Tuesday, October 6. 2009
If you can read this, you’re aware there’s a debate within and outside the Obama administration about what the US is to do about Afghanistan. If you are, also, a careful reader you are probably confused or conflicted. With good reason.
Eight years after 9/11, the objectives and the means to them are still unclear or ill-focused. We’re told by various authorities the objectives range from containing a relatively few Al-Quaeda to reconstituting much of the social fabric and governance of Afghanistan and its immediate neighbors. Similarly, authorities recommend means that range from narrowly targeted attacks from within or outside Afghanistan, or Pakistan, to increased ground forces to major social welfare and government reform efforts, each with differing time horizons.
Those authorities with the most experience in these matters tend toward the broader objectives and means. Yet, all of them caveat their course with hard-learned reservations about success.
THE authority, as provided by the Constitution, the President, despite his and supporters’ politically convenient mouthings meant to win an election, is determined to, according to reports from insiders, re-examine the entire matter from basic assumptions forward.
Opponents of his presidency find themselves in the comfortable position that Obama capitalized upon pre-election of pointing out the gross inconsistencies in the president’s words, actions and results. This is furthered by the arch comedy of verbal hypocrisies from his supporters.
A few more global strategists, like Henry Kissinger, point to the broader tableau of possibilities, involving India, China and Russia much more deeply. However, none have demonstrated such inclination. Indeed, even the NATO countries are, as usual, hesitant to increase their meager commitments, especially to unsure decision-making in Washington and prospects.
Compounding all this is that, now including the global economic shakeout, none of the Western countries appear willing to devote the commensurate resources to the broader missions.
So, ultimately, the start-from-scratch debate is healthy in revealing the stakes, the stake-holders, the opportunities, the risks, the costs and the constraints. Regardless of efforts for the debate or process to be more transparent, it is reasonably so, and such decisions are always finally made among a small circle and the inescapable responsibility of the President.
Obama administration insiders preclude withdrawal. That leaves either a full-bore effort, which may or not succeed, or a lesser effort that everyone with access to the best information says will only prolong everyone’s agonies with less to no expectation of satisfactory resolution.
No one’s eloquence can mask that stark choice. Polling indicates that is recognized by most citizens.
Politicians tend to see compromises as the natural order of things. The rest of us live in a more directly consequential reality.
All of the evidence so far about President Obama indicates his reality is dedicated to vapid speeches. No tangible results have come from any. On any subject, only his hardest-core supporters still rally to his words.
I support the fullest re-examination of all aspects of our involvement in Afghanistan, both in itself and for its vital educative function for all of us.
I support the direct consequences of whatever decision is made by President Obama to be properly seen as his responsibility alone. He has finally cornered himself, and has run out of words to distract from that.
What we’re debating is not just the fate of Afghans, Pakistanis, other countries, our or others’ security and pockets. It is, also, the determiner of our own and President Obama’s mettle, integrity and future.
 The big lies of the UN Climate Report. Am Thinker. Related, I still think the notion of CO2 as a "pollutant" is patently insane.
Related: Dr. Holdren used to be a Coming Ice Age catastrophizer. Maybe he is a catastrophizer by nature.
Equally insane: schools banning bake sales. Next they will replace pancake breakfasts with raw broccoli and tofu - and nobody will show up.
Camel's nose in the tent: FTC to begin to regulate blogs
I blame last year's economic mess ultimately on the government. Now they want to do it again. Of course, a good down-payment is a good idea - but what if the government gives you that too?
It's a great time to be a consumer - if you have any $ left
The 125th birthday of Ludwig Van Mises. Why he is important.
Medical-related
Jindal: The Conservative case for reform. I like it.
Democrats Mired in Chaos, Confusion Over Healthcare Bill
The infant mortality canard
Country With Worst Health Care In The World Wins Nobel Prize
I don't know where the WH rounded up those docs yesterday, but docs are overwhelmingly opposed to further government involvement and control.
Monday, October 5. 2009
Another point of view re Polansky, from NYM:
I tend to view the Polanski affair, not as an authentic case of rape, but as a payment dispute in which one side is able to whistle up the assistance of the criminal law.
Mayor at Drudge: Bloomberg: 'We can't just say everybody can go everyplace and do anything they want'... (fixed link)
A guy who wrote verse for Hallmark Cards (h/t, No Left Turns)
A new way to think about crime deterrance
Nice photos of the Adirondacks from Tiger. Nice place he has there.
How government is keeping unions alive
Did we elect a Beta male?
Horowitz banned from speaking on campus
The NEA is all about power
Do you want this Copenhagen Treaty? I don't.
California wake-up call
Althouse on the insulting, condescening, adolescent speeches to the Olympic Committee
Prelutsky:
The idea that any sane person would be in favor of the government’s running the health industry simply doesn’t compute. Leaving such important matters in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats is beyond mind-boggling; it’s lunacy.
Can the middle class afford Obamacare?
Baucus' plan is the same old thing. From Weekly Standard:
Along with new taxes, the bill seeks to offset its enormous increases in government spending by squeezing Medicare, and particularly the Medicare Advantage program that millions of seniors use to get extra coverage through private insurers. But rather than use cuts in Medicare to shore up that program's ailing finances and help make it sustainable, the Baucus bill (like other Democratic plans this year) would use the money to create yet another unsustainable entitlement.
The bill would therefore exacerbate the chief causes of the rising costs at the core of our health care woes: inefficient entitlement spending and the absence of real market pressures in health insurance. Instead of addressing these, Baucus is offering tax increases, a new entitlement sure to grow more costly every year, fewer options for doctors and patients, a far greater government role in health care, and the prospect of health care service shortages, disruptions, and rationing.
Why do the Dems want to undermine Medicare Advantage?
Sunday, October 4. 2009
 "Boost the United States"? I thought we were a terrible, evil country. How can you say both?
The US gives up control of the internet. Good or bad or neither?
USAF pilots who cannot fly?
The Incest Lobby jumps on the Polanski story. Good grief. The non-incestuous are termed "outbreeders". I hear the theme from Deliverance. (h/t, No Pasaran)
Pence: We are on the verge of a great Conservative Awakening. I hope so. It requires radical Leftists to get them to pay attention - since they have demanding jobs and lives, etc.
Related: If I had told you, would you have believed it?
Finance Committee Democrat Won’t Read Text of Health Bill, Says Anyone Who Claims They’ll Understand It ‘Is Trying to Pull the Wool Over Our Eyes’. Just trust them. They care about you.
No climate change bill this year. Thank goodness. It's been too darn cold. I wish our Masters in government would turn the temp up a tad.
From WSJ Online re Olympics:
"This idea that other nations will do something that's not in their best interests because they like you is just silly."
It adds doubts. No kidding.
SDA:
Michelle Obama talked about her late dad who suffered from multiple sclerosis.
Alas, someone in Brazil's delegation once lived in Rio, and had a great-uncle with angina.
Jules:
That Olympic village is going to need to be an armed camp. The big question is whether those Olympic-themed thongs were occupied or not. You’d think the Windy City’s pluggers would have had the good sense to put something traditional in their gift bags that really says “Chicago.” Like cash. And pork. Maybe a nightstick and some brass knuckles just to remind the IOC members to seriously consider their interests. But if they had, they might have won.
The always-amusing Ace: Chicago dodged a bullet
As they say:
Few presidents have suffered this much loss of support in so short a period of time — and things will probably get worse before they get better. Friday didn’t help. Mr. Obama has sustained a political wound at a vulnerable moment for him.
Related, from Powerline:
What Obama doesn't want to accept is that the Democrats' scheme for government takeover of health care is deeply controversial. In fact, most Americans oppose it, many bitterly--as, in my view, they should.
Obama also doesn't seem to understand that he is a not-very-popular President with a poor track record of accomplishment who is not in a position to demand anything from Congress. At the end of the day, the Democrats may or may not have the votes to pass a radical "reform" bill. But whether they do or do not have the votes will not be determined by empty threats from President Obama.
Saturday, October 3. 2009
Jeffrey Lichtman on WABC radio today (filling in for Kudlow):
"Why do Liberals want more jail time for not buying medical insurance than they want for child rape?"
Friday, October 2. 2009
 From Dalrymple's The Cult of Insincerity:
I am like one of Pavlov’s dogs, who salivated at the sound of a bell. I have only to hold a newspaper in my hand to feel a pleasant frisson of outrage coming on.
Lawrence Silberman discusses stare decisis vs Originalism (video)
Banning dissent in science. Coyote. It's disheartening to say the least.
Who killed California? National Affairs
Related: Can New Jersey be saved?
Pethokoukis: The not-so-secret plan to raise our taxes:
Does President Obama have a secret plan to raise taxes on middle-class Americans — and,well, pretty much everybody else — with a European-style, value-added tax? Actually, it’s not such a big secret.
Related, from Tiger:
Two Americas: This year, 47% of households will pay no federal income tax. No wonder increasing taxes on those who already pay them has become so popular.
Powerline: Is Conservatism brain-dead? Or is Beck the new Brain?
Related: fascinating comment from Wretchard on the death of Liberalism (h/t, Vanderleun)
The top 40 political blogs (nb: We are not a political site. We are an elite boutique site for the Illuminati)
Ireland to determine Euro serfdom today.
The KrautMan on Obama's French Lesson
Office of the President attacks media. Driscoll
Why they hate Palin. Video. The intensity of the hatred is disturbing to me. What has she done that is so terrible? Except lead a vigorous, adventurous American life, and not go to an Ivy?
The media doesn't cover unemployment like they usta do. Funny about that.
That oughta do it: 25 minutes on Aghanistan, a day on the Olympics. What am I missing? It's a major blow when you put yourself and your family on the line like that. Who is doing the thinking in the WH? Well, like I care...
Is Tom Friedman the dumbest guy in the world?
Climate change! Record cold temps hit US (from Drudge):
Michigan: Record low temps -- breaks 1935 cold...
Record low tied at Daytona Beach...
Cold snap fills up homeless shelters in Idaho...
Ain't it terrible when facts don't fit your narrative? But it can be easily solved: get more hysterical. The reality that the earth may be cooling should be far more worrisome for humans - and there is nothing we can do about it but to adjust. Winter is coming here, but Maggie's Farm will help you cope with invigorating weather. Dig out your long-johns: we will re-post our Winter in New England series this year.
You can read the whole legal memo to ACORN posted via Big Government. Devastating. But ACORN seems to have ignored the advice they paid for. h/t, Big Govt
They assumed that none of the laws or rules applied to them. "By all means necessary" is the Gramsci-ite term.
Taxpayers at all income levels could be hit with over $1.5 trillion in new taxes, fees, and other costs over the next 10 years, despite President Obama's repeated promises that he would not raise taxes "one dime" on those earning less than $250,000 a year.
Whole story at Newsmax.
 We don't want this crap. The pols want it.
A joke: Ralph Nader's novel.
Why are the Dems trashing Medicare?
Related: If you were a doc, would you treat Medicare patients?
Government Motors' deepening troubles
Wow! Iran is nice enough to agree to MORE TALKS. Is this Kindergarten?
Related: Nuclear disarmament and the Tooth Fairy. Nyquist
Your tax dollars at work:
Homeland Security Waste Part 1
Part 2
The cost of non-profit journalism
The annual banned book charade
$615,000 tax dollars for a Grateful Dead library.
Thursday, October 1. 2009
 George Will observes in Ugly Truths for the Warming Alarmists that, as global warming disappears, the alarmists become more hysterical. One quote:
The Post recently reported the theory of a University of Virginia professor emeritus who thinks that, many millennia ago, primitive agriculture -- burning forests, creating methane-emitting rice paddies, etc. -- produced enough greenhouse gases to warm the planet at least a degree. The theory is interesting. Even more interesting is the reaction to it by people such as the Columbia University professor who says it makes him "really upset" because it might encourage opponents of legislation combating global warming.
That's a contemptible admission, but a good example of where the Lefty academics are at. I think it is well-established that the whole subject has become politicized, ideological-ized, sensationalized, and governmentalized to the point that calm, rational discussion of the facts - if and when they are available - is difficult. There is too much money and power at stake in this crazy obsession.
Image is Disney's Chicken Little, in case you didn't know
 I wouldn't mind being this kind of "blithering idiot"
The one-millisecond trading issue
"Studies show..." Ace: all taxes are for your personal benefit
A holocaust? These guys are desperate
The Dem court-packing scheme. Imagine if the Repubs pulled this
Roger Simon: And yet those people are defending a man who drugged and sodomized a thirteen-year old!
Villainous quotes PJ O'Rourke:
I'm a 61-year-old man with three young children and a yard to rake. While I appreciate the attention from our most ex- of ex-presidents, I'm really too busy to properly accomplish all this loathing and detestation. I quit smoking so I don't even have a lighter to set crosses on fire. We don't happen to own white bed sheets and I'm five nine and--dressed in Ralph Lauren candy stripes and tripping on fitted corners--I'd feel like a fool at Klan rallies (and Tea Parties and Town Hall meetings, to the extent that there's a difference).
Then I have the task of finding people to disrespect, denigrate, and discriminate against. I know people who are black, gay, Jewish, and Hispanic. But, unfortunately, I like them. When you like a person it's difficult to treat him (or even her) with the kind of vigorous and unrestrained bigotry that Jimmy Carter expects me to engage in. I have to go looking for people (people of the proper race, creed, and ethnic origin) whom I can't stand.
Wednesday, September 30. 2009
Via Icecap:
Leading UK Climate Scientists Must Explain or Resign
By Jenniffer Marohasy
MOST scientific sceptics have been dismissive of the various reconstructions of temperature which suggest 1998 is the warmest year of the past millennium. Our case has been significantly bolstered over the last week with statistician Steve McIntyre finally getting access to data used by Keith Briffa, Tim Osborn and Phil Jones to support the idea that there has been an unprecedented upswing in temperatures over the last hundred years - the infamous hockey stick graph.
Mr McIntyre’s analysis of the data - which he had been asking for since 2003 - suggests that scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the United Kingdom’s Bureau of Meteorology have been using only a small subset of the available data to make their claims that recent years have been the hottest of the last millennium. When the entire data set is used, Mr McIntyre claims that the hockey stick shape disappears completely. (Yamal: A “Divergence” Problem, by Steve McIntyre, 27 September 2009)
Mr McIntyre has previously showed problems with the mathematics behind the ‘hockey stick’. But scientists at the Climate Research Centre, in particular Dr Briffa, have continuously republished claiming the upswing in temperatures over the last 100 years is real and not an artifact of the methodology used - as claimed by Mr McIntyre. However, these same scientists have denied Mr McIntyre access to all the data. Recently they were forced to make more data available to Mr McIntyre after they published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society - a journal which unlike Nature and Science has strict policies on data archiving which it enforces.
This week’s claims by Steve McInyre that scientists associated with the UK Meteorology Bureau have been less than diligent are serious and suggest some of the most defended building blocks of the case for anthropogenic global warming are based on the indefensible when the methodology is laid bare.
This sorry saga also raises issues associated with how data is archived at the UK Meteorological Bureau with in complete data sets that spuriously support the case for global warming being promoted while complete data sets are kept hidden from the public - including from scientific sceptics like Steve McIntyre.
It is indeed time leading scientists at the Climate Research Centre associated with the UK Meteorological Bureau explain how Mr McIntyre is in error or resign. See post here.
Looks like they were cherry-picking data to get the results they wanted. Why?
Quoted at Conspiracy as Joke of the Day. It begins:
DEMOCRATS: DO YOU REALLY WANT TO REFORM HEALTH CARE, OR DON'T YOU? Philip K. Howard in the Wall Street Journal:
On Aug. 25, at a town-hall meeting in Reston, Va., Howard Dean, former chair of the Democratic National Committee, was asked why there is nothing in the health-care proposals about liability reform. Mr. Dean replied: "The reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. . . . And that is the plain and simple truth."
...A few thousand trial lawyers are blocking reform that would benefit 300 million Americans. This is not just your normal special-interest politics. It's a scandal—it is as if international-trade policy was being crafted in order to get fees for customs agents.
Read it all. Link above.
Polanski is on record as claiming that all guys "want to f- young girls." Perhaps some do, but guys with young daughters tend not to approve of the notion: the idea tends to make them go load their guns. Althouse wonders about the pedophilia of Hollywood types.
I would just like to offer the comment that, from a psychological standpoint, desire for 13 year-old girls is not really pedophilia. In the past, 13 year-old women routinely married and, without spending time on a search, I wonder how many girls in NYC get pregant at 13? I'll bet it's many.
No, the issue is not whether men (or women, for that matter) are sometimes attracted to young people, or whether 13 year-olds can be sexy witches, or whether 44 year-olds can be drawn to young females.
The issue is the law. Forcible sex, and sex with the underaged, are illegal. Admittedly the latter is rarely enforced when the guy is underaged too but, regardless of our sexual inclinations and fantasies, or our opinions about every law, we all implicitly agree to obey the laws by virtue of our citizenship - or to accept the consequences like the adults we are presumed to be. That's Adulthood 101.
Rape is illegal. Everybody knows that. We used to hang people for it. It has never been in fashion, to my knowledge. Until now.
 Is the O "playing at being President?" Gratuitously cruel but cute-as-heck photo of the O is h/t NE Repub.
Sarkozy: The O incredibly naive and egotistical.
The O wants the US to surrender sovereignty - but to whom?
These are supposed to be savvy guys. Don't they realize that they are being used as window dressing?
More from the Frenchies: How French women stay thin. h/t, Tiger.
Massive ACORN vote fraud in NY. Related: The Politico gets played by ACORN
It wasn't rape. As neoneo notes, after all she was a 13-year old sexually active temptress at the time. The rules do not apply to Hollywood, apparently. Sodom and Gomorrah over there. Vanderleun nails the story.
In praise of political anger. Gets your heart working too.
The FCC cannot tie its own shoes, but wants to dig into the internet. Arrogant jerks. Leave us the heck alone.
The enraged and hateful Left aims at critics' jugulars
The Are all men pigs? meme. We believe that, at heart, all men are not pigs, but dogs, invested with a powerful mating urge. However, most of us also believe in civilized, honorable, and honest behavior especially when sober or when not in the throes of uncontrollable biological urges and desire...
NYC celebrates 60 years of Chicom rule. Perhaps New Yorkers might enjoy the same thing?
Why the O bombed on health care. WSJ. No, the public isn't stupid.
NY Post - Reform horrors: The O's total disconnect
Via Wilkinson:
I actually think we are going to get a reform that is both worse than the status quo and worse than a pure single payer system.
Maybe they want to break it, so they can come in and "fix it" later. That is termed "tactics."
Praying to Obama. Good grief. That is sick.
Ace on why it matters:
...it's why defeating health care in general and a government option in particular is so important. Once people turn their very lives over to the beneficence of government, it's game over.
Right. It makes us all slavish dependents on the government plantation.
Insty:
JAMES PETHOKOUKIS: “Liberals are screaming over public option failure even tho WH says plan is no biggie. Someone has their story wrong.”
If anybody thinks Congress and the O know what the heck they are doing, please make your case.
Tuesday, September 29. 2009
Does anybody take Frank Rich seriously?
I never did ,even when he did the drama reviews.
Not that 64 is old by any means, but the Medicare group is very upset about ObamaCare.
Rightly so. They have a very good deal right now - probably an impossibly good deal - and they are going to lose it to help pay for the younger people who don't want to buy medical insurance.
Once the dog gets a bone, don't try to take it away. Folks on Medicare love their almost-free lunch.
Ann Althouse, a prominent law professor, teenager in the ‘60’s, dismisses Andy Williams as too “square” even back in the ‘60’s to be taken seriously now, when he says President Obama is “following Marxist theory.”
I tested Williams’ squareness on my sons, now 4 and 9, this morning by showing them a YouTube of Andy Williams singing the theme song from Exodus, “This Land Is Mine.” Both loved it. But, are they biased because we’re Jewish? No. Both’s favorite TV show when younger, after the usual run of kiddie shows, was reruns on PBS of Lawrence Welk’s show. They both loved the melodious and understandable lyrics along with the lively and friendly performances.
So, are my sons square? Or, does Ann Althouse’s comment reflect a deprived upbringing, lacking personal connection to the emotions and tastes of an earlier generation? I choose the latter but what is important about this minor brouhaha is what it reflects about us.
Ann Althouse is known for her scholarship on federalism and the Constitution, so she is concerned with past debates and their effect on and application to current events. In this, she may be cognizant of philosopher George Santayana’s famous comment about “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” but may have missed his other comment, “the equality of unequals is inequality” while arguing for equality of opportunity.
Most people are not scholars of the myriad origins, forms and history of Marxism or Socialism. These terms are usually short-hand for categorizing redistribution of results among unequals, from those who earned the results to those who haven’t. That’s a sticky argument, as others argue unless those who haven’t are provided means to opportunities then they are less likely to obtain results commensurate with their skills and efforts.
The problem lies in discerning the boundaries, and aside from legislative and court determinations each individual must choose. I say “must” because the extent to which government decides the boundaries is inescapable upon each individual.
Most liberals tend to come down on a more expansive view of redistribution. Hence the epithet of “Marxist” or “Socialist” from some of those more conservative.
Many investigators who have studied President Obama’s past associations, to the limited extent they have been discovered, document his closest formative influences and choices to be among those quite radical and even avowedly “socialist” or “Marxist.” The major media has essentially ignored this pattern, or restrained coverage when they no longer could.
Does this matter?
To me, not as much as some of the investigators among my friends. I tend to be something of a behaviorist, believing that what one sees now is most important, and recognize all's ability to change. Others whom are friends are less concerned with the observable and the now. As one I respect says, “My hope is that he will get real very soon on lots of fronts as he experiences the push back and the immovable objects….Personally, I will give it more time to see how his presidency develops.”
Fair enough. And, while recognizing the observable and the now, incomplete when one considers the actual actions of President Obama that irremediably affect our and other nations’ inhabitants futures.
It’s unnecessary to be sucked into semantics or history. Only open eyes are necessary. That’s why this seemingly minor brouhaha is receiving such play among commenters. Some see Andy Williams' comment as an eye-opener and some see it as "square," but once again the real issue is missed. What will be history is now being shaped, and cannot be avoided by retreat to the past or hope for the future, nor need analogies be made. The observable and now are real and tangible enough.
 With ObamaCare in a Hole, Will the White House Stop Digging?
The real obesity problem is with the government
The hockey stick is dead. It was a fraud
Fiendish plot to create government daycare
Insty:
CANADIANS PUSH FOR PRIVATE OPTION: “Whereas U.S. healthcare is predominantly a private system paid for by private insurers, things in Canada tend toward the other end of the spectrum: A universal, government-funded health system is only beginning to flirt with private-sector medicine.” (Via American Power).
Will Small Businesses Stop Offering Health Insurance If Reform Passes? I think that's their plan
Coyote: But’s Its My Hard Work Paying Your Unemployment
Seems quite clear now that the O did not write his books
Dr. Government by Sen. John Kyl
Euroland should just give up on Socialism and try real Communism. It works just great.
Related: Are we witnessing the collape of Liberalism? at Am Thinker. How's that for whiplash?
|
