challenges facing Social Security."

So he's going to save the program by promising ever more generous benefits and, perversely, paying out more to those who have put in less.

"A variety of options are available to solve the rest of the problem, and I will work with Congress on any good-faith proposal that does not raise the payroll tax rate or harm our economy." Note that this does not imply that he wouldn't increase the income level subject to taxation or implement other tax increases to accomplish his salvation of a program of legalized theft.

"Americans who would choose not to save in a personal account will still be able to count on a Social Security check equal to or higher than the benefits of today's seniors." There's only one way to do this, and that's to raise taxes (or, alternatively, to run the Fed's printing presses).

In response to the question, "Mr. President, your State Department has reported that terrorist attacks around the world are at an all-time high. If we're winning the war on terrorism, as you say, how do you explain that more people are dying in terrorist attacks on your watch than ever before?", Bush said, "Well, we've made the decision to defeat the terrorists abroad so we don't have to face them here at home. And when you engage the terrorists abroad, it causes activity and action." Apparently, though, he isn't responsible for any of it. Terrorists just do these things for no reason.

In response to the question, "What do you think of Putin now that he has expressed a willingness to supply weapons to outlaw regimes, specifically his recent comments that he said he would provide short-range missiles to Syria and nuclear components to Iran?", Bush replied, "Yes. First, just on a broader -- kind of in a broader sense, I had a long talk with Vladimir there in Slovakia about democracy and about the importance of democracy. And as you remember at the press conference, or, if you weren't there, somebody will remember, he stood up and said he strongly supports democracy. I take him for his word. . . .

"Now, we're working closely with the Russians on the issue of vehicle-mounted weaponry to Syria. We didn't appreciate that, but we made ourselves clear.

"As to Iran, what Russia has agreed to do is to send highly enriched uranium to a nuclear civilian power plant and then collect that uranium after it's used for electricity, power purposes. That's what they've decided to do. . . .

"And I appreciate that gesture. So I think Vladimir was trying to help there. I know Vladimir Putin understands the dangers of an Iran with a nuclear weapon. And most of the world understands that as well."

If you can't trust an ex-KGB guy who says he supports democracy, whom can you trust?

A reporter asked, "Mr. President, under the law, how would you justify the practice of renditioning, where U.S. agents who bust terror suspects abroad, taking them to a third country for interrogation? And would you stand for it if foreign agents did that to an American here?"

Here's the biggest non-answer of them all:

"That's a hypothetical.

"We operate within the law, and we send people to countries where they say they're not going to torture the people.

"But let me say something. The United States government has an obligation to protect the American people. It's in our country's interests to find those who would do harm to us and get them out of harm's way.

"And we will do so within the law. And we will do so in honoring our commitment not to torture people.

"And we expect the countries where we send somebody to not to torture as well.

"But, you bet, when we find somebody who might do harm to the American people, we will detain them and ask others from their country of origin to detain them. It makes sense. The American people expect us to do that. We're still at war.

"You know, I've said this before to you, I'm going to say it again: One of my concerns after September the 11th is the farther away we got from September the 11th, the more relaxed we would all become and assume that there wasn't an enemy out there ready to hit us.

"And I just can't let the American people -- I'm not going to let them down by assuming that the enemy is not going to hit us again. We're going to do everything we can to protect us.

"We've got the guidelines. We've got law.

"But, you bet, we're going to fight people before they harm us."

In other words, we'll do whatever we darn well please with these people we have designated as terrorists, and we'll pretend that they aren't being tortured in the places where we're sending them because their governments have said they wouldn't torture them.

More doublespeak about No Child Left Behind:

"Look, I'm a former governor. I believe that the states ought to control their own destiny when it comes to schools. They're by far the biggest funder of education. And it should remain that way.

"But we spend a lot of money here at the federal level, and have increased the money we spend here quite dramatically at the federal level.

"And we just changed the policy. Instead of just spending money and hoping for the best, we're now spending money and saying,

"Measure."

Well, which is it, Mr. President? Should the states control their own school systems or not?

Finally, here's how the conservative president really feels about taxes:

"You know, I was amazed by the report the other day that there's some $330 billion a year that goes unpaid by American taxpayers. It's a phenomenal amount of money.

"To me, it screams for making the tax system easier to understand, more fair, so that we can -- and to make sure people pay their taxes. More fair means pay what you owe."

How could any self-respecting conservative not love this guy?

Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:01 AM | Comments (0)

April 28, 2005

More Words of Wisdom from RAH

"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics."
--Robert A. Heinlein in Postscript to Revolt in 2100

"A managed democracy is a wonderful thing, Manuel, for the managers... and its greatest strength is a 'free press' when 'free' is defined as 'responsible' and the managers decide what is 'irresponsible'."
--Prof. Bernardo de la Paz in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

"Do-gooding is like treating hemophilia -- the real cure is to let hemophiliacs bleed to death... before they breed more hemophiliacs."
--Jubal Harshaw in Stranger in a Strange Land

"A desire not to butt into other peoples business is at least 80% of all human wisdom."
--Jubal Harshaw in Stranger in a Strange Land

"My old man claimed that the more complicated the law the more opportunity for scoundrels."
--Daniel Boone Davis in The Door Into Summer

And last, but certainly not least(in fact, most telling),

"What are the marks of a sick culture?

"It is a bad sign when the people of a country stop identifying themselves with the country and start identifying with a group. A racial group. Or a religion. Or a language. Anything, as long as it isn't the whole population.

"A very bad sign. Particularism. It was once considered a Spanish vice but any country can fall sick with it. Dominance of males over females seems to be one of the symptoms.

"Before a revolution can take place, the population must loose faith in both the police and the courts.

"High taxation is important and so is inflation of the currency and the ratio of the productive to those on the public payroll. But that's old hat; everybody knows that a country is on the skids when its income and outgo get out of balance and stay that way - even though there are always endless attempts to wish it way by legislation. But I started looking for little signs and what some call silly-season symptoms.

"I want to mention one of the obvious symptoms: Violence. Muggings. Sniping. Arson. Bombing. Terrorism of any sort. Riots of course - but I suspect that little incidents of violence, pecking way at people day after day, damage a culture even more than riots that flare up and then die down. Oh, conscription and slavery and arbitrary compulsion of all sorts and imprisonment without bail and without speedy trial - but those things are obvious; all the histories list them.

"I think you have missed the most alarming symptom of all. This one I shall tell you. But go back and search for it. Examine it. Sick cultures show a complex of symptoms as you have named... But a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than a riot.

"This symptom is especially serious in that an individual displaying it never thinks of it as a sign of ill health but as proof of his/her strength. Look for it. Study it. It is too late to save this culture - this worldwide culture, not just the freak show here in California. Therefore we must now prepare the monasteries for the coming Dark Age. Electronic records are too fragile; we must again have books, of stable inks and resistant paper."
--Friday and Dr. Baldwin in Friday

Anything sounding familiar? Keep in mind that Heinlein died in 1988, and most of this was written 20+ years ago.

Posted by Patrick Yancey at 06:52 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

He's Baaaaack!

Well, well, well . . .

The neocons' favorite double agent and embezzler, Ahmad Chalabi, has just been appointed acting oil minister for Iraq due to the mysterious failure of the new Iraqi government to name an oil minister.

"Chalabi, speaking to Reuters by telephone shortly after his appointment, said he might only be in the job for 'a short time' but he pledged to work to ensure smooth exports and honor contracts struck by the previous government."

Remember, though, that this war was about bringing democracy to the Middle East and ending the threat of Saddam's vast arsenal of WMD. It had nothing whatsoever to do with oil, and anyone who thinks that Chalabi's posting to the Oil Ministry is in the least bit suspicious is obviously a member of the tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists.

On the other hand, maybe Justin Raimondo was onto something in this column.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 02:31 PM | Comments (0)

They're All Coming Out of the Woodwork Now

Yet another conservative recognizes the error of George W. Bush's ways. William Rusher, writing at WorldNetDaily, says:

In proclaiming it America's mission to spread democracy all over the world, President Bush has gone far beyond the traditional policy of the Republican Party, and even beyond the ambitious goal of Woodrow Wilson, which was (you will recall) to "make the world safe for democracy." . . .

As the Wilsonian antecedents of his policy suggest, its paternity is traceable to the Democratic rather than the Republican Party. Even at that, no administration of either party actually ever threw America's military weight around abroad in support of a cause that was less than a vital interest of the United States until Bill Clinton came along. . . .

But George W. Bush has made Clinton look like a piker. The danger that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction made pre-emption of his efforts a genuinely vital interest of the United States. But when we attacked Iraq and found no WMDs, Bush quickly shifted to justifying the war on the basis that democratizing Iraq was the only way to make it, and thereafter the rest of the Middle East, peaceful. He even insisted that this had been one of our war aims all along, and perhaps it was – but if so, it was hardly a vital interest of the United States, justifying the loss of American lives.

Where were you, Bill, when this mattered? Answer: Cheering Dubya on to reelection.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 08:56 AM | Comments (1)

April 27, 2005

Don’t Spit in My Ear and Then Tell Me Its Raining

A news story from Iraq details how the US Army’s elite Delta Force barely missed capturing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the top Al Qaeda-linked terrorist in Iraq. However, they have perhaps snagged the next best thing: his laptop.

If you can’t capture or kill a major terrorist figure then capturing his laptop is the next best thing, eh? It has pictures of him and his kids! In the glory days of spycraft during the Cold War the Mossad, KGB, MI-6, or the CIA would have dispatched this goon a long time ago. Today, the operational experts at CIA HQ can only brag about capturing his laptop. Any info on it is prolly either obsolete, or more likely, intended to be captured.

What in the hell does it say about the CIA and the $7.7 billion a year the USG spends on “intelligence” that when they capture a bad guy’s laptop it counts as a “major intelligence score”? Even with a $25 million price on his head (and double that amount on Osama,) they still can’t get anyone to rat him out?

It tells me that whatever motivates these people has a higher value to them than the considerable reward money being offered.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 10:15 PM | Comments (0)

Buckley Joins the Club

Alan Caruba isn't the only member of the official Right who gets it--"it" being the fact that George W. Bush ain't no conservative.

Here's William F. Buckley, Jr., from a column on whether, and how, Bush's faith, policies, and political support intertwine:

Wilfred McClay who is a learned senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., gave an arresting lecture in February called “The Evangelical Conservatism of George W. Bush; Or, How the Republicans Became Red.” By this last crack McClay means to associate Red with corporate political idealism. For instance, the socialists and the Communists (and the 1848 progressives, who chose the color red to distinguish themselves from the partisans of the existing orders, bland Whiters more or less content with the status quo).

And so to George Bush. McClay lists the energizing discontents of President Bush. “His ‘compassionate conservatism,’ his relatively favorable view of many Federal social and educational programs, his sensitivity to issues of racial injustice and reconciliation, his softness on immigration issues, his promotion of the faith-based initiative, his concern with issues of international religious liberty, his African AIDS initiative, and above all, his enormously ambitious, even seemingly utopian, foreign-policy objectives — [these] are positions that are best explained by the effects of his evangelical Christian convictions, and by his willingness to allow those convictions to trump more conventional conservative positions.” Mr. McClay darts off here to make different points, entirely engrossing: “It is strange that, of all the things liberals loathe about Bush, his religiousness seems to be at the top of the list. For it is precisely the seriousness of Bush’s commitment to his evangelical faith that has made him more ‘liberal,’ in a certain sense, than many of his party brethren.”

Buckley, interestingly, does not deny that Bush qualifies as a liberal; he merely takes issue with McClay's characterization of the role Christianity plays in Bush's liberalism (as do I, as one who would likely be characterized by many as an evangelical). Saith WFB:

The points listed in the Bush agenda are independently backed by many non-Christians, and indeed the most conspicuous of these, the ultra-Wilsonianism of Bush’s second Inaugural Address, is most reliably traced not to Christian impulses, but to a non-Christian expression of them. It is the neo-cons, most frequently identified as Jewish in orientation, who are primarily identified with such policies — so that we have arrived at exactly what, beyond that Jewish idealism and Christian idealism can and often do converge?

His conclusion: "Meanwhile, conservatives will keep our eyes on President Bush, and stop him before he campaigns for compulsory baptism."

Mr. Buckley, meet Mr. Caruba. Messrs. Buckley and Caruba, meet the rest of us who have been in the club for four years now.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 03:51 PM | Comments (0)

Iraq Breaks World Record for Terrorism

According to Knight-Ridder,

Terrorists staged nearly 200 significant attacks in Iraq in 2004, exceeding the record number of strikes worldwide the year before, according to data the Bush administration gave to Congress but has been withholding from the public.

The total didn't include some Iraqi insurgent attacks and more than 100 operations by foreign terrorists in Iraq because they didn't fit the State Department's strict criteria of what constitutes an international terrorist attack.

Yes, folks, the number of terrorist strikes in Iraq alone last year crushed the record for the entire world, which was itself set the year before.

The data raised questions about President Bush's claim that the United States and its allies are winning the war on terrorism and came as the Pentagon acknowledged that violence in Iraq remains as high as last year.

"In terms of incidents, it's right about where it was a year ago," Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday.

So, you see, terrorism is up, and the insurgency is just as strong as it was a year ago. Conclusion: the U.S. is losing. Right?

Gen Myers also insists the US and coalition forces are winning the war and is confident of military victory.

"I'm going to say this: I think we are winning, okay. I think we're definitely winning. I think we've been winning for some time," Myers told reporters.

By the way, the administration wasn't even going to release these numbers because they knew how devastating they were. Thank goodness for partisan politics! At least it motivated the Democrats to force the administration's hand on this.

(Links courtesy Antiwar.com.)

Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:14 AM | Comments (0)

April 25, 2005

Dubya's Not a Conservative? You're Kidding!

Writes Alan Caruba at CNSNews.com:

A lot of thoughtful conservatives are having serious second thoughts about George W. Bush. His failure to act upon core values of fiscal conservatism and sovereignty is a growing concern.

Really? Well, who woulda thunk it? It's nice of you to point this out now, Alan, but where were you before the election?

Caruba points to numerous un-conservative policies of the Bush administration, including:

Caruba concludes:

Does any of this sound like conservative policy to you? Does it worry you that the threat of terrorism is the sole reason given for almost any policy put forth by the White House since 9-11? If the Democrats ever get their act together, you and I are going to be talking about President Clinton, but referring to Hillary.

How much you wanna bet Caruba will be stumping for the next GOP presidential candidate as if none of this had happened? He's clearly more afraid of a liberal Democrat than of a liberal Republican.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:57 AM | Comments (1)

April 24, 2005

Monkey’s with Rifles? Only in America

“A US police department in Arizona intends to follow through on a proposal to train a capuchin monkey for high-risk police operations.”

I cruise around the net a lot reading English editions of newspapers and websites from all over the world. I like to get their spin on news and events. This story about the simian SWAT team was reported in both al-Jazeera, The Asian Times, and a few others whom I forget right now.

What must their readers think of America? I can barely keep from laughing out-loud myself.

Sheesh.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 08:18 PM | Comments (0)

April 23, 2005

You Can’t Buy Influence if There is No One to Sell It

The principal retort of those who cannot fathom the idea of life without a state goes like this: “It is impossible to completely eliminate powerful and therefore oppressive hierarchies. Therefore, unless we have a minimal state to countervail them, then corporate entities will oppress us unchecked and unmitigated. Therefore, we have to have a state to counterbalance them. Sad but true Ali.” My retort: “I doubt it.”

This argument is non-sense of course. Corporations are legal constructs that can only survive if there is a state to protect their “rights” and privileges in a mutually reinforcing form of corruption with each other. Without the state to protect them with violence and/or the threat of it, wither the corporation’s power?

I was reminded of all this today when I read in the NY Post that the MPAA paid off two NYPD detectives to go around to flea markets, computer shows, non-corporate video and DVD rental stores to bust “illegal” copies of MPAA members products. Without government cops, courts, and more importantly laws (all of which they can buy influence with, if not control outright) the corporations would have to make products that are uncopiable or else expect a much shorter shelf life for their products.

Without the ability to gain subsidies, protections, “free trade” arrangements, inflate or deflate currencies, oppress workers, seize real-estate by eminent domain, impose taxes, zoning, building codes, “historical districts”, tax loopholes, and all the rest of the privileges gained from bribing the state, where does their power go? The corp's power to skew the market to their advantage goes away.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 12:16 PM | Comments (0)

April 21, 2005

Big Fat Mistake

Writes Radley Balko:

"We misled you. And we plan to keep on misleading you."

That's essentially what the Centers for Disease Control announced this week. The agency said Tuesday that it has greatly over-exaggerated the number of lives lost each year to obesity. After years of putting the figure somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000, the agency now says the number is just under 26,000, meaning the government has been telling us obesity is fourteen times the threat it actually is, leading policymakers at all levels of governance to prescribe all matter of intrusive, expensive, choice-restrictive public policies aimed at addressing it. A Lexis search for "400,000" and "obesity" returns just under 3,000 hits. A search on "300,000" and "obesity" returns more than 3,000.

Even worse, just as critics of the obesity hysteria have been saying all along, the CDC's latest data suggests there may be a mild protective effect associated with being modestly overweight, particularly among the elderly. That means the incessant calls from government officials and nutrition activists for us to "shape up" may bode ill-health for many Americans.

If all of that weren't bad enough, press reports indicate the CDC will still continue to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on anti-obesity programs, and will not be using the new data in those programs. According to the Associated Press:

"CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding said because of the uncertainty in calculating the health effects of being overweight, the CDC is not going to use the brand-new figure of 25,814 in its public awareness campaigns and is not going to scale back its fight against obesity."

As always, government lies to us brazenly and then, when forced to admit its lies, goes on repeating them just the same.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:30 AM | Comments (0)

April 20, 2005

A Viet Nam veteran who isn’t Fonda Jane

Apparently the Nam vet who stood in line for forty five minutes with a mouth full of tabacco juice just so he could spit it all over Jane Fonda who was signing copies of her new book was angry.

Forty-five minutes! That is a long time to be holding that nasty black toxic plant mixed with saliva in his cheek pouches without displaying discomfort or just involuntarily hocking up a big brown loogey all over the floor.

More importantly however, is the 38 years this guy has been burning with seething anger, resentment, and rage toward Ms. Fonda. It seems while the spitting vet was over in Viet Nam in 1972 Hanoi Jane did a propaganda tour of North Viet Nam which included radio and TV statements against Nixon and the war and that famous pose atop a North Vietnamese Anti-Aircraft Gun. The sense of anger and humiliation was more than this guy could stand. Even after 38 years and even after knowing with near certainty he would be arrested. Which he was.

I rather feel for this guy too because I am in the same boat as he is, at least in circumstances and history, if not in how I adapted. I served in the 24th Mechanized Infantry Division in Gulf War of 1991 as a platoon commanding 2nd Lieutenant. When I returned from the Kuwait, I was wierded-out and listless for months at time. When you see whole oil fields ablaze at night, huge fires as far as I could see with my binoculars, and the smell of unwashed men, oil smoke, the occaisonal dead Iraqi or civilian swarming with flies, well it stays with you and changes your attitudes about things. Who is playing in the World Series, or who wins a lot of money on Jeopardy, or whether Colonel Brown will give me a good Officer Efficiency Report all seemed stupid, pointless, and irrelevant. And I was only over there nine months and only in actual shooting combat (if you can call directing air and artillery strikes against demoralized, leaderless, starving, and scared Iraqi conscripts “combat”) about 74 hours.

I think given time, rest, and lots of Zoloft I am now pretty much OK, unlike Mr. Spit. For 38 YEARS, he has stayed mad! More years than my whole lifetime as it were. By all accounts of him I’ve read in the media, he had made a “successful transition” to civilian life as the Army likes to view it, and then this spewing all over Ms. Fonda. Go figger.

Some vets turn their rage against symbols like Ms. Fonda because that is all she is or ever was really. The US did not lose the war because of her.

Some vets turn their anger outward. They are very angry. Very, very angry and they already know the mechanics of death and have tasted Ares’ bile. The result of this anger is what Bill Clinton and Dick Cheney were “commemorating” in Oklahoma City today. Welcome home soldier.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 11:10 PM | Comments (0)

Two (more) Strikes Against the TSA

The Republican-created TSA is in the news twice today.

First we learn that screening at airports hasn't improved one iota in the past two years. The government's solution? More money and power to them, of course. They're going to spend at least $204 million on new technology to help them better invade airline passengers' privacy. (The real solution, naturally, is to get the government out of the airline security business altogether and let the airlines handle it.)

Meanwhile, it emerges that a "Transportation Security Administration official spent $500,000 on art, silk plants and other decorations for a new operations center and then went to work for the vendor after leaving the agency, according to a report from the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general."

What's more, "higher-ups at the TSA 'quashed' efforts by procurement managers to exercise control."

I feel safer in the air now!

Posted by Mike Tennant at 02:03 PM | Comments (0)

Planning to Retire?

Harry Dent used to get $50,000 per speaking engagement for telling people why the Dow would hit 40,000 by 2008, then plummet to 10,000. As Gary North explains, it seems Harry was convinced that this time the Fed was counterfeiting money in a responsible manner, and he managed to get millions of people to agree with him.

North also includes something quite rare in discussions of money: a clear explanation of how the Fed raises interest rates.


The FED does not permanently raise rates by handing out a press release that says, "We will decree higher rates." It does so by having Greenspan tell Congress something about protecting the dollar against inflation. Then the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) backs up Greenspan’s words by reducing the rate of purchase of government debt.

In other words, to raises rates the Fed slows down the printing presses.

Posted by George F. Smith at 11:06 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

April 19, 2005

Extra! Extra! Al-Jazeera Banned From . . . Iran

Al-Jazeera must be doing something right. First they were bombed and then banned by the U.S. in Iraq. Now comes this news:

Iran today suspended operations of Arab TV broadcaster Al-Jazeera throughout the country, accusing it of inflaming violent protests by the Arab minority in south west.

Go, Al-Jazeera! Any news organization that has gotten itself banned by two governments--especially two antagonistic governments--must be doing its job well.

(Link courtesy Antiwar.com.)

Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:42 AM | Comments (2)

April 17, 2005

Legislators Who Love Employment but Hate Employers

Maryland's House of Delegates voted 82 to 48 to approve a bill that would require all businesses in the state with more than 10,000 employees to spend at least 8 percent of their payroll on health benefits for workers (or, alternatively, “donate” the funds to the state's Medicaid program). Wal-Mart, with its 15,000 employees, is the only such company that does not already spend 8 percent on health care for employees--and thus, is the direct target of the bill.

Prolly these same people complain how much they want development and jobs in their communities too. They love employment but they hate employers. I know people who take jobs with limited or no benefits at all, but they never stay very long. This cheapness on the part of their employers results in a high turnover rate of employees too. Nevertheless, they both seem to get what they want from each other. A paycheck for job takers and warm bodies to stock the shelves, ring up sales, and mop the floors for the employers. The public benefits by being able to purchase goods for the lower prices.

What possible benefit do the Maryland pols think they are bringing to Maryland residents by this legislation? What possible damn right do they have to do it?

Posted by Ali Massoud at 08:12 PM | Comments (0)

April 15, 2005

The Unseen Hand of the Market is Giving the Los Angeles Times the Finger

Is it the Internet or are people finally tired of their bullshit? The over-all circulation of the Los Angeles Times has plunged 5.5% which is the worst drop of any major daily newspaper in North America as reported by a survey in Editor & Publisher a news media trade journal.

I have about choked on my own gorge as a result of reading some LAT news stories over the years myself, so I do feel their pain. The readers that have given up reading this rag that is.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 07:33 PM | Comments (0)

Baghdad Burning

"Riverbend", a 24-year-old Iraqi woman blogs from inside the warzone. Her April 03 post refers to another negative side effect of the occupation--the barrage of American media:

The schedule on MBC’s Channel 4 goes something like this:

9 am – CBS Evening News
9:30 am – CBS The Early Show
10:45 am – The Days of Our Lives
11:20 am – Wheel of Fortune
11:45 am – Jeopardy
12:05 pm – A re-run of whatever was on the night before – 20/20, Inside Edition, etc.

Those fortunate bastards...

Posted by Matthew Bryan at 01:37 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Surveillance Should Work Both Ways

I have always been a great believer in the value of political theatre. Therefore, when I read this story in Wired News about a posse of counter-surveillance cameramen walking around Seattle watching the watchers I had to grin.

I was once ordered by a plainclothes Ann Arbor police officer to show her some ID whilst being admonished for jeering and heckling a city council meeting. I figured she was a cop, but just to make it official I said to her, “Who are you? You show me some ID first please.” Instead, though she sprayed me square in the face with pepper spray. The old “non-compliance” thing you know. It didn’t just hit me, but all the people around me too causing a mini stampede for the exits. Upon returning home, I soaked my face in a sink filled with ice water for the next two hours.

Free speech indeed. I can only imagine what officer pig’s reaction would have been if I had shown up to the council meeting with a audio or video recording device which are forbidden by law unless you have approved reporter credentials.

They want, no DEMAND, to record me and my actions, but send armed cops after anyone who wants to record them.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 12:26 AM | Comments (0)

April 14, 2005

No More Coddling Dictators for the Sake of Stability?

US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld called on President Pervez Musharraf here on Wednesday evening, reiterating the United States’ commitment to broadening and deepening its strategic relationship with Pakistan. . . .

He reaffirmed the US decision to enhance military assistance and strengthen defence cooperation with Pakistan. He said the US would be stepping up support to meet Pakistan’s legitimate defence needs. Rumsfeld praised the president for his initiatives to promote peace and stability in South Asia.

There go more taxpayers dollars down an unconstitutional rathole. It must be nice, on the one hand, to preach democracy to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, and on the other hand, to give money and weapons to an unelected dictator.

Surely no relatives or friends of those killed with U.S.-supplied weapons will have any reason to hate us and want to participate in terrorist attacks against us.

One more thing: "President Musharraf appreciated the US decision to sell F-16 aircraft to Pakistan." I'll bet he did.

Read the whole thing here. Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 03:32 PM | Comments (0)

April 12, 2005

When the Cure Is Worse Than the Disease

Col. David Hackworth, once the darling military analyst of the official right (until he started criticizing the Iraq war), rips the Pentagon anew for its insistence on forcing the dangerous anthrax vaccine on soldiers. Writes Hack:

[S]ince 9-11 and the start of the Global War on Terror, the only American deaths that have occurred from any anthrax attack have been five civilians in the USA during the fall of 2001 from exposure to a strain of anthrax widely believed to have been domestically produced. But while zero service personnel have been killed in action from Saddam Hussein's alleged stockpile of anthrax and other Iraqi WMD that have mysteriously gone walkabout – or anthrax from any other source – six Americans have died after receiving DOD's anthrax vaccine!

The Pentagon wants this vaccine to be mandatory for all service personnel; the courts have temporarily put a stop to that. The vaccine is known to have numerous, potentially deadly, side effects, and the Defense Department tried to cover up the use of a compound in the vaccine that may be responsible for many of the side effects.

Hack concludes that soldiers shouldn't be used as guinea pigs, and they shouldn't. However, since the DoD considers them nothing more than cannon fodder for the empire anyway, why shouldn't the feds experiment on them?

Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:17 AM | Comments (1)

April 10, 2005

Every Cashier a Sentinel for the State

Maryland man arrested for paying with $2.00 bills.

Another of the everyday joys of living our post-9/11 world: The powers of the petty tyrant now extend to incompetent Best Buy cashiers.

Feel free yet?


Posted by Matthew Bryan at 05:43 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Very funny in sad kind of way.

From the Future of Freedom Foundation email update:

“On Tuesday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales urged lawmakers to make permanent all 15 expiring provisions of the Patriot Act. Gonzalez claims that the government has never used the Patriot Act's power of secret warrants to obtain library, bookstore, medical, or gun store records. So if you're a terrorist bookworm with colon polyps who loves AK-47's, this is your day.”

— Dennis Miller MSNBC host

Very funny indeed, eh? However, that is largely horseshit. Most all of the Patriot Act (I hate that name by the way), have been used by the feds for non-terrorism or espionage related investigations and uses. The secret court proceedings needed to do all of these black ops things legally have been rubber stamped and the “person of interest” the feds are victimizing has no official recourse, because they are never notified!

Another day in the land of the freak and home of the slave my friends.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 10:42 AM | Comments (0)

April 07, 2005

The power of the purse.

General Motors Corp. has pulled its advertising from the Los Angeles Times over what it called “factual errors and misrepresentations” in the paper’s news stories about them. No doubt GM got tired of paying good money to a media giant that charges top dollar for ad space and then turns around and bashes them in news stories before their check clears.

It seems that LAT automotive reporter Dan Neil published a critical column about the company's brand strategy and called on GM to fire Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner.

I am sure that many people especially Green Party and lefties everywhere will piss & moan about this being censorship, but I disagree. Why in the bloody hell should anyone pay good money to a media outlet that trashed them? I know I would not.

I think that if you use effective free-market solutions, such as GMC has, to deal with your issues then even the media giants have to take notice.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 11:58 PM | Comments (0)

How Many Government Agencies Does It Take to Teach Soldiers Arabic?

Writes Fred Kaplan at Slate:

I've just read one of the funniest and saddest government documents I've run across in years. Published by the Pentagon (the source of most such things) under the title "Defense Language Transformation Roadmap," it details the official plan for improving foreign-language skills among U.S. military personnel.

The document, Kaplan notes, took 21 months to complete and consists of a whole (count 'em) 19 pages. On top of that, the plans in the document are really just fixin'-to-get-ready plans--not plans actually to teach military personnel Arabic, but plans to set up plans to teach military personnel Arabic.

Kaplan concludes:

In the three and a half years after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, the United States built a massive arsenal, equipped an equally massive fighting force, and declared victory in a worldwide war over imperial Japan and Nazi Germany.

In the three and a half years after the Soviets launched the Sputnik satellite in 1957, the U.S. government funded dozens—if not hundreds—of Russian-language and Russian-studies departments not just within the military but in high schools and colleges all across America.

Now, three and a half years after Islamic fundamentalists flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Department of Defense is three months away from publishing an official "instruction" providing "guidance for language program management."

It's pathetic.

Indeed it is, but that's government for you. I wonder how much this has (and will) cost the taxpayers. We dare not complain about it though, or we're soft on defense and with the terrorists.

(Link courtesy Antiwar.com.)

Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:56 PM | Comments (1)

April 06, 2005

Bases Loaded for Washington

Afghanistan's defence minister on Tuesday gave one of the clearest signs yet that Kabul is open to permanent basing of US forces in the country, saying his government was in discussions with the US that could include air bases in Afghanistan after the current nation-building process ends.

General Abdul Rahim Wardak said the details of what would constitute a long-term US presence were still under discussion. But he signalled Kabul was eager for “enduring arrangements” that could include permanent air bases or “pre-positioned” military equipment that would be used by rapidly deployed US forces in a crisis.

This according to the Financial Times.

Remember, folks: The War on Terror isn't about extending a military empire or U.S. control over other countries. It's all about bringing freedom and democracy to the world.

(Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)

Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:13 PM | Comments (0)

April 05, 2005

This is rational?

From the weekly update of the Ayn Rand Institute:

The Failure of the Homeland Defense: The Lessons from History

“With the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, America has accepted a permanent, institutionalized state of siege on its own soil. But is this the correct strategy? In this lecture Dr. John Lewis examines several examples from history—including Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome*—in which great nations, facing attack, have acted defensively rather than with bold offense. The results are clear: such a policy is suicidal. Rather than bracing against further attacks at home or spreading "democracy" abroad, America should destroy her enemies.”

https://secure2.convio.net/ari/site/SPageServer?pagename=reg_welcome&autologin=true

(* Other empires we should emulate? Sheesh.)

Rather than running all over the world trying to secure oil fields, why not just pay the lawful owners of those resources the price that they ask, or seek alternative sources, develop substitutes, or try other non-violent free-market responses? That would seem to me to be the more rational course of action. Has the ARI now morphed into a neo-con outfit too?

Putting garrisons all over central Asia and the Middle East helps not at all. If the oil flow from the Middle East becomes too undependable or expensive the free market can and will react to those circumstances and transition to other sources and fuels will start. If people then still want to drive a 9 MPG behemoth like the Ford Expedition or a Hummer they still could. They would of course also pay for the privilege of doing so too.

American society should not have to pay for the ill will created by maintaining garrisons, with terrorism, and the fear of it, and the subsequent loss of blood, treasure, and liberty the current irrational policies produce.

For scholars that avow rationalism and logical thinking the ARI seems more animated by fury and nationalism rather than what is moral and logically consistent with the views they advocate. Go figger?

Posted by Ali Massoud at 03:04 PM | Comments (1)

More Stats of Which War Supporters Can Be Proud

According to Reuters:

Guerrillas and criminal gangs have killed 6,000 Iraqi civilians over the past two years and wounded 16,000, according to the first comprehensive government estimate of the toll from the insurgency. . . .

"We have also found that around 5,000 Iraqis have been kidnapped since the fall of the regime, which does not include those cases that have gone unreported," [Human Rights Minister Bakhtiar Amin] said.

Obviously none of this would be happening were it not for the U.S. invasion. Clearly, then, those who favor the war have the best interests of the Iraqi people at heart.

(Link courtesy Antiwar.com.)

Posted by Mike Tennant at 02:49 PM | Comments (0)

Conservatives: Three Cheers for Fannie and Freddie!

One might expect that conservatives, who claim fealty to the Constitution and to the idea of limited government, would oppose Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government-run agencies that provide low-interest mortgages. Can anyone find any constitutional justification for such agencies, let alone moral justification?

As a matter of fact, someone can. That someone is Jeffrey Mazzella, president of the Center for Individual Freedom. Writing at CNSNews.com, a site formerly known as the Conservative News Service, Mazzella urges Congress not to attempt any radical reforms of Fannie and Freddie (and certainly not to eliminate them, not that there is any danger of that) because

While we are by no means a fan of big government, practically speaking, there is a limited role for government to play in the housing and banking markets to ensure the dream of home ownership comes true for even more Americans.

Really? Since when did government-subsidized mortgages become a conservative principle? What does this have to do with individual freedom?

Mazzella argues:

The impact these two companies have on the housing and construction markets is tremendous, and considering that the housing sector led the current economic recovery, it wouldn't be wise to tinker too much with the very companies that provided that much-needed financial boost.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have successfully developed a secondary market in fixed-rate, long-term home mortgages and consumers are better off for it. Many credit these two housing giants for lower rates that help make home ownership possible for some 70 million American families.

Now Mr. Mazzella, if the consumers in question were unable to obtain these loans, what would happen? Well, they would either have to pay higher interest rates or rent until they could afford to buy a house. Meanwhile, the increase in demand created artificially by the goverment's loans means that housing prices are higher than they otherwise would be, which in turn means that other home buyers (a) are forced to pay higher prices than they would in the absence of Fannie and Freddie and (b) at the same time may have to bail out Fannie and Freddie in the event of loan defaults, either by tax increases or inflation.

Conservatives once claimed to be hard-headed thinkers who understood economics and the unseen effects of government policies. Those days, if they ever existed in the first place, are long gone. As long as Republicans are in charge of government, it's full speed ahead.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:51 PM | Comments (0)

April 04, 2005

Mort Walker, Libertarian?

See Sunday's Beetle Bailey comic strip.

Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:28 PM | Comments (1)

April 02, 2005

Terror Related Baloney

I was discussing with a client of mine the various machinations of the feds against Muslims and immigrants that are in the news a lot these days. She seemed confused about why the FBI and US Attorneys continually investigate, infiltrate, and bust Muslim charities and accuse them of having sinister but nebulous “links to terrorism”.

She seemed to buy into the idea the feds put out about how all these groups are either swindles to rip-off gullible immigrants or the clandestine funders of terrorist groups within America. So clearly, I got some ‘splainin’ to do so people can understand what most of these bogus charges amount to. Some of it is misperception but some is entrapment by the feds.

So I’ll start at the beginning.

The practice of the Islamic faith (regardless the sect) is based upon these Five Pillars as put forth in the Holy Qur'an, and no Muslim can be considered devout if they omit or neglect any of them.

They are:

1. The acknowledgement of Allah.
2. Daily prayer.
3. Alms to the needy. (This is known as Zakah)
4. Fasting and abstinence during the day during the month of Ramadan.
5. A Pilgrimage to the Holy Place (Mecca).

The one that concerns the issue here is Zakah. Giving alms is specified by amount and type and such, but that isn’t relevant here. The point is, to do your religious duty as a Muslim you must give (if you can without neglecting your own family of course) to help others. Allah commands this.

So social services, hospitals, orphanages, Mosques, schools, and such are the usual recipients of the funds raised. Additionally however, (read carefully here) they are to be made available to all that need them.

This is where the “hook” the feds use to bust people comes into play. If I become ill or injure myself I can go to the charity hospital and they will help me. Moreover, even if I am a Hamas, Hiz’ballah, or Fatah guerilla fighter who has been injured in combat against the Israelis, US Army, or the local dictator. The injured and ill are all treated to the best of their ability to do so. Islam requires this conduct.

Remember Pvt. Jessica Lynch earlier in the war when the evil Saddam Hussein and the Ba’athist Party were still in control in Iraq? Injured in combat, she was taken to a hospital and treated as best they were able. She was not raped, tortured, or neglected.

So then, if Israel, the local warlord, British, or American forces arrest or kill your father, husband, or son the charities will still help your family. Whether you are in jail for theft or robbery, or for “suspicion of terrorism” or whatever else, no questions are asked.

Now see, the US government and other statist entities consider this “open to all” approach to be abetting terrorism. So if here in Michigan our mosque donates money to the Bekka Valley Hospital Society based in Lebanon, and then that hospital gives food and shelter to the families of imprisoned or killed guerilla fighters from Hamas or Hiz’ballah, the Israelis will often say that this is “aiding terrorism”. Or if they treat injured fighters then the facility is now a “military target” and can be attacked.

The Israeli government will notify the US government if there are any connection or funds from American based organizations whether real or imagined. If they are shown to have received any funds at all, then that mosque is now a “terror cell” and the leaders of the Muslim community affiliated with that mosque can go to prison and/or be deported if they are immigrants.

I will not say that Muslims are all perfect or that all the Zakah activities are fully in compliance with Islamic or civil laws. No doubt some do in fact aid in terrorism or are scams. With all that alms money flowing around and human nature being what it is, I’d be more surprised if there weren’t some bad apples out there. Surprisingly though, and based on what I know and what I have heard this very rarely happens.

This is something I think the American people should know. Please remember my words the next time you see a Muslim cleric, or community leader doing a perp walk on CNN or Fox News while the newsreader drones on about arrests for “terror related activities” down at the local mosque or Muslim charity.

Posted by Ali Massoud at 04:53 PM | Comments (1)