Musings Archive June 2004
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 AMERICANS ARE EVIL: You know, there are times you read something and you can hardly believe that it's not a parody. In the Ottawa Sun today there was an article in which Earl McRae talks to average Canadians why they didn't vote Conservative in Monday's election.
"Martin," said St. Clair, "is a good man. He came across very honest. He wanted a chance to clean up all the s--t that happened under Chretien. I just didn't trust Harper. He came across too oily."
"Exactly," said Heather. "The scariest part for me about him is that he wanted to cosy up to the Americans. Can you believe it? The bloody Americans. I hate the Americans."
What do you hate about them?
"They're warmongers," said Don. "They're out to take over the world. They remind me of the Germans in World War II."
"They're not our best friends, they're our worst enemies," said Heather. "You can't trust them. I wish we had some other country as our neighbour, not those bullies. They're ignorant. They don't know anything about any other country. They'd just love to take us over if they could."
"I don't think they're all bad, I've got American friends," said St. Clair, "but Harper would've had us kissing their ass instead of telling them to screw off like Martin will do."
But you don't think our culture and economy is willingly soaked with American goods and services from which we've benefited?
"We don't need 'em, we can make it on our own," said Don.
"Harper," said St. Clair, "wants to turn our military into one like the Americans. Armed to the teeth, kill at the drop of a hat. Our history is one of peacekeeping, not fighting."
"Our soldiers," said Heather, "go into situations to keep the peace, not to shoot people. They have all the equipment they need, they don't need American-style weapons."
"We're not a warrior nation," said St. Clair. "Canadians don't want our military over-armed."
If we're ever attacked by a powerful enemy, wouldn't we expect the Americans to defend us?
"That's another myth," said Don. "Who the hell's going to attack us? No one's ever going to attack us. Who've we ever harmed? Go anywhere in the world and Canadians are liked and respected. We're recognized as a peaceful nation."
It's hard to believe that I live in a country with people that stupid -- public education was supposed to solve that -- but there you go. So my friends in America, please remember these three clods the next time the thought passes through your mind that Canadians are your friends.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:51 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ NO PROGRESS OVER DARFUR: U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is in Darfur today, scene of a genocidal campaign against the residence there and not surprisingly the Sudanese government isn't being much help resolving the situation.
Powell, on the second day of a visit to Sudan, arrived in Darfur Wednesday for a first-hand look at some of the million people displaced by marauding Arab militias in what the United Nations calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis.
He has threatened unspecified U.N. Security Council action if Khartoum does not crack down on the militias, known locally as the Janjaweed, and streamline relief work in the region.
But a senior U.S. official said that in Powell's initial talks the Sudanese did not realize the gravity of the crisis.
"They are in a state of denial. They are in a state of avoidance. They are trying to obfuscate and avoid any consequences," said the official, who asked not to be named.
They aren't just denying the genocide, they're complicit in it. The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the Sudanese government sent the military into the region to warn refugees not to complain about any of the killings that have been going on. Seems to me that it's more than a "state of avoidance."
Read on. You can also read an editorial about Darfur that I wrote earlier this month.
Posted by steve @ 03:40 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Tuesday, June 29, 2004 FROM EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR MEANS, TO EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR NEEDS, RIGHT HILLARY?: My American friends, you have a chance to avoid what happened in Canada last night if you remember this simple phrase:
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
Hillary Clinton said that yesterday during a Democratic fundraiser in San Francisco. You elect John Kerry you have no one to blame but yourselves.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:34 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 3 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ THEY'RE STILL GOING TO COST YOU: If you're the compassionate soul that I am, doubtless you're worrying about all of those defeated or resigned MPs. What are they going to do with the rest of their lives? How will they make ends meet?
Fear not, this is Canada!
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation released a study today which calculated "projected pension and severance payments to be paid to 83 MPs who were either defeated in the June 28th general election or resigned prior to the vote. Canadian taxpayers will pay out $3.5 million in annual pensions to 50 retiring or defeated MPs. In addition, another $2.5-million in severance cheques will be issued to at least 39 former MPs."
Defeated or retiring MPs who are eligible for a pension but have not reached the age of 55 are also entitled to receive severance equal to one month for every year served to a maximum of six months of 2004 member indemnity. Severance payments range from a low of $11,800 and a high of $70,500.
The biggest pension winners include Liberal MP Rey Pagtakhan at $105,868, NDP Lorne Nystrom and Liberal Guy St-Julien each at $86,663, and Liberal André Harvey at $80,307. Meanwhile Liberal Susan Whelan will collect $76,577 each year, and Liberal Robert Speller will receive $72,271.
Top pensions going to retired MPs include former Prime Ministers Jean Chrétien and Joe Clark. Mr. Chrétien will collect $154,179 a year and Mr. Clark will collect $111,030. Former Cabinet members Sheila Copps and David Collenette will each collect $119,869 whereas John Manley, Robert Nault and Lyle Vanclief will each receive $105,868. Mrs. Copps and Messrs. Manley and Nault are also each entitled to a severance cheque totalling $70,500.
It's good to be the king.
You can read the entire list here. (PDF format)
Posted by steve @ 04:09 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ WHAT'S THIS?: I couldn't sleep so I went back online to check the latest numbers and I just noticed something rather interesting. It takes 155 seats to form a majority in our current Parliament and at this moment the Liberals have 135, the Conservatives 99, the Bloc Quebecois 54, the NDP 19, and Independent at 1.
Now my premise has always been a Liberal/NDP coalition government. Do the math though: that's 154 seats. Assuming, of course, that the numbers don't change again.
Assuming that the Liberals don't want to play ball with the Bloc Quebecois, that leaves Mr. Independent -- Surrey North MP Chuck Cadman -- as a very powerful person. Though he is a conservative (who was ditched by his party), Cadman stated tonight (before all the results were in) that he would take a poll of his riding to determine who he should ally himself with. A lone MP could spell the balance of power for a Liberal minority government.
Of course, this is a simplistic way of looking at things. It's pretty easy to imagine that a bunch of Bloc Quebecois MPs will vote with the Liberals for two reasons: 1) the leftward shift that the socialist NDP will induce will cause Liberal policies to fall closer to the socialist BQ's platform, and 2) the Bloc has no reason to look forward to another quick election as they likely wouldn't repeat their impressive showing at the polls.
Either way, the next couple of days are going to be interesting.
Posted by steve @ 04:08 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -2 (+/-)] [4 comments]
~ YOU KNOW YOU'RE FREE WHEN: You have talk radio in your nation, as Prof. Glenn said earlier this evening..
Iraqi voices filled the airwaves of the nation's first independent talk radio station Monday, applauding a surprise move by the U.S.-led coalition to return sovereignty to Iraq two days early.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:55 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ RANDOM THOUGHT: On June 28, Iraqis finally won the right to decide their own futures courtesy of coalition arms.
On June 28, Canadians decided to reelect the same corrupt party when given a free choice.
Posted by steve @ 12:39 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 2 (+/-)] [1 Comment]
Monday, June 28, 2004 HONEY, I SWEAR IT WILL BE DIFFERENT THIS TIME: Well, once again Canada didn't disappoint. Like a battered wife who keeps coming back for more, we've once again given the Liberals the reigns. True, they'll govern in a minority government -- probably with the backing of the socialist NDP -- but nontheless Paul Martin gets to keep his nice office on Parliament Hill.
Conservatives, ignoring the fact that the popular vote for the right actually dropped this election, will tell you that the fact they gained a bunch of seats is a good thing. It is, considering the party is just a few months old. It isn't, because Ontario once again came out to vote for the Liberals and made a mockery of claims that a united right could make serious inroads in the province.
The big winner this election was the socialist Block Quebecois, a party dedicated to splitting up Canada, and the socialist NDP, which made big gains in the popular vote and now hold the balance of power. Canadians took a look at the scene and decided to punish a corrupt government by voting for political parties with economic plans created a century ago.
So what can we expect? Assuming that the Liberals include the NDP in a government, they will be pulled further to the left. I also don't expect such a government to last long -- under a year at best. See you back at the polls real soon...with a resulting majority Liberal government.
Posted by steve @ 11:32 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ I'D HAVE SKIPPED THE WHOLE THING: But Mark Steyn says if you're going to read Bill Clinton's My Life, skip the first 879 pages.
Is there anything interesting in "My Life" by Bill Clinton? Oh, yes. Page 870.
The Clintons are in New Zealand and finally get to meet "Sir Edmund Hillary, who had explored the South Pole in the 1950s, was the first man to reach the top of Mount Everest and, most important, was the man Chelsea's mother had been named for."
Hmm. Edmund Hillary reached the top of Everest in 1953. Hillary Rodham was born in 1947, when Sir Edmund was an obscure New Zealand beekeeper and an unlikely inspiration for two young parents in the Chicago suburbs. I mentioned this in Britain's Sunday Telegraph eight years ago this very week, after this little story was trotted out the first time, but like so many curious anomalies in the Clinton record, it somehow cruises on indestructibly. By the time Sir Edmund shuffles off this mortal coil, the New York Times headline will read: "Man for Whom President Rodham Named Dies; Climbed Everest in 1947."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:22 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ TOO BAD: The world is abuzz with rumours that the U.S. has caught Abu Musab al-Zarqawi but the U.S. military has denied it.
"This is not true, no matter how much I want to capture or kill Abu Musab al-Zarqawi on this special day, sadly we have not yet caught him," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the deputy chief of operations, told Associated Press Television News.
The denial is very simple. The Bush Administration wants to announce the capture of Osama bin Laden and al-Zarqawi and the location of Amelia Earheart just before the election in November. I think Michael Moore told me that...
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:09 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ CONGRATS: It's two days earlier than announced but Iraqis are now in charge of their own destiny. At 10:26am Baghdad time, the interim Iraqi government formally took over the running of their nation.
Coalition Administrator Paul Bremer -- now the former administrator -- read his letter contained in the transfer document:
"As recognized in U.N. Security Council resolution 1546, the Coalition Provisional Authority will cease to exist on June 28th, at which point the occupation will end and the Iraqi interim government will assume and exercise full sovereign authority on behalf of the Iraqi people. I welcome Iraq's steps to take its rightful place of equality and honor among the free nations of the world. Sincerely, L. Paul Bremer, ex-administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority."
Bremer handed the transfer document to the head of the Iraqi Supreme Court, who then gave it to President Sheikh Ghazi al-Yawar. Prime Minister Ayad Allawi and the deputy prime minister also attended.
"This is a historic and happy day for us in Iraq," al-Yawar said. "It is a day that all Iraqis have been looking forward to. This is the day that we take our country back into the international community.
"We want a free and democratic Iraq, and we want a country that is a source of peace and stability for the whole world."
Welcome to the family guys.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:37 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [1 Comment]
~ CONGRATS TO SERBIA: With all the bad stuff happening in the homeland of my family in the last decade, it's nice to get some pleasant news for a change. On Sunday, Serbia-Montenegro elected Boris Tadic, a pro-Western reformer.
"From my point of view, this is a victory against the past," Tadic, 46, said in an interview with CNN International.
Tadic said he wanted to help bring his country into the European Union and work with the various parties in the Serbian parliament to develop a new new constitution for the country.
However, he admitted that his most daunting challenge was getting Serbia's economy back on track.
"We need more jobs to build new circumstances in Serbia," Tadic said.
It would be nice to see Serbia-Montenegro rejoin the European community and work to get past its recent problems. Things got so bad that Montenegro, under the direction of pro-Western/reformer politicians, has been threatening to secede from Serbia.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:43 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [1 Comment]
~ MUST BE ANOTHER ATTEMPT BY BUSH TO JUSTIFY THE WAR: The Financial Times reported Sunday that there is evidence that Iraq may have tried to procure yellow cake uranium from Niger several years ago.
The British government has said repeatedly it stands by intelligence it gathered and used in its controversial September 2002 dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programmes. It still claims that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger.
But the US intelligence community, officials and politicians, are publicly sceptical, and the public differences between the two allies on the issue have obscured the evidence that lies behind the UK claim.
Until now, the only evidence of Iraq's alleged attempts to buy uranium from Niger had turned out to be a forgery. In October 2002, documents were handed to the US embassy in Rome that appeared to be correspondence between Niger and Iraqi officials.
When the US State Department later passed the documents to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, they were found to be fake. US officials have subsequently distanced themselves from the entire notion that Iraq was seeking buy uranium from Niger.
However, European intelligence officers have now revealed that three years before the fake documents became public, human and electronic intelligence sources from a number of countries picked up repeated discussion of an illicit trade in uranium from Niger. One of the customers discussed by the traders was Iraq.
I guess Joseph Wilson's tea sipping trip to Niger wasn't all that useful after all, was it Mr. Ambassador?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:31 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -2 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Sunday, June 27, 2004 SELF-PROMO ALERT: The July 19 issue of The American Conservative will be on the newsstands on Monday. I have a piece in the issue tweaking some of my conservative pundit brethren for their excessively optimistic predictions about the war in Iraq.
Even though I don't imagine most of y'all will agree with it, I'll link to the article if it is posted online. Or you could always subscribe.
Posted by antle @ 06:10 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ CLOSING TIME/ WHOLE LOTT OF DRINKING: Jeremy Lott has announced his impending departure from the nation's capital, at least for the time being. Any ESR readers in the area are welcome to come hoist a pint at his Irish wake. As an added incentive, you will also have an opportunity to find out whether W. James Antle III really is a 75-year-old man who wears a sweater.
Posted by antle @ 05:17 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ WHY AREN'T THEY COVERING THIS?: My stablemate over at The Shotgun, Kate McMillan, has a great blog entry asking one question: Why isn't the media reporting the whole story about what's going in Iraq?
Surely there are reporters and editors who lurk on the Shotgun from time to time. I want to hear from you. You covered every anti-war demonstration. You quoted every naysaying Canadian politician. You gave a closeup to every half-wit Hollywood actor who could move their lips. You covered UN deliberations. You've dissected every hoped-for disaster, from the "massive humanitarian disaster" to the "quagmire" of the stretched supply lines, to the "failure" to catch Saddam, to the "uprising of the Arab street", to the "Vietnam" of El Sadr's militia, dancing to the rhythm of every RPG to be tossed into the Green Zone. You even reported on the ones that "caused no casualties". So, it's not like you didn't have the time and space.
Are you intentionally trying to mislead and misinform the Canadian public by reporting out a tiny window facing in a single direction?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:17 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ A LETTER FROM BAGHDAD: Amy Ridenour reprints a letter she received from a soldier stationed in Baghdad. I won't quote from it because you should read the whole thing yourself.
Posted by steve @ 04:57 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 4 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Saturday, June 26, 2004 BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR: It's enough to make a grown man cry. According to a poll released today, Canadians prefer a left-leaning minority government.
Voters were asked: If Canada has a minority government after the next election, would the following be acceptable or unacceptable for you: A Liberal-led minority government supported by the NDP?
More than half of those polled (56 per cent) said they'd prefer this left-leaning combination.
Among decided NDP voters, a Liberal/NDP coalition seems especially palatable. Eighty-one per cent would approve of the partnership.
Seventy-one per cent of decided Liberal voters agree.
Left-leaning? The NDP are socialists. That's a little more than left-leaning. Please, someone sponsor me for American citizenship.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:54 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 3 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ SETBACK FOR NADER: Ralph Nader failed to win the endorsement of the Green Party, which instead gave the nod to David Cobb. The argument seemed to be over whether Greens would prefer a candidate who could get lots of votes (or at least approach the 2.7 percent Nader got four years ago) or one who would not jeopardize their state ballot access by refusing to technically be their nominee.
I've never really grasped why Nader didn't choose to run on the Green Party ticket for the third straight presidential election. It would have gone a long way toward solving his ballot-access problems. The only thing I can think of is that he felt a Green nomination would limit him to lefties, as opposed to a broader candidacy for everyone irritated with the two major parties. Nader clearly thought he could appeal to more than just lefties in his interview with my boss.
But to prove that concept, he needs to get himself on a lot more state ballots than the seven his endorsement from the Reform Party is likely to give him.
Posted by antle @ 06:47 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -2 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ HE WAS A CLYMER, RIGHT DICK?: U.S. VP Dick Cheney said Friday he felt better after he cursed out Sen. Patrick Leahy.
In an interview with Fox News on Friday, Cheney said he was "forcefully" expressing his unhappiness with the conduct of the Democratic senator from Vermont -- who Cheney said had publicly questioned his integrity, and then wanted to be friendly when he saw him in person.
Sources who related the incident to CNN said the vice president had told Leahy either "f--- off" or "go f--- yourself."
I like him ever more now. I'd have said the same thing.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:24 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -2 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Friday, June 25, 2004 BEEN CAUGHT AGAIN: Earlier this week we blogged a story that demonstrated Bill Clinton lied about the timing of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and now today we have a report that Lewinsky is accusing him of lying about other bits.
In an interview with The Daily Mail, Lewinsky called the former president's account of their relationship dishonest and said he has missed an opportunity to undo some of the damage their entanglement caused her.
"He could have made it right with the book," the newspaper quoted her as saying. "But he hasn't. He is a revisionist of history. He has lied."
No he hasn't Monica, it all depends on how you define the word "is".
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:57 PM EST [Link]
~ THE NYT AND SADDAM: Following on the NY Times report today on a document linking al-Qaida and Iraq's intelligence service, Andrew C. McCarthy slaps the newspaper around a bit.
A week ago, the New York Times reported, in a screaming page-one headline, that the 9/11 Commission had found "No Qaeda-Iraq Tie." Today, in a remarkable story that positively oozes with consciousness of guilt, the Times confesses not only that there is documentary evidence of at least one tie but that the Times has had the document in question for several weeks. That is, the Times was well aware of this information at the very time of last week's reporting, during which, on June 17, it declaimed from its editorial perch that the lack of a connection between Saddam Hussein's regime and Osama bin Laden's terror network meant President Bush owed the nation an apology.
Today, the Times concedes that the Defense Intelligence Agency is in possession of a document showing that, in the mid-1990s, the Iraqi Intelligence Service reached out to what the newspaper euphemistically calls "Mr. bin Laden's organization" (more on that below) regarding the possibility of joint efforts against the Saudi regime, which was then hosting U.S. forces. To be clear, the document records that it was Iraq which initiated the contacts, and that bin Laden finally agreed to discuss cooperation only after having spurned previous overtures because he "had some reservations about being labeled an Iraqi operative[.]"
Why again, is the Times the paper of record?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:14 PM EST [Link]
~ WAY TO KEEP UP ON CURRENT EVENTS: The Conservative Party of Canada, while relatively new, has been around long enough that you'd think Elections Canada would be prepared for them. Apparently not judging by this email I received from an official in British Columbia:
I am writing you to inform you of a bizarre goof by Elections Canada. I am the Deputy Returning Officer for Poll 048, Bridesville, BC. I am also a member of the Conservative Party of Canada.
This morning I opened the elections material supplied by Elections Canada for the D.R.O.'s. In the package are the sticky badges for the Candidates Representatives (scrutineers). There are badges for all the political parties and a few blank ones. There are badges for the Canadian Alliance Party and the Progressive Conservative Party. There are no badges for the Conservative Party. Considering that the Alliance and PC's ceased to exist last December (in theory anyways), I find this error to be in extremely poor judgement.
Rumour has it that the D.R.O's will be getting proper badges for the Conservative Party in time for the election. Still this just shows how poorly bureaucracies function.
Posted by steve @ 03:49 PM EST [Link]
~ MORE AMERICAN INTERFERENCE IN CANADIAN ELECTION: I thought the left was opposed to interfering in another sovereign nation's election? Ralph Nader today urged Canadians not to vote Conservative in Monday's election, following the lead of Michael Moore.
June 25th, 2004
AN OPEN LETTER TO CANADIAN VOTERS FROM RALPH NADER
It is out of affection for Canada that I tender the following:
Caveat, voters, next Monday.Stephen Harper and the Conservatives have plans for crippling the commonwealth and security of the Canadian standard of living, known worldwide as just about the finest among sizable nations. Mr. Harper and the Conservatives are sympathetic with the Fraser Institute's plan for a corporatist Canada that tears away your common safety net. The Fraser Institute would choose to insidiously undermine your national health insurance system bit by bigger bit -- on the installment plan.
If you want to see the Fraser Institute and the Conservatives' plan for Canadians, come to the U.S., where health care for many Americans is based on a pay -or-die model. Forty-five million Americans -- women, men and children -- have no insurance coverage, and the number of uninsureds is increasing. The prestigious Institute of Medicine estimates 18,000 Americans die every year because they cannot afford to see a doctor or go to a hospital. In the US, most working people have lost their freedom to choose a doctor or hospital because their corporate HMO plans assign such service. Hundreds of billions of dollars are wasted annually on bureaucracy, administrative expenses, and massive computerized billing fraud and abuse (see www.citizen.org, or Harvard professor Malcolm Sparrow's book License to Steal). Furthermore, average health care expenses per capita are much higher in the US than in Canada -- and not only drug prices.
Voters beware. You are, in part, understandably reacting to the recent scandal touching the incumbent party. Do not overreact. You have a third major choice -- the NDP -- or other parties. Don't indirectly vote for the Fraser Institute and its positions of anti-law and order for corporations -- policies threatening to become your future government's policies. You'll pay: under the Conservatives, large corporations, including those from other countries, will have more say than ever -- Reagan/Bush/BushII style. Please maintain and advance your civil society.
There are many Americans who, over the decades, have looked to Canada for social justice initiatives to emulate. About ten years ago, I co-authored a book, Canada Firsts, which became a 42-week bestseller in your country. Canada Firsts described many Canadian "firsts" that found their way south to our country -- including credit unions. We need an independent, humane Canada. It is in such a spirit that I submit these views for your consideration.
Best wishes for justice,
Ralph Nader
This is very imperialistic of you Ralph.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:35 PM EST [Link]
~ MORE OF LACK OF CONNECTIONS BETWEEN AL-QAIDA AND IRAQ: A document found in Iraq shows that there were high level contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq going back to the mid-1990s.
American officials described the document as an internal report by the Iraqi intelligence service detailing efforts to seek cooperation with several Saudi opposition groups, including Mr. bin Laden's organization, before Al Qaeda had become a full-fledged terrorist organization. He was based in Sudan from 1992 to 1996, when that country forced him to leave and he took refuge in Afghanistan.
The document states that Iraq agreed to rebroadcast anti-Saudi propaganda, and that a request from Mr. bin Laden to begin joint operations against foreign forces in Saudi Arabia went unanswered. There is no further indication of collaboration.
Read on. (NYT, Free registration)
Posted by steve @ 03:23 AM EST [Link]
~ ESR OBTAINS SCRIPT FOR NEXT MICHAEL MOORE MOVIE: It's apparently entitled "Pig at the Trough" and it blows apart conventional thinking about the Oil for Food scandal that has conservatives salivating at the prospect of embarrassing the United Nations. According to Moore's next movie, the villain behind the scandal isn't who you think it is.
OPENING CREDITS: Pig at the Trough: The United Nations, Steve Martinovich and a conservative conspiracy by Michael Moore.
VOICEOVER: After orchestrating the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States to allow the Bush administration's mad rush to war against Iraq, the next target on the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's wish list was none other than the United Nations. Long a check against the imperialist dream of the right-wing, the conservatives hatched a long-term plan to undermine the world body to give them a free reign to reorganize the world according to neoconservative principles.
VOICEOVER: The man behind the plot is an obscure writer from Canada named Steven Martinovich. Although he's known as a conservative today, Martinovich was once a member of Canada's Liberal Party. Turning his back on social justice, Martinovich colluded with the American right-wing to discredit the UN. His plan ran parallel to Richard Perle's long dreamed of invasion of Iraq and was designed to create a scandal that erupt at the precise moment public opposition to the war in Iraq began to grow.
VOICEOVER: Martinovich hatched his scheme in the early 1990s when as a member of the Liberal Party he decided to run for the position of Student Director of the Ontario Young Liberals. The position gave him access to the highest reaches of power. One of those men was then Prime Minister Jean Chretien.
Using the same standards of evidence that I used in Fahrenheit 9/11, I've managed to trace a clear line from Martinovich to the Oil for Food scandal. I have evidence that Martinovich and Chretien met at least twice during the 1990s, including once during a dinner reception in Toronto, Ontario. One of these meetings was captured on film.
VOICEOVER: How is Martinovich linked to the Oil for Food scandal? It's quite simple. Martinovich met twice with Chretien who happens to be friends with Canadian billionaire Paul Desmarais Sr., who also just happens to hail from Martinovich's hometown of Sudbury, Ontario. Desmarais' sons André and Paul Desmarais Jr. are the current co-CEO's of Power Corporation of Canada, the majority shareholder in France's TotalFinaElf, a company linked to the Oil for Food scandal. It's clear that Martinovich used his connections to send a message to the Desmarais family to instigate a kickback scheme.
VOICEOVER: The final proof of the connection comes in the form of a March 22, 1994 letter from Chretien to Martinovich, ostensibly to congratulate him on his election to Student Director. In the letter Chretien vaguely tells Martinovich that "I am sure you are looking forward to this challenging and exciting position." In other letters from government ministers, Martinovich is told that if they can be of any assistance to not hesitate to contact them. Martinovich's access to the levers of power were absolute and subverted the Canadian government's natural hostility to the illegal regime in Washington, D.C.
Two pictures side by side, one of Martinovich pumping gas, the other of him eating a chicken and rice meal.
VOICEOVER: Martinovich managed to pull off a double coup. Not only did the impoverished and unemployed writer receive financial gain for masterminding the kickbacks, he got cheap gas as a result of the invasion and cheap food that was destined for the Iraqi people.
SCENE: MIDDLE CLASS HOME IN SUDBURY, ONTARIO, MICHAEL MOORE AND CAMERA CREW WALK UP THE DRIVE WAY
Moore: I'm here to ask Martinovich my questions directly. Knocks on door, disheveled man answers.
Martinovich: You the pizza guy?
Moore: Steve, isn't it true that you masterminded the oil for food scandal?
Martinovich, confused: I didn't want oil on my pizza. Hey, wait a minute, aren't you that fat fu...
CUT TO PICTURE OF PHOTO OF GEORGE W. BUSH AND MARTINOVICH SIDE BY SIDE
VOICEOVER: Once again, wicked rich white men worked together to attack the very pillars of civilization. Once again, I've used rigorous reporting to prove it.
END CREDITS: A message from the director: "Any attempts to libel me will be met by force. The most important thing we have is truth on our side. If they persist in telling lies, knowingly telling a lie with malice, then I'll take them to court."
Posted by steve @ 12:39 AM EST [Link]
Thursday, June 24, 2004 GOOD NEWS...BAD NEWS: A couple of interesting polls today. One on CNN showed that Bush's numbers on the economy are rising (47 per cent believed he was doing a good job on that front) while another showed that for the first time a majority of Americans believe going to Iraq was a mistake.
Over at Fox News, Bush is outpolling Kerry by about a half dozen points. Interestingly:
As has been the case since the end of the primary season, Bush’s strength of support is much higher than Kerry’s. Fully 75 percent of Bush voters say they support him "strongly" and 25 percent say "only somewhat." Among Kerry voters, just over half — 53 percent — say they support him "strongly" and 45 percent say "only somewhat."
Significantly more voters think Bush would do a better job than Kerry protecting the United States from terrorist attacks (49 percent to 28 percent). On the nation’s economy, Bush and Kerry are evenly matched with each receiving 42 percent. Bush has an 11-percentage point edge over Kerry when voters are asked which candidate is "more honest and trustworthy," although 12 percent volunteer "neither."
So we have some bad news and some good news. Placing this in the ESR-otronic 3000 Election Predictifier -- essentially a blender with a printer attached -- it seems Dubya is doing slightly better than Kerry is. The E3KEP reminds me, however, that we still have 4 1/2 months to go before the big day. Still, I consider it funny that if Kerry keeps going on about Iraq Bush can look at him and say, "It's the economy, stupid."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:43 PM EST [Link]
~ WHAT IF?: What if John Kerry had been at the helm after 9/11 instead of Dubya. That's the question that a new ad from the Progress for America Voter Fund asks in a new $1 million ad campaign that will air in New Mexico and Nevada. If you don't live there, worry not. You can see the ad here.
Posted by steve @ 07:17 PM EST [Link]
~ I'M SURE HE DROPPED THE KIDS OFF AT SCHOOL EVERY DAY: Umm Mohammed, the wife of Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, said today that there's no way her husband is the kind of guy who would kill women and children.
"He would not recommend the killings of children, women and elderly people as they're trying to portray him," she told the Arabic daily in an interview at the family's home in Zarqa, 27 kilometres northeast of the Jordanian capital Amman.
Of course, al-Zarqawi is such a family man he hasn't seen his wife or children in five years.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:01 PM EST [Link]
~ AUF WIEDERSEHEN MEIN FREUND: Well, after not updating ESR's Conservative Site of the Day since July 15, 2003 I've decided to finally close it down. The site itself will remain up as long as ESR exists but it will no longer be updated.
It seems a shame to shut something down that ran for 5 1/2 years but the reality is that I think we're very long past the whole Site of the Day thing and I just didn't feel like updating it every day. That and I got tired of all the spammed nominations that had little to do with conservatism...
Posted by steve @ 02:33 AM EST [Link]
~ ONLY ONE-FIFTH?: Interesting study released by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University on Wednesday:
While most single young men aspire to marriage, about one-fifth are deeply skeptical of the institution and their prospects of making it work, according to a new national survey which closely links men's marital outlook to their upbringing.
The survey, released Wednesday by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University, found that the men with negative attitudes were far more likely than the rest to have been raised by a divorced parent in a non-churchgoing family.
I'm one of those one-fifth (though I came from a sometimes churchgoing family that didn't divorce) and I actually think the number is higher. I know a lot of guys in their early 30s who are single and have no interest in getting married. I've been trying to figure out why a large number of men aren't interested in marriage and haven't come up with any really good answers. A lot seem to be distrusting of the institution, enjoy the fact that all the money they earn is theirs to spend as they please, they don't trust women or they prefer...emmm...casual relationships.
Why am I single? Well, I probably fall into the camp that enjoys their independence. When I was working I rather liked the fact that if I wanted to spend my money on a stupid extravagence, I could. If I wanted to go out and 'socialize', dagnamit, I could! Football on Sunday? All day baby, all day! Still, Frank Sinatra had it right. Before he died Old Blue Eyes said that you knew the time was right when you were up at 3:00am and the thought passed your head that perhaps there was something more in life...
At any rate, there are wider societal implications to all of this. At least 20 per cent of American males aren't enamoured of an institution which is the foundation of their society. Blame it on feminism, high divorce rates, economic independence of women or screwed up guys but the fact remains that there is a large chunk of the population that may drop out of the traditional path that most lives take. That can only cause problems in the future.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:40 AM EST [Link]
~ REPUBLICANS HAVE SEX TOO: William Saletan has an interesting piece in Slate about the hypocrisy of Republicans who defend Jack Ryan (leaving aside whether wanting to have weird, kinky sex with your wife is equivalent to having weird, kinky sex with an intern while you are married and then lying under oath about it when it comes up under questioning in a sexual harrassment lawsuit).
But I think Saletan overstates the extent to which Republicans actually are defending Ryan. A major story is how Jim Edgar, Ray LaHood and other leading Illinois Republicans are dropping Mr. Sex Club like a hot potato in light of the allegations and what they claim to be his dishonesty about them. Although the GOP has not yet totally abandoned him, he is being far more widely criticized by Republicans than Clinton was by Democrats at this point in the Monica Lewinsky scandal. There are top Republicans calling for Ryan to drop out of the Senate race. Where were the leading Democrats calling on Clinton to resign the presidency?
In my homestate of Massachusetts during the 2000 election cycle, once Ted Kennedy's Republican challenger Jack E. Robinson disclosed the extent of his wide array of personal scandals and baggage the state GOP and then Gov. Paul Cellucci disavowed him. I personally did not vote for him, opting instead for Constitution Party candidate Phillip Lawler (though the Libertarian Carla Howell, who only ran 1 percentage point behind Robinson, was also an excellent choice).
Nice effort, Will. Better luck next time.
Posted by antle @ 12:21 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, June 23, 2004 WHEN TO FOLD 'EM: The same week Bill Clinton begins his publicity blitz for his new book, repeatedly telling interviewers that he is proud to have never even considered resigning the presidency during the whole impeachment saga, Connecticut Gov. John Rowland announces that he is stepping down.
Why did Clinton survive when Rowland didn't? There are numerous differences between their situations and Rowland's legal difficulties were more complex, but there are two distinctions that I think are particularly important.
The first is that Clinton did a far better job of managing public opinion when his presidency was imperiled. Rowland responded to his legal troubles by just lying and stonewalling. Clinton lied and stonewalled too, but he also engaged in a ferocious campaign to demonize his opponents (Kenneth Starr and the Republicans in Congress) and exploited the public's sexual privacy concerns. Rowland, accused of accepting freebies from various cronies, did not have any detractors who lent themselves as well to being demonized as, say, Newt Gingrich. It is also a lot harder to argue that an inquiry into whether a sitting governor did favors for people in the state in exchange for goodies (home improvements, champagne, cigars, etc.) constitutes some sort of invasion of privacy.
Consequently, Clinton had only a third of the American people in favor of kicking him out office and less than half clamoring for his resignation, while Rowland was faced with a state where 70 percent of the voters wanted him to resign and 57 percent supported impeachment.
The second, and in my view more important, difference is that members of Rowland's own party wanted him out. Politicians can normally weather these types of crisises when their party stays unified behind them. They can usually survive if only backbenchers or squishier members of their party (liberal Republicans or conservative Democrats) break with them. But once their party's stalwarts, especially those in leadership positions, start to turn, the troubled politician is toast.
If people like Joe Lieberman and Robert Byrd had gone beyond denouncing Clinton in 1998 and instead called upon him to either resign or be removed from office, you can bet the man from Hope would have given resignation some thought. Because the Democrats largely remained united behind him, Clinton knew he would beat impeachment and therefore didn't have to consider resignation.
Posted by antle @ 07:59 PM EST [Link]
~ ADVANCE NOTICE: There won't be much blogging from me today. I have a deadline for a piece that has to go out today. Those bills have to be paid.
Posted by steve @ 02:59 PM EST [Link]
~ THERE IS GOOD NEWS: And Arthur Chrenkoff reports it even if the media doesn't. Today he posted part four of his series on the good news out of Iraq.
Overall, the news from Iraq hasn't been too bad lately, with the transition to sovereignty well under way and decrease in fighting. However, we still hear a lot more about terrorism, prisoner abuse saga, sabotage, unvafourable opinion polls, and then some more about terrorism.
Also read part one, two and three.
Posted by steve @ 02:33 PM EST [Link]
~ STEVE PICKS THE WINNER OF THE CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTION: And it won't be the Canadian people.
The recent slide by the Conservative Party I think effectively kills any realistic shot that they had of forming a majority government, assuming you thought it was realistic to begin with. I think it's still possible that they will come out with the most seats, indeed Mike Duffy showed some stats Tuesday evening that the Conservatives could see up to about a half dozen more MPs than the Liberals, but they won't form the next government.
It all comes down to the choice of dance partners and the Conservatives are the odd man out on everyone's dance cards. The NDP and Bloc Quebecois are both socialists and I doubt that Conservative voters would be pleased with a coalition going in that direction. For the Liberals, they could enter into a coalition with either far left party. The only possible fit the Conservatives could pull off would be with the Liberals.
That's something I think we can rule out though it's the best possible result with a minority Conservative victory.
If the Conservatives are asked to form a government I see them flailing around uselessly while the Liberals and the New Democrats look into each other's eyes and realize that power turns everyone on. The Liberals want to keep it, the NDP would like to taste it on the federal level. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if there's been talk behind the scenes already considering NDP leader Jack Layton's announcement pulling back from his inheritance tax promise.
And the big loser in all of this will be the Canadian people. The Liberal Party will be pulled further to the left as a concession to the NDP and we'll have the privilege of paying for it.
Posted by steve @ 01:51 AM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: If you live in Canada or can otherwise buy the National Post where you are, pick up a copy to read my latest feat of brilliance in the op-ed section. It's about Tax Freedom Day -- the day in which it has been calculated that Canadians have finished paying off all taxes and work for themselves -- which happens to fall on June 28. Ironically, it's the same day we go to the polls to vote in the federal election.
At any rate, my version had it titled "The Price of Being Canadian" but the fine folks at the Post may have changed it. I'd post a copy but they seem to be anal about exclusivity. I'll post a link if there is one.
[Update - 2:37pm] Unfortunately the essay is behind their subscribers only wall.
Posted by steve @ 01:32 AM EST [Link]
~ SIGH...SO WAS HE LYING THEN OR IS HE LYING NOW?: CNN reports that Bill Clinton's new book contradicts testimony he gave in 1998.
In his 1998 testimony, the former president said, "When I was alone with Ms. Lewinsky on certain occasions in early 1996 and once in early 1997, I engaged in conduct that was wrong." That timeline would have put the start of the affair after Lewinsky had completed her White House internship and had taken a staff job.
But on page 773 of his book, "My Life," Clinton said, "During the government shutdown in late 1995, when very few people were allowed to come to work in the White House and those who were there were working late, I'd had an inappropriate encounter with Monica Lewinsky and would do so again on other occasions between November and April, when she left the White House for the Pentagon."
Yeah, I'm shocked too.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:28 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, June 22, 2004 BRYAN HENDERSON IS OUR NEW HERO: (Via Peeve Farm) Protest Warrior has a wonderful story of a California high school teen who decided to stand up for his principles and challenge the reigning leftist orthodoxy at his school. In the process, he revealed his opponents to be what they really are: intolerant fools.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:56 PM EST [Link]
~ DREZNER DISSES DOBBS: There are more than a few people who love Lou Dobbs in the blogosphere but Daniel Drezner is most certainly not one of them. In a post earlier today he declared that Dobbs was a "big fat hypocrite."
Back in March, James Glassman pointed out in Tech Central Station that Dobbs was praising companies like Boeing and Washington Mutual as worthy stocks in his eponymous investment letter -- even though he was bashing these very same companies for offshore outsourcing on his CNN show, Lou Dobbs Tonight.
Read the whole thing, it's quite good.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:39 PM EST [Link]
~ DOES ANYONE LIKE IT?: A lot of people are buying Bill Clinton's My Life but no one seems to be enjoying it. An AP review written by Jerry Schwartz calls the book a "daily grind" that's big but "shallow."
Part of the problem is that "My Life" is relentlessly chronological, especially the second half of the book, which is devoted to his presidency. Almost every paragraph describes another meeting with a foreign leader or the signing of another bill or delivery of another speech.
The effect is mind-numbing. It's like being locked in a small room with a very gregarious man who insists on reading his entire appointment book, day by day, beginning in 1946.
If I want to read something that will put me to sleep, I have a copy of James Joyce's Ulyssess for that.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:57 PM EST [Link]
~ HITCHENS REDEEMS HIMSELF...SLIGHTLY: After savage hit pieces on Bob Hope and Ronald Reagan, Christopher Hitchens redeems himself slightly by absolutely lighting up Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.
To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.
Good to have you back Mr. Hitchens...if only on this issue.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:43 AM EST [Link]
Monday, June 21, 2004 HIIBEL RULING UPHELD: Hard to believe I missed this earlier today. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that people are required to identify themselves to a police officer when asked under circumstances.
People who have given the police some reason to suspect that they may be involved in a crime can be required to identify themselves unless their very name would be incriminating, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a case that had raised concerns about the boundaries of personal privacy.
The 5-to-4 decision addressed a question that, surprisingly, had gone unresolved for decades. But the answer the court gave was hardly definitive, leaving for another day some of the more difficult issues of application.The case was a challenge by a Nevada rancher to a state law requiring people stopped in suspicious circumstances to identify themselves on the request of a police officer. Twenty states, including New York, have such laws on their books, as do a number of cities and towns.
The rancher, Larry D. Hiibel argued that his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure and his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination were violated by the state law. Mr. Hiibel's cause was taken up by an array of groups concerned with privacy in an age when a name entered in an electronic database can provide a sometimes startling amount of personal information.
Read on. Read SCOTUS' ruling here (PDF format)
ESR has also weighed in with essays that you can find here and here.
Posted by steve @ 11:37 PM EST [Link]
~ A FULL HOUR OF HIM WAS TOO MUCH: I was going to blog about Bill Clinton's appearance on 60 Minutes last night but I had too much last minute work on ESR to get done. That and listening to Clinton actually made me tired. As I was watching it though one line popped out at me:
"I was involved in two great struggles at the same time, a great public struggle over the future of America with a Republican Congress and a private struggle with my old demons. I won the public one and lost the private one. I don't think it's much more complicated than that."
Not surprisingly many conservatives are taking Slick Willie to task for claiming ultimate victory against the Republican Party. Over at NRO, Jonah Goldberg argues that clearly wasn't the case.
Ah, yes, the glorious victory against the Republicans which cost the Democrats the House, the Senate and arguably the White House in 2000. The victory which caused the first two-term Democrat since FDR to tack right on Welfare and trade and abandon the dream of single-payer health care.
Granted, Republicans won the war over socialized health care but I wonder if they won the wider war. George W. Bush is spending in a manner that Clinton never could have contemplated and has introduced programs and endorsed legislation that tack to the left. Under Dubya's watch America has a prescription drug plan and increased federal involvement in education, hardly conservative priorities. And I'm trying to figure out why Goldberg believes protectionist trade policies are conservative in nature.
Although Clinton arguably aided the Republicans' rise to power in the mid-1990s in Congress (and indirectly got Bush elected in 2000), I wonder if history won't record that Bush wasn't too different from Clinton when it came to many, though obviously not all, domestic issues.
Posted by steve @ 03:07 PM EST [Link]
~ CONGRATULATIONS: To the crew of SpaceShipOne which achieved space flight this morning! It's not quite the same as being the first in space but I'll bet the crew enjoyed the ride nonetheless.
Posted by steve @ 02:54 PM EST [Link]
~ "IT'S NOT GOING TO GET BETTER": James Lileks has a depressing essay up today about how the enemy has achieved one of its goals: the dividing of the American public.
And it’s not going to get better. I don’t think the next attack will bring us together like 9/11. Last time a small portion of the nation went straight to blaming us for enflaming poor Mo Atta and his motley crew; the last three years have seen that poison spread and flourish, and blaming America for the ravings of medieval theocrats is now a legitimate argument in polite society. I’d almost venture to say that a third of the country would conclude that a radiological device exploded in Manhattan would be Bush’s fault, because he made the “evil doers” (roll eyes) super-extra-fancy-grade-AA mad.
For the last few weeks I’ve had this gnawing belief that bin Laden got lucky by attacking during Bush’s term. Conventional wisdom says the opposite, because Bush fought back. But he’s the enemy now. I ask my Democrat friends what they’d rather see happen – Bush reelected and bin Laden caught, or Bush defeated and bin Laden still in the wind. They’re all honest: they’d rather see Bush defeated. (They’re quick to insist that they’d want Kerry to get bin Laden ASAP. Although the details are sketchy.) Of course this doesn't mean they're unpatriotic, etc., obligatory disclaimers, et cetera. But let's be honest. People are coming up with websites that demonstrate ingenious technology for spraying anti-Bush slogans on the sidewalks; it would be nice if they sprayed "DEFEAT TERRORISM" or "STOP AL QAEDA" now and then. Wouldn't it?
The relevant bit starts about half way down the page.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:43 AM EST [Link]
Sunday, June 20, 2004 HEAR ME ROAR: I was just sent this a few minutes ago and I offer it to all Canadians. Copy this and email it to as many other Canucks you can:
----------------
Hello.
My name is Alan Robberstad
I am a Canadian.
One voter out of millions of Canadian voters.
Paul Martin is no friend of mine.
Liberal governments have not made my life any better.
Liberal governments have made the future worse for my children.Jean Chretien and the Liberal Party became Prime Minister many years
ago. Guess who was the Liberal Finance Minister.....Paul Martin...LEST
WE FORGETSince 1993:
(1) My taxes have increased.
(2) My family's share of the national debt has increased.
(3) My personal expenses have increased.
(4) My waiting time to see a doctor has increased.
(5) My concerns for my family's safety have increased.
(6) My costs to educate my children have increased.
(7) Government interference in my life has increased.
(8) My personal debt has increased.
(9) My income has stayed more or less the same.
(10) My savings have decreased.
(11) The buying power of my dollar, in Canada, has decreased.
(12) The value of my dollar, in the U.S., has decreased.
(13) My trust of elected officials has decreased.
(14) My trust in the justice system has decreased.
(15 )My trust in the immigration system has decreased.
(16) My hope that a Liberal won't waste my tax dollars has decreased.
(17 )My dreams for a better future for my kids, in Canada, have
disappeared.That is my story since the Liberals came to power.
I am not voting for Paul Martin's Liberals.
I am voting against Paul Martin and his Liberal Party on June 28, 2004.I am voting for Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party.
Do I like the Conservatives?
Not particularly......I don't really like Politics.
I am not political by nature.
I am not passionate about politics.
I am a middle age guy (48).
I live in a small house on a fairly quiet street in Edmonton. I have a
wife, Kathy, and two children (ages 19 and 17). I have no pets. I am a middle class man. I don't usually say too much.Until now.
Now I am going to say something!
In 35 of the past 37 years, Canada has been ruled by:
(1) Pierre Trudeau - a multi-millionaire lawyer from Quebec.
(2) Brian Mulroney - a multi-millionaire lawyer from Quebec.
(3) Jean Chretien - a multi-millionaire lawyer from Quebec.
(4) And now we are going to vote for Paul Martin???? - a
multi-millionaire lawyer from Quebec???The leader of the Conservative party, Stephen Harper, is:
(1) Not a lawyer.
(2) Not a multi-millionaire.
(3) Not from Quebec.Stephen Harper says that the Conservative party will:
(1) Reduce my taxes.
(2) Pay off the national debt as fast as they can.
(3) Shrink the size and influence of the federal government.That's good enough for me.
I'm going to give the Conservative party a chance with my vote.But wait! Paul Martin is now saying the same thing. My mother told me
forty years ago: "Fool me once - shame on you. Fool me twice - shame on
me!"The Liberals have had 34 years to be financially responsible. Remember,
Jean Chretien was Trudeau's Finance Minister. Remember also, Paul
Martin was Jean Chretien's Finance Minister These people have been
raising my taxes for thirty four years. They have been mis-spending my
tax dollars for 34 years. 34 years!And now Paul Martin says he'll stop taxing and spending. No way.
Thank you for reading my story so far!
Why am I telling my story to you?
Although I feel alone, I know that I am not alone. Your story may be
similar to mine. And you may also feel alone. One small voter in the
midst of millions of voters.What can you and I do together to change things?
Here is my idea:
Lets you and I join up together. Just you and I. Together. As a small
team of two.
How can you and I fight a huge political machine?You and I have two things that we can use:
(1) Our individual personal connections.
(2) The Internet.The Internet is supposed to be this global zing tool, right? Let's put
it to use.I have 27 Canadians in my personal e-mail address book.
I am sending this e-mail to each of them.I'm asking you to do two things:
(1) Forward this e-mail to every Canadian in your own address book.
(2) Vote against Paul Martin and the Liberal Party on June 28.Vote for the Conservative candidate in your riding.
I have probably written this e-mail too late.
As I said I am not politically adroit.
I feel like Peter Finch, in the 1976 movie "Network", when he shouted:
"I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!" Please,
forward the e-mail RIGHT NOW!!As I type these last few words the voting begins in less than 18 days.
432 hours till voting begins. I hope the Internet is as fast as some
people claim it is.This may not work.
This e-mail may "fizzle out" and go nowhere.
But you and I will have tried, won't we have?My best wishes to you.
My best wishes to Canadians everywhere.My thanks to David Stokes from Toronto
He actually wrote this just (5) days before the last federal election
in 2000. Fool me once - shame on you.
Fool me twice - shame on me!"Alan Robberstad
Edmonton, Alberta
June 10, 2004@ 3:00 p.m.Posted by steve @ 11:41 PM EST [Link]
Saturday, June 19, 2004 WHY NOT SHOW THESE PHOTOS?: By now I'm sure you've come across links to the photos showing the decapitated body of Paul Johnson. Only in the interests of journalism do I provide a link to them here. I issue the strongest possible warning before you visit them.
I think it's important to see them. Not out of some purient and morbid curiosity about how decapitated bodies look like, but so that a simple message is sent to the viewer. This is what they want for us. When Islamists shout for your blood they aren't talking about an honourable death on the battlefield, they want you dead like Johnson died. Bloody and horrifying. A message sent to the modern world that the edge of the sword can be as effective as any smart bomb. A message that the war against western values continues as long as there are people who uphold those ideals. It doesn't matter whether you're a technician who works on Apache helicopters in Saudi Arabia or a little girl playing in some anonymous Western town. They want you dead like that.
I realize that the photos are an order of magntitude more disturbing than the photos of the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib were but I wish the media had shown them anyway, particularly considering the pornographic glee the media seemed to have when they showed those pictures. A lot of Americans are tiring of the war on terrorism and want to see it end. The problem is that the war on America by the terrorists hasn't ended and won't end any time soon. The Johnson photos would have not to subtly reminded Americans that there is real evil in the world and that it continues to plot their deaths.
Posted by steve @ 07:43 PM EST [Link]
~ A BIASED REPORTER?: I'm shocked. Really. Okay, I'm not. The Jerusalem Post reports that a senior BBC reporter told a Hamas meeting that "journalists and media organizations are 'waging the campaign shoulder-to-shoulder together with the Palestinian people.'"
The alleged remarks, by BBC Arabic Service correspondent Faid Abu Shimalla, were reported on the Hamas Web site, which said they were made at "an impressive and well-attended ceremony" earlier this month to honor some 140 Palestinian, Arab, Islamic, and international journalists and attended by Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.
A BBC spokesman last night confirmed to The Jerusalem Post that Shimalla has been the Gaza Strip correspondent of the BBC Arabic Service for the past five years, but he said the BBC was unable to locate the Web site and could not comment further.
He noted, however, that Shimalla is "a senior and experienced journalist who knows the requirements for impartiality."
So what? Every journalist knows the requirement for impartiality. The problem with most journalists today is that they ignore it. That said, you move far from bias when you declare to members of a terrorist organization that you stand shoulder to shoulder with them.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:26 PM EST [Link]
~ IT SUCKS: I was actually going to get a review copy of Bill Clinton's autobiography but decided I just didn't have the energy to read and critique it. The Clinton era seems so long ago that it's more of a bad dream to me than it is history. What's the Clinton legacy outside of cigars and interns? Beats me.
At any rate, Michiko Kakutani reviews My Life for the NYT and comes away rather unimpressed.
The book, which weighs in at more than 950 pages, is sloppy, self-indulgent and often eye-crossingly dull — the sound of one man prattling away, not for the reader, but for himself and some distant recording angel of history.
In many ways, the book is a mirror of Mr. Clinton's presidency: lack of discipline leading to squandered opportunities; high expectations, undermined by self-indulgence and scattered concentration. This memoir underscores many strengths of Mr. Clinton's eight years in the White House and his understanding that he was governing during a transitional and highly polarized period. But the very lack of focus and order that mars these pages also prevented him from summoning his energies in a sustained manner to bring his insights about the growing terror threat and an Israeli-Palestinian settlement to fruition.
Certainly it's easy enough to understand the huge advance sales for the book. Mr. Clinton would seem to have all the gifts for writing a gripping memoir: gifts of language, erudition and charm, combined with a policy wonk's perception of a complex world at a hinge moment in time, teetering on the pivot between Cold War assumptions and a new era of global interdependence. Add to that his improbable life story — a harrowing roller-coaster ride of precocious achievements, self-inflicted slip-ups and even more startling comebacks — and you have all the ingredients for a compelling book.
But while Dan Rather, who interviewed Mr. Clinton for "60 Minutes," has already compared the book to the memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, arguably the most richly satisfying autobiography by an American president, "My Life" has little of that classic's unsparing candor or historical perspective. Instead, it devolves into a hodgepodge of jottings: part policy primer, part 12-step confessional, part stump speech and part presidential archive, all, it seems, hurriedly written and even more hurriedly edited.
I guess I saved myself a week of reading that would have been wasted.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:19 PM EST [Link]
~ BLOGGERS TO RUN CANADA: Well, if Damian Penny is ever elected PM. He released a list today of cabinet appointments to be filled by bloggers but he did overlook one person.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:01 PM EST [Link]
~ MOORE BRINGS HIS IGNORANCE TO CANADA: It's been fairly demonstrated that Michael Moore has no idea what's going on in his own country so what's the next step for him? To opine on Canadian politics.
Canadians risk turning into pseudo-Americans if they vote Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party into office, activist American filmmaker Michael Moore said yesterday.
"So my silent plea is don't go our way!" Moore said in an interview yesterday during a hectic day-long Toronto visit to introduce his controversial documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11, at a special preview screening for 600 people at the Varsity Cinemas.
"Look, I'm on a lifelong mission to convince Americans to be more Canadian-like," he said, describing how he grew up in Flint, Mich., listening to the CBC and came to admire Canada for its independence, especially in relation to the Vietnam War.
I couldn't imagine anything more horrifying than a United States that becomes like Canada.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:48 PM EST [Link]
Friday, June 18, 2004 HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU'VE ARRIVED?: (Via The Shotgun) When hit pieces appear! I have yet to be the target of one but Mark Steyn was hit by Dan Kennedy in the Boston Phoenix. What? Never heard of either Kennedy or the Phoenix? Ironically, Kennedy calls Steyn "the most toxic right-wing pundit you’ve never heard of."
Then there is Mark Steyn, a pungent columnist, essayist, and critic who’s not well known in the United States, but whose political screeds are published in English-speaking countries around the world. A native of Canada who divides his time among New Hampshire, Quebec, and London, Steyn is a self-described right-wing warmonger. Like a respectable conservative, he has some high-tone affiliations. Steyn writes obituaries of the famous and not-so-famous for the Atlantic Monthly. He pens theater reviews for the New Criterion, a conservative arts-and-culture journal with a vaunted reputation. And he reviews movies for the Spectator, a venerable, classy London weekly magazine owned by the Hollinger media empire, his principal benefactor.
But if Steyn’s sharp, clear writing, quick mind, and wide-ranging curiosity appeal to the pretensions of the intelligentsia, there is another side to him as well. Steyn may possess more depth and range than Limbaugh or Coulter, but he shares much in common with them. To wit: a shrill, mocking tone of moral certainty that consigns those who disagree with him to the status of appeasers or even terrorists; and a willingness to distort, misrepresent, and omit facts in order to advance his argument. And if you think he couldn’t possibly be as bad as, say, Coulter, whose shtick is to pop up on television and denounce liberals as "traitors," consider this: in perhaps his sleaziest column of 2004, a condescending dismissal of triple-amputee war hero Max Cleland, Steyn’s principal source was Coulter.
Dude, you're hitting my man Mark. Not a wise move. Fortunately I don't have to do anything physical because Michelle Malkin rides to Mark's defence.
A public confession: I have long had an intellectual crush on Mark Steyn. (My husband is okay with it--just as long as he gets to rave about the gorgeous Kim Serafin without me complaining.)
Anyway, I call the attention of all fellow Steyn lovers to this flaccid, attempted hit piece on Mr. Steyn. All you need to know about the article is that the writer, Boston Phoenix media critic Dan Kennedy, 1) turned to bottom-of-the-barrel Demo-stenographer Joe Conason for comment on Steyn's writing ability ("He's kind of a glib guy"); 2) thinks any conservative commentator who isn't George Will, David Brooks, or Paul Gigot is a "right-wing carny barker;" and 3) called Steyn a "second-rate Maureen Dowd."
I can't even imagine how much mail Kennedy's already received.
Posted by steve @ 06:59 PM EST [Link]
~ THE FUTURE OF THE HOUSE OF SAUD: A pair of interesting articles up on Slate today that if you haven't seen I recommend you read them. The first is Lee Smith's The Saudi Civil War -- which looks at the players behind the troubles in Saudi Arabia -- and the second is Islamists Won't Blow Down the House of Saud by Afshin Molavi. The second argues that the House of Saud won't fall anytime soon and that's good news.
I'm not quite sure I agree but both are informed pieces that you should at least read.
Posted by steve @ 06:22 PM EST [Link]
~ THIS IS INTERESTING: According to AP, Vladimir Putin gave intelligence to the Bush administration after 9/11 which indicated that Saddam Hussein had planned attacks in the U.S.
Putin said he couldn't comment on how critical the Russians' information was in the U.S. decision to invade Iraq. He said Russia didn't have any information that Saddam's regime had actually been behind any terrorist acts.
"After Sept. 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, the Russian special services, the intelligence service, received information that officials from Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States and outside it against the U.S. military and other interests," Putin said.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:03 PM EST [Link]
~ HOW ABOUT WE LET THE LEFT TAKE OVER MUSINGS FOR A DAY?: I just had a rather interesting offer: As part of a promotion for his book, a liberal author is offering to blog for one day on Musings. How about it, should we let the left inflitrate the mighty ESR empire for a day?
Posted by steve @ 12:59 PM EST [Link]
Thursday, June 17, 2004 ATHLETES AND RACE: Radley Balko has a good essay up at Fox News about athletes and race and why sportswriters love to provoke stories about the two.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:32 PM EST [Link]
~ ESR IS JEW LOVERS CENTRAL!: According to some of our detractors anyway. By accident I stumbled upon a web site called "Original Dissent" which had a thread debating how Jew-loving ESR is.
Enter Stage Right has always struck me as a neocon stronghold, though undoubtedly it became more of the same after 9/11. Some of the most obnoxious Zionist neocons over at Free Republic were enamoured with it in the late 90's, which was a sure sign that ESJ was a false front a la Ayn Rand.
I like to think that FReepers are still in love with ESR but that's a debate for another day. For the record, ESR is not a front organization for anyone. It's funded by donations from the public and money out of my pocket.
Also, ESR isn't a "neocon stronghold". In the run up to the war we offered opinions from both pro and con and continue to do so. In this week's issue we're running at least one person who was opposed to the war. While I myself was (and remain) in support of the war, several regular contributors were opposed.
Finally, Sartre, you didn't part company with ESR, I stopped running your pieces. There is a difference. I don't have any problem with you or the paleo-con movement but your continued attacks on ESR -- which seems to be some sort of bête noire for many paleos -- is wrongheaded. Our common enemy is the left, not others in the right.
I think that's what bothers me the most about paleocons -- or at least many of them. If someone doesn't subscribe to "traditional conservatism", in their view it isn't a difference of opinion or that the person is wrong, that person is a moron shill who has been bought by Israel. Neocons are "kool-aid" drinkers who are too stupid to question what comes from George W. Bush. It's an arrogance which bothers me to no end. There is no room for disagreement...unless you buy their platform you're one of the sheeple.
For the record, Justin Raimondo offered to write a response to an earlier defense of neoconservatism and I gladly accepted. He ended up not writing anything so the neocons had the first and last word. I have an opens submission policy and will run almost anything as long as it is a responsible critique of an issue or group.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:53 PM EST [Link]
~ I HATE EMAIL: Especially when it doesn't work. If you send me email please note that I'm unable to respond. Both my personal and ESR email keep bouncing back replies with a "550 relaying mail to ISP is not allowed".
That doesn't make any sense to me since I'm not relying email. So until the problem is solved please be patient for a response. Remember, I can receive your email, just not respond at the moment.
Posted by steve @ 02:40 PM EST [Link]
~ KERRY'S HOUSE OF KETCHUP: Another week, another Kerry's House of Ketchup. Find it here.
Posted by steve @ 10:20 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, June 16, 2004 THAT'S A SURPRISE: Who would have thought that a party that defines itself by being the most environmentalist is in fact not the most enviro-wacky in Canada.
In separate assessments of where the parties stand on environmental issues, both Greenpeace and the Sierra Club of Canada gave slightly higher marks to the NDP than the Greens. The Sierra Club gave the Green Party an A and the NDP an A plus. Greenpeace, which used four criteria in its assessment, gave the NDP straight A's while the Green party got two A's and two B's.
The Green party platform is admirable on philosophical principles but lacking in precision, said Elizabeth May of the Sierra Club, in an interview Thursday.
"They've got good policies, high ideals, there's nothing about them not to like. Their approach is, I guess in a word, naive. There's not a lot of nitty gritty."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 08:51 PM EST [Link]
~ FAMILY VALUES: The family that kills together...well, okay, they tend not to stay together. The Jerusalem Post reports that two 15-year old girls were arrested earlier today in Nablus "for allegedly planning to carry out a suicide attack together with their fathers."
According to the report, the four were recruited by an Al-Aksa activist. IDF sources told the radio that the same activist recruited Husam Abdu, 16, of Nablus to carry out a suicide bombing at the Huwara checkpoint south of the West Bank city.
The two teenage girls were identified as members of the Fatah organization, Majda Kohon and Assil al-Hindi.
They were arrested in Nablus and taken into custody along with their fathers. Israel radio reported that after questioning it transpired that one of the girls had recruited the other to carry out a suicide bombing attack.
A report on the Ma'ariv quoted the mother of one of the girls as saying she believed her daughter, whom she described as disciplined and did not leave the house much, to be completely innocent.
Everyone is always completely innocent.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:19 PM EST [Link]
~ HARPER LOST: So sayeth The Meatriarchy who opines:
Paul Martin won the debate. Steven Harper lost.
Martin looked like a man who was involved in the 7th game of the Stanley Cup final and was laying everything on the line, giving 110% and playing like there is no tomorrow. He took predictable fire from all the others for the record of government mismanagement but he was aggressive and relentless in his attacks on Harper and the differences in style between the two were marked.
Martin seemed very comfortable in the spotlight. He kept his head up, his eye contact with the camera was consistent (if a little overdone) and he never seemed at a loss for words.
Harper is obviously bright and well informed on all the issues but he comes across too soft spoken and not fiery enough. I know that you can’t change a person’s personality but there are things that his handlers could have focused on that would have made his performances better. For starters the eye contact thing. Harper tends to look down too much; almost immediately after he is finished his point his eyes drop. This makes him look uncomfortable, almost shy. In fact I kept thinking that Harper is our version of Richard Nixon, a solid guy but lousy in front of the cameras.
Needless to say if you read what I wrote about the debate earlier today I disagree. I did think Stephen Harper was too passive during the debate but I completely disagree with the notion that Martin looked comfortable. If anything, he looked like a white collar criminal who just found himself in a maximum security prison.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:09 PM EST [Link]
~ BOY, ALL WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT NOW IS THAT 'IRAQI WINTER': Because that quagmire called Iraq is dissipating. Moqtada al-Sadr today sent home his Mehdi Army 'soldiers'.
With the formal end of U.S.-led occupation just two weeks away, Sadr issued a statement from his base in Najaf calling on his Mehdi Army militiamen to go home.
"Each of the individuals of the Mehdi Army, the loyalists who made sacrifices...should return to their governorates to do their duty,'' the statement said.
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 03:01 PM EST [Link]
~ NO LINK BUT...: The 9/11 Commission released its findings today and asserted that there was no link between Iraq and the terrorist attacks.
The commission's report says bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan, despite his opposition to (Saddam) Hussein's secular regime. Bin Laden had in fact at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan.
"The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded bin Laden to cease this support and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda."
A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994.
Bin Laden is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded.
"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the report said.
"Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied" any relationship, the report said.
Over at Prudent Politics, however, Cody Hatch says the issue hasn't been resolved to his satisfaction.
I assume that the Sept. 11th Commission has access to documents that I do not, and that they have access to people and testimony that I do not, but where is the "credible evidence" that nothing came from these meetings? Did Sudan, Iran, and Afghanistan send a senior intelligence official to meet with bin Laden, as Iraq did? How many nations sent official representatives in response to requests by bin Laden for meetings?
Posted by steve @ 02:53 PM EST [Link]
~ YAWN: After watching the leader's debate on TV Tuesday night I decided not to bother blogging about it. It was almost enough to make me not vote on June 28.
The last thing people want is "American-style politics" in this country but I'm beginning to think it would be a grand thing. The debate to me personified the problems that a 36 day campaign causes: An utter lack of real time to debate not only what needs to be done, but how it should be done. All I got from all four leaders -- though to be charitable Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper was more dignified than the others -- was a yapping match with little content. Kind of a micro version of the campaign to date.
It almost bothers me that I wasted the time watching them 'debate' when I could have been...oh, I don't know...doing anything else.
At any rate, Damien Penny had some thoughts about the debate here, Paul Wells opines here while 'experts' over at the CTV say Stephen Harper won the debate because Paul Martin lost it.
"I think it was a TKO against the prime minister, and I think he's finished. I think his one chance has slipped away," said Gerald Caplan on Newsnet's Countdown with Mike Duffy.
CTV's Craig Oliver concurred, saying there was no one single blow, but that Harper won both the debates by not losing and by not looking scary. "I think it was a lot easier after tonight to become a lot more comfortable with him."
Bah...time for a cigar.
[Update - 3:14pm] A Chick Named Marzi (formerly Conservative Punk Canuck) weighs in on the debate here.
Posted by steve @ 02:47 AM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: Did you hear that UN inspectors have found components from Saddam Hussein's WMD and missile programs all over the world? Unless you regularly visit the blogosphere, probably not. I tackle the discoveries and the lack of media coverage over at the American Spectator in an article you can find here,
Posted by steve @ 12:50 AM EST [Link]
~ WELCOME TO THE BLOGOSPHERE: Superstar syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin now has a blog.
Check it, and her entire newly redesigned site, out. You can also read an ESR interview with Michelle here.
Posted by antle @ 12:22 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, June 15, 2004 HOW IRAQ IS CHANGING VOL. XXIV: Reuel Marc Gerecht reported in today's Wall Street Journal that a majority of Iraqis -- particulary Shiites -- want a representative government.
Though vastly more tolerant and appreciative of American actions, the Arab Shiites, too, have diminishing patience and curiosity about Americans and the Iraqi authorities whom Washington has placed over them. The desire for elections among the Shiites is enormously powerful--Sistani's pro-democracy broadsides, which knocked America's MacArthur-like proconsul, L. Paul Bremer, to his knees and sent the Bush administration reeling toward the U.N., have had such force precisely because his statements reflect widespread sentiment throughout the Shiite community. It is by no means clear whether the Shiites view this new interim government as a step closer to democracy, which will finally give the Shiites the social prominence and political power equal to their numbers (they are at least 60% of the population).
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 08:31 PM EST [Link]
~ HOW BUSH IS LIKE CHURCHILL: At least when it comes to media coverage. Gary Larson had an article up yesterday about both Winston Churchill and George W. Bush had to deal with a hostile press during war time.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 08:12 PM EST [Link]
~ I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH THE GAY ACTIVISTS: Statistics Canada released a new survey today which suggests that one per cent of Canadians were homosexuals while 0.7 per cent are bisexuals.
I don't buy it. I certainly don't believe that it's 10 per cent of the population -- a figure which gained prominence thanks to those ridicuously flawed studies that Masters & Johnson released decades ago -- but homosexuals certainly number at least 5 per cent of the population. I've seen credible numbers which suggest as high as 7 per cent.
Also, it's a bit hard to define bisexual. Is someone bisexual if they have sex with someone of the same sex once, or view it as a past-time that they eventually drop? I know more than a few women who could easily qualify as bisexuals and yet if you asked them they'd say they were straight.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:14 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S A FACT: GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH CARE WORKS!: Well, if you don't mind not having a family doctor and enjoy waiting for emergency care.
More than 3.6 million Canadians didn't have a regular doctor last year, and many of them suffered a lack of basic preventive care, winding up in emergency rooms at far higher rates than those with doctors.
The problem was almost as serious in urban as rural areas, according to a new Statistics Canada survey, the most comprehensive picture to date of the country's doctor shortage and its consequences.
Of the 3.6 million who didn't have a doctor, 2.4 million hadn't bothered to look, the Canadian Community Health Survey released Tuesday says.
But 1.2 million searched, some long and hard, with no success.
And yet the big debate in the election isn't whether the system isn't working, but rather how much more money to dump into new programs -- like the Conservatives' prescription drug plan. The failures of socialized health care are like that proverbial elephant in the room that everyone sees but no one acknowledges. Well, except for the people who aren't being served by it.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:06 PM EST [Link]
~ TIME CHANGES EVERYTHING: Iraq's neighbours, after being initially cool, today welcomed the new interim government.
The new Iraqi interim government received a solid boost Tuesday when the country's neighbors and Egypt endorsed the U.S.-backed leadership, a move that could help stem an increasingly violent insurgency.
Hours later, the political committee of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the world's largest Islamic organization, unanimously approved a resolution backing Iraq's interim government and calling for help in rebuilding the war-shattered nation, a delegate who attended the discussions said.
The resolution is expected to be formally declared at the closing of the three-day foreign ministers' meeting on Wednesday, the delegate added, speaking on customary condition of anonymity.
Although the Guardian was careful to say that this new government isn't the U.S.-backed one -- though they didn't explain how this new government came to being (hint: American soldiers) -- it's good news that Muslim states have taken this step forward.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:01 PM EST [Link]
~ NICE RESEARCH: The AP admitted today that the new Abu Musab al-Zarqawi memo is, in fact, not new.
A comparison subsequently showed that the purported letter from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was the same text intercepted and released in February by the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.
I blame George W. Bush and his mad rush to war for this mistake.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:57 PM EST [Link]
~ DON'T GO AGAINST THE FAMILY: "Many U.N. employees fear reprisals from their bosses if they step forward with information on the Iraq oil-for-food scandal or report other allegations of corruption, according to a shocking internal survey released yesterday.
"A recent poll of 6,086 employees and managers released on the U.N. Web site revealed that the staff has little faith in the world body leadership's commitment to ethics and integrity and that most believe that when allegations of wrongdoing surface, they are not properly handled."
Seems the only person who believes the UN's party line is Koffi Annan.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:54 PM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: With all the pro-legalization articles I write you might be tempted to think I was a pothead. Nope. The only drugs I enjoy are Crown Royal, cigarettes, cigars and bacon. That said, I have another pro-legalization piece running in today's Kitchener-Waterloo Record on the Insight page. If you can pick up a copy, please do, otherwise just click on "More" to read my brilliance.
[more]Posted by steve @ 02:37 AM EST [Link]
Monday, June 14, 2004 DON'T CHEER TOO LOUDLY: Conservatives are predictably cheering the U.S. Supreme Court's decision this morning to leave the Pledge of Allegiance intact. I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that the court didn't rule on the Pledge itself, that this case essentially was a test of custody rights.
Five justices -- led by Justice John Paul Stevens -- said Michael Newdow, the father, did not have legal standing to bring the case. Newdow, who is involved in a custody dispute with the mother of their third-grade daughter, could not speak for the girl, the court ruled.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "When hard questions of domestic relations are sure to affect the outcome, a prudent course is for the federal court to stay its hand rather than reach out to resolve a weighty question of federal constitutional law."
He added, "Newdow lacks prudential standing to bring this suit in federal court."
I wouldn't be surprised if the Pledge wasn't subject to another challenge, this time from someone who had proper standing in the case. That's when the Pledge's fate will truly be up in the air. As Wendy McElroy pointed out in ESR some months back, several courts had ruled in Newdow's favor concerning the unconstitutionality of the Pledge and that the case itself had morphed into one concerning custodial rights when it reached the Supreme Court. She also stated that throwing the case out on 'standing' was a bad idea.
The Supreme Court has the option to throw the Newdow case out on a technicality of "standing." The prospect must be tempting, but it would be a mistake to dismiss the case on anything but its substance. By dismissing the case on "standing," the Supreme Court, without meaning to do so, could deal a severe blow to the important and entirely separate issue of fathers' rights.
Posted by steve @ 03:33 PM EST [Link]
~ IRAQ II: Well it took over a decade for something to be done about Iraq and it looks like we're on the same timetable with Iran. The difference? By the time someone does something, Iran will likely be armed with a nuclear weapon or two.
Iran is not fully cooperating with U.N. inspectors and must come clean about the full extent of its nuclear program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United States said Monday.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran's cooperation has been "less than satisfactory" and warned that clarification of unresolved issues -- particularly Iran's uranium enrichment activities -- could not be allowed to drag on forever.
"It is essential for the integrity and credibility of the inspection process that we are able to bring these issues to a close within the next few months, and provide the international community with the assurances it urgently seeks regarding Iran's nuclear activities," he told the IAEA's board of governors.
If I were Iran, I would be totally scared...in 2016.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:22 PM EST [Link]
~ HOW ABOUT A SERIOUS INVESTIGATION: William Safire has a good essay in today's NYT about the 'investigation' that the U.N. is launching into the Oil-for-Food scandal. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 03:08 PM EST [Link]
~ FAVOURITE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS: John Hawkins has the results of his latest blogger poll up: Favourite fictional characters. I unfortunately was too pressed by other work this weekend to be able to get my picks in but you can find out what everyone else thought here. Based on the list I was putting together in my head, not one of mine would have made it into the top 10.
Posted by steve @ 12:54 AM EST [Link]
Sunday, June 13, 2004 YOU SIR ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT: U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan whined Saturday that the "world today is a much more unequal place than it was 40 years ago."
Bzzt! Wrong! If I wasn't so lazy I'd run across the house right now and pull out the documentation that proves that the world's poor are monumentally better off in 2004 then they were in 1964. By every measure -- whether it's caloric intake, income, general health or longevity -- the world's poor in general are far better off then they were 40 years ago. If Annan is arguing that the gap between rich and poor is greater, perhaps he can make the case but that doesn't mean that the poor are getting the short end of some non-existent zero-sum game.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:21 AM EST [Link]
Saturday, June 12, 2004 THIS SHOULD SHUT PEOPLE UP ABOUT MCCAIN: I have more than a few problems with John McCain but his status as a conservative isn't one of them. On Friday it was reported that he 'officially' turned down John Kerry's offer of the VP slot.
I don't know why people thought McCain would ever entertain the offer...he has one of the most conservative voting records in the last decade outside of campaign finance reform.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:52 AM EST [Link]
~ EVEN IN DEATH HE'S STILL RIGHT: Ronald Reagan's epitaph: "I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph. And there's purpose and worth to each and every life."
Posted by steve @ 05:42 AM EST [Link]
~ ENVIRONMENTALISTS WHO LIE? PERISH THE THOUGHT: "Amy and Steve LeSatz want to be able to teach their clients the finer points of riding and roping without having to trailer their animals 25 miles to the nearest public indoor arena whenever the weather turns miserable.
"But the LeSatzes aren't able to build their own riding arena. The only decent site on their property in southeastern Wyoming lies within 300 feet of Chugwater Creek, and building there is far too expensive because of Endangered Species Act restrictions intended to protect the Preble's meadow jumping mouse.
'The mouse that doesn't exist,' Amy LeSatz noted drily."
Yup, you read that right. The LeSatz family were prevented from developing their property by an endangered species that never existed.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:38 AM EST [Link]
Friday, June 11, 2004 I CAN'T EVEN PAY OFF MY CREDIT CARD: But it looks like I owe someone a huge chunk of change. According to the Fraser Institute each "Canadian taxpayer owes $180,421 in federal, provincial, and municipal liabilities that total $2.7 trillion, despite paydowns against the national debt."
Federal, provincial, and local governments have accumulated $789 billion in direct debt and over $2.7 trillion in total liabilities, the conservative think-tank said Friday in a release.
"Total liabilities include direct debt and programs that the government has committed to provide, such as Old Age Security, the Canada Pension Plan and medicare," the institute said.
Net direct debt - liabilities minus assets - of all three levels of government fell from $847 billion to $789 billion between 1997-98 and 2001-02. But debt has grown over the last decade, the think-tank said, as in 1990-91 Canada's direct debt totalled $533 billion.
Seriously, I don't have the $180K so don't send any collections agency after me.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:48 PM EST [Link]
~ ARE THEY PEAKING TOO EARLY?: A new Ekos poll confirms others that have suggested the Conservative Party is leading the Liberals.
An Ekos poll of 2,117 voters published Friday put the Conservatives ahead in the campaign with 34 per cent support of decided voters compared with 30 per cent for the Liberals.
The NDP had 19 per cent while the Bloc Quebecois was at 12 per cent.
We're 17 days away from voting in Canada so I'm a little worried that the Conservatives might be peaking too early, especially with the attacks coming from all sides -- including people who are calling themselves conservatives. Even if Stephen Harper and the party run a flawless campaign from now on, and I've seen little to suggest that's going to happen, I'm worried that the slings and arrows that are battering them will have an effect among undecided and swing voters.
Posted by steve @ 04:45 PM EST [Link]
~ SO WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?: According to Reuters, the UN "has found indications Iran wanted to equip thousands of uranium enrichment centrifuges, enough to produce bomb-grade material for several warheads per year."
And?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:35 AM EST [Link]
Thursday, June 10, 2004 RAY CHARLES, R.I.P. Ray Charles has died at the age of 73.
The loss of this R&B legend is tragic, as is the fact that his death comes at a time when Reagan coverage will completely overshadow it.
There is, however, one connection: Ray Charles performed at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas where the Reagan-Bush ticket was renominated.
Posted by antle @ 11:27 PM EST [Link]
~ IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM WON'T STOP: Iran warned the G8 today that its "peaceful" nuclear program won't be halted despite international pressure.
"Using peaceful nuclear energy is Iran's natural right and...G8 countries should not expect Iran to abandon this right," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in a statement carried by state media.
G8 leaders from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan and Russia issued a statement on Wednesday accusing Iran of dragging its feet on full disclosure of its nuclear activities.
Of course, any country that hands out applications for suicide bombers is only interested in peaceful uses of nuclear power. I believe them!
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:14 PM EST [Link]
~ HOLLYWOOD KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT SCIENCE - NEWS AT 11!: The recently released disaster movie The Day After Tomorrow portrays a world that suddenly drops off the edge of a cliff into a global ice age. Doubtless there are a lot of mouth breathers who walked out of this movie and believed it was all possible. Hey, I heard the CGI was pretty good.
Well, according to The Guardian, data shows that we're quite a ways off from another ice age. 15 000 years off to be more precise.
The next ice age could be 15,000 years away, say European scientists who today announce a continuous record of 740,000 years of climate data from a single core of Antarctic ice.
Scientists from 10 nations have now almost completely drilled through a 3,000 metre depth of ice high in the Antarctic mainland. They calculate that Dome C, on a smooth plateau where summer temperatures can fall to -40C, has at least 900,000 years of snowfalls, preserved as neatly as the annual growth rings of a tree. And the ice and tiny bubbles of trapped air in each layer have now begun to answer huge questions about bygone climates.
The results confirm that there have been eight ice ages in the past 740,000 years and eight warmer periods, or interglacials. And by comparing the pattern of global conditions today with those of the past, the researchers report in Nature that the present warm period could last another 15,000 years.
Of course, it's not all good news. Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:02 PM EST [Link]
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 "YOUR WOMEN. I WANT TO BUY YOUR WOMEN. THE LITTLE GIRL, YOUR DAUGHTERS...SELL THEM TO ME. SELL ME YOUR CHILDREN.": Ah if this was only a post concerning the movie The Blues Brothers. Donna M. Hughes has an essay up at Project: Free Iran detailing the selling of women in to prostitution and slavery with the tacit support of Iranian government officials.
Joining a global trend, the fundamentalists have added another way to dehumanize women and girls: buying and selling them for prostitution. Exact numbers of victims are impossible to obtain, but according to an official source in Tehran, there has been a 635 percent increase in the number of teen-age girls in prostitution. The magnitude of this statistic conveys how rapidly this form of abuse has grown. In Tehran, there are an estimated 84,000 women and girls in prostitution, many of them are on the streets, others are in the 250 brothels that reportedly operate in the city. The trade is also international: Thousands of Iranian women and girls have been sold into sexual slavery abroad.
The head of Iran's Interpol bureau believes that the sex-slave trade is one of the most profitable activities in Iran today. This criminal trade is not conducted outside the knowledge and participation of the ruling fundamentalists. Government officials themselves are involved in buying, selling and sexually abusing women and girls.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:29 PM EST [Link]
~ DON'T GO AGAINST THE FAMILY: Reporters without Borders reports today that an Iranian journalist has been charged after writing a series of articles critical of the regime.
Reporters Without Borders called today for the immediate release of Abbas Kakavand, who was imprisoned on 7 June for allegedly disseminating "false news" in articles he wrote for the website gooya.com since February after leaving the conservative newspaper Ressalat. His articles criticised corruption and the political payments received by many conservative leaders.
Thank God Europe is treating the Iranian government as a legitimate body!
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:55 PM EST [Link]
~ HER OF ALL PEOPLE: The name Anne McLellan won't probably mean much to Americans but she's the current Deputy Prime Minister in Canada and a woman I've despised for as long as I can remember. This election I thought we could finally get rid of her. Well, until today that is.
Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, facing what could be the tightest in a string of squeaker campaign victories, was to get some support Wednesday from an unlikely source.
Twelve Progressive Conservatives, including four former Alberta cabinet ministers, announced they will work to get McLellan re-elected in the re-distributed riding of Edmonton Centre.
"We have taken this unprecedented step because it is clear that Anne McLellan has been an especially strong and effective voice for Alberta," former cabinet minister Dennis Anderson said in a release.
Her fight for increased gun control should have been reason enough for every Albertan to turn their back on her but here we have 12 conservatives supporting her. I don't understand it.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:39 PM EST [Link]
~ HI! I'M AN IDIOT! VOTE FOR ME!: Canada's Conservative Party is learning a lesson this week. When you start the election well back of the Liberals then essentially pull up even with them, the media and your opponents will lie in wait for a stupid comment about a controversial subject. Ontario Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant has provided that stupid comment.
The controversial subject is abortion -- which both the Liberals and the media are trying to paint the Conservatives as extremist on -- and Ms. Gallant decided to announce to an anti-abortion group that there is no difference between the beheading of Nick Berg by al-Qaida terrorists and abortion.
Now I know millions of Canadians are opposed to abortion on grounds that make perfect sense to me. I can understand why people like Gallant would make the type of statement that she did. That said, during an election campaign when you're battling charges that your a party of right-wing extremists, it's not a wise comment to make.
If Gallant wasn't the only one making dumb statements, this week we also had Conservative MP Jason Kenney stating that politicians who refuse to fight abortion are equivalent to those who fail to fight against child abuse or slavery and MP Scott Reid calling for cuts to services for minority-language groups, earning him a resignation letter. But wait, there was also MP Rob Merrifield announcing that counselling for women seeking abortions would be a good idea.
People, during an election you're going to alienate more people than you'll attract when you make those kind of comments. You can't make policy sitting in the opposition benches.
[Update - June 11, 4:39pm] - Rick over at Rick's Miscellany takes a shot at me for essentially arguing that policy isn't to be discussed during elections. As I wrote to Rick in an email a few minutes ago:
What I meant in that blog entry was not that pro-life Tories shouldn't publicly advocate restrictions or even a total ban, simply that some of them, like Gallant, used overly inflammatory language to advance their position. Comparing abortion to the slaughter of a human being by terrorists seeking to destroy the very notion of the West isn't a good way to get your point across in my opinion. It's hard to argue that a 'moderate' people like Canadians would hear that and agree.
Although I'm nominally pro-choice myself, I want the pro-life side -- which tends to be my side of the political fence -- to be active during an election and to speak their mind. I just want them to do it in a reasonable manner. That goes for the pro-choice side as well.
Posted by steve @ 01:05 AM EST [Link]
~ MOVIE NIGHT AT FORT SINATRA: What better way to spend a Tuesday birthday then watching kung fu and Batman movies? Exactly, many better ways but I settled for this one.
First up was the classic 3 Evil Masters, a movie with barely a plot but plenty of action. A kung fu master is hunted and killed by -- you guessed it -- three evil masters -- but he is avenged by a young man he took under his wing. As someone on IMDB.com mentions, the ending is a little lackluster but the action more than makes up for it. If you like kung fu, you'll like this one.
Our second feature of the evening was Return of the 5 Deadly Venoms (aka Crippled Avengers). You may remember last year that I mentioned watching 5 Deadly Venoms. This is not a sequel. Rather, the five cats that worked with legendary director Cheh Chang in 5 Deadly Venoms came back to do another movie together and for some reason they titled it Return of the 5 Deadly Venoms. The heroes are crippled (one loses his legs, another his speech and hearing while another is rendered mentally disabled) by an evil kung fu master and his son and must overcome their disabilities to defeat him. Although the movie won't win any awards for sensitivity to those with disabilities -- especially Sheng Chiang's performance as the "idiot" -- this movie has so much kung fu fighting that you'll forget to call an advocacy group to complain.
The final feature was as a change of pace: Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker, an animated feature a friend loaned me and set roughly 50 years in the future. If you're not familiar with the Batman Beyond premise, Bruce Wayne is in his 80s and long retired. His former alter-ego has been taken up by a young high school student who set out to avenge his father's death. It's pretty dark for a cartoon though not as violent as some have suggested. It's a PG-13 after all. That said, the scene involving The Joker...ummm...."fixing" Robin/Tim Drake was surprising. It was pretty good and if you like animation, give it a shot.
And there you go...how Steve spent his birthday. Not crying in dark corners or working, but rather watching kung fu and Batman movies. Can you tell I'm a 33-year old single male?
Posted by steve @ 12:50 AM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: I have the cover story for today's edition of The American Spectator Online. It's a piece on what it was like to grow up in the '80s as part of an age group that strongly admired Reagan.
Also check out this fine column by Lawrence Henry, in which he mentions his longtime writing home at ESR.
Posted by antle @ 12:41 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 REAGAN AND LIMITED GOVERNMENT: A brieft but excellent synopsis of Ronald Reagan's fiscal policy record from a small-government by the Cato Institute's Chris Edwards.
Read on.
Posted by antle @ 11:43 PM EST [Link]
~ HEY, I WAS GOING TO WRITE ABOUT THAT: William Saletan critiqued what he saw as Reagan's view of liberty, expressed in his 1989 farewell address with the observation that where government expands, liberty contracts. As soon as I saw this attack on what Saletan described as Reagan's Law, I felt the need to respond. I was even going to pitch the idea to Tech Central Station.
But doggone it, Stephen Bainbridge did such a good job responding in TCS that I don't have to. He goes into the salient discussion of negative versus positive rights.
Posted by antle @ 10:40 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S STARTING ALREADY: I hate to be an "I told you so," but as I predicted in my piece this week there are those who are using the occasion of Reagan's death to promote causes he would not support. This includes both backers of embryo-destructive research and the Reagan-legacy cottage industry.
It's worth pointing out that Reagan himself probably would not have supported any of this (even Nancy Reagan has never to my knowledge claimed that her husband would have agreed with her embryonic stem-cell research stance). As far as the currency idea, as much as I'm a Reaganite, I'm strongly opposed to booting the great Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton off the $10 bill. I'm somewhat more open to having Reagan share half the dimes with FDR - recognizing an icon of the left and the right, who also happen to be the two men with strongest claim to being the best president of the 20th century, on one coin - but I still see it as somewhat inconsistent with the Gipper's humility.
Let's pay unique tributes to Reagan, rather than taking tributes away from other presidents and statesmen.
Posted by antle @ 10:31 PM EST [Link]
~ I HATE CANDLES: It's my birthday today. No, I don't want emails congratulating me. I'm merely mentioning this to explain a lack of posting today. I'll either be working on a review of a book, crying softly in a dark corner over my age or indulging in a kung fu movie marathon.
Posted by steve @ 02:28 PM EST [Link]
Monday, June 7, 2004 TIME TO DIE: Declan McCullagh argued in an essay today that the FCC's time -- if it was ever even a valid organization -- has long since past and it should be killed off.
Its justification for existence was weak 70 years ago, but advances in technology since then have eliminated whatever arguments remained. Central planning didn't work for the Soviet Union, and it's not working for us. The FCC is now an agency that does more harm than good.
Consider some examples of bureaucratic malfeasance that the FCC, with the complicity of the U.S. Congress, has committed. The FCC rejected long-distance telephone service competition in 1968, banned Americans from buying their own non-Bell telephones in 1956, dragged its feet in the 1970s when considering whether video telephones would be allowed and did not grant modern cellular telephone licenses until 1981--about four decades after Bell Labs invented the technology. Along the way, the FCC has preserved monopolistic practices that would have otherwise been illegal under antitrust law.
These technologically backward decisions have cost Americans tens of billions of dollars.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 08:53 PM EST [Link]
~ THAT WAS HIS JOB: Mark Steyn has a great little essay about Ronald Reagan that you can read here.
Posted by steve @ 06:32 PM EST [Link]
~ EVEN A WOLF STOPS ATTACKING AT SOME POINT: I love contrarians as much as the next man but Christopher Hitchens would do well to take a break some days. Today he writes a rather silly piece explaining why Ronald Reagan was a moron. If that's not enough for you, Slate is also running two other pieces attacking Reagan.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:11 PM EST [Link]
~ FREEDOM MAN: Saul Singer pays tribute to Ronald Reagan in the Jerusalem Post as a man unafraid to stand up for liberty.
Like World War II, the Cold War is now viewed retrospectively through American eyes as inevitable, just, and ending in the West's victory. But as Reagan himself pointed out in his farewell address, the policies that he espoused were widely derided as "dangerous" before and during his tenure.
Reagan's critics accused him of risking nuclear war. Reagan seemed almost alone in understanding that the only way to end the Cold War was for the Soviet Union to cease to exist, and that that day would come. In the end, it came even quicker than he imagined.
Reagan was vilified at the time for calling the Soviet Union an "evil empire," much as Bush has been derided for fingering the "axis of evil." And Bush seems to have a similarly unpopular insight that the jihad will only end when the regimes that support it have gone the way of either Gaddafi or Saddam and the entire region is on the path to freedom.
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 02:46 PM EST [Link]
~ I DO STILL NEED A JOB: Though this application form makes it clear that my job history doesn't lend itself to this kind of gig:
Translated:
In the Name of God
Preliminary Registration for Martyrdom Operations
I ----------------, child of ----------------, born 13----- (Islamic calendar), the City of: ---------------- proclaim my preparedness for carrying out martyrdom operations:---- against the occupiers of the holy sites (referring to Najaf, Karbala, and other places in Iraq.)
---- against the occupiers of (Jerusalem)
---- for carrying out the death sentence of the infidel Salman Rushdie
Also, I would like to become an active member of the Army of Martyrs of the International Islamic Movement. Yes ---- No ----
Contact telephone:
Applicant's address:
Applicant's signature:That's right, it's an application to be a suicide bomber. It was handed out at Iran's first conference for suicide bombers that was held last week.
Posted by steve @ 12:37 AM EST [Link]
~ DO LIBERALS BEHAVE ILLOGICALLY?: Tom Holzel argues that they do and explains why he believes so in an interesting essay you can find over at his web site.
Posted by steve @ 12:23 AM EST [Link]
~ NOTICE: Just a word about the latest issue of ESR that just went up. If you notice any oddness about the images in this week's issue -- such as colour and the like -- it's because my eight-year old monitor is on its last legs. A couple of days ago something busticated inside and now I'm working with a purple-tinted display. Needless to say it's hard to tell if the colors in an image are correct.
Posted by steve @ 12:07 AM EST [Link]
Saturday, June 5, 2004 CONSERVATIVES TAKE LEAD IN ONTARIO: A new poll suggests that the Conservative Party is now leading the governing Liberals in the key province of Ontario, opening up the possibility of a Conservative minority government.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:31 PM EST [Link]
~ THE SADDEST DAY: The greatest American president of the 20th century has died.
I have no words. Today is one of the saddest days of my life.
Posted by steve @ 05:34 PM EST [Link]
~ THIS IS THE SORT OF THING THAT BOTHERS PALEOS ABOUT CONSERVATIVE COLUMNISTS: Jeff Jacoby, the best columnist at the Boston Globe, has written a piece praising George W. Bush - for being the candidate in the tradition of democracy-spreading liberal Democrats like Harry Truman and JFK.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that my grandfather's Democratic Party was a lot more attractive than the coalition of special-interest groups and grievance lobbies that make up the majority of that left-wing den of thieves today. But do we really have to embrace the idea that conservatism is just whatever liberalism was 40 years ago? That today's conservative is just yesterday's liberal? Or that we on the right have no traditions or heroes of our own, so we have to cheerlead for the left's old heroes?
Some may say yes. I, in my curmudgeonly way, say "bah."
Read on.
Posted by antle @ 04:19 PM EST [Link]
~ HEDGING THEIR BETS?: CNN has included so many people on its list of potential running mates for John Kerry that it would be ridiculous if one of them did not get the nod.
Of course, some of the prospects are themselves ridiculous. John McCain is included on the list, even though the pro-life, pro-war, pro-defense spending, pro-free trade Republican has repeatedly and firmly said he would not take the job if offered by either party (they note this but include him anyway). Joe Lieberman is listed, even though I think it's pretty clear his moment has passed. Desperate to think of minorities Kerry might tap, they include Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.). There is simply no way Clyburn is going to be picked - he is not particularly well-known outside of South Carolina, he will not help Kerry win that state, and I haven't seen any credible reports or heard any informed speculation that he was even being seriously considered.
Finally, CNN is just wrong in its assertion that "the Constitution does not specify whether or not a former commander in chief can become vice president," thus making Bill Clinton eligible to be Kerry's running mate. The 12th Amendment clearly states "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." The 22nd Amendment is equally clear that "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice." Bill Clinton served two full terms as president. Under the Constitution and federal law, he is ineligible to serve as president again. Therefore, he is ineligible to serve as vice-president. But it was a nice try.
Posted by antle @ 11:53 AM EST [Link]
~ THE SUNSET OF HIS LIFE: Reports are circulating that Ronald Reagan's health is declining and that the end could come in "weeks or months." It seems that at least once a year these rumors make the rounds, but at 93 and afflicted with Alzheimer's disease for at least a decade, eventually they will be true.
It will be a sad day for the free world when the greatest American president of my lifetime and arguably the second half of the 20th century passes on. But we will be left with the memories of his administration and his enduring legacy of a world free of the Soviet communist threat and a nation with a revitalized free enterprise system.
Read on.
UPDATE: President Reagan has died at his home in California. R.I.P.
Posted by antle @ 11:30 AM EST [Link]
~ BUSH HOLDING HIS BASE: If there were any fears that Dubya was losing his conservative base they've been answered by a new poll.
"[Republicans] like him, they trust him and they think he’s going to do the right thing," said Washington-based pollster Dave Winston. "That doesn’t mean they agree with him 100 percent of the time. Are there going to be differences? Of course there are."
Pundits have speculated that in recent weeks differences among Republicans over administration policies have become more severe and perhaps more fundamental, particularly regarding the War on Terror.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:15 AM EST [Link]
Friday, June 4, 2004 KERRYISMS NO BETTER THAN BUSHISMS: Although you wouldn't know it from ESR, editing is the hallmark of a good magazine. Eugene Volokh calls Slate to task for its regular Kerryisms/Bushisms feature.
What's more, Slate, like many magazines, is itself also largely about editing — taking the universe of commentary and cutting away the dross, plus taking a particular article and cutting it down to its readable, clear, focused essence. People who run magazines should want their readers to feel that the magazine is consistently well-edited.
It's remarkable, then, how bad the editing in the Kerryisms really is. The Kerryisms author strips away necessary material, not just the "pointless embellishments." In the process, he substantially changes the original author's meaning; this often leads to the result's conveying something the original author doesn't want to convey(something authors rightly hate). At the same time, the Kerryisms author often omits other edits he should be making. And he makes all these mistakes with a smug, self-satisfied tone that leads the errors to just be more annoying.
Volokh gives a good example involving Kerry's recent comments about Cuba and the American embargo.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:34 PM EST [Link]
~ IDIOT BRIGADE ONCE AGAIN ON THE MOVE: After failing to convince every town named "Fishkill" and the like to change their name to something more animal friendly, PETA has a new cause: trying to convince pet stores to stop selling pets.
Animal rights protestors staked out Petco Animal Supplies Inc.'s annual meeting in San Diego on Thursday to pressure the No. 2 U.S. pet supply chain to stop selling animals in its stores.
The shareholder proposal, brought by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, had asked Petco to study ending animal sales in its 670 stores.
The proposal won approval from less than 2 percent of shareholders, but PETA spokeswoman Christy Griffin said the organization planned "to keep bringing up this issue over and over until they get animals out of their stores."
I really, really hate the animal rights movement. I'm going to eat a steak for dinner tonight...stuffed with veal...and wrapped with baby harp seal meat.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 11:21 AM EST [Link]
~ IF THEY LOVE HIM SO MUCH WHY DON'T THEY VOTE FOR HIM?: Saul Singer had an interesting piece in yesterday's Jerusalem Post on why American Jews still aren't likely to pull the lever for Bush come November. Although the piece is Judeo-centric, Singer's thesis can be more widely applied: Bush may lose in November as a victim of his own success. People may believe the War on Terrorism is largely over so they can relax and get rid of their war president.
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 11:16 AM EST [Link]
Thursday, June 3, 2004 ANOTHER KERRY VOTE HE'D LIKE TO CHANGE IN RETROSPECT: California Yankee takes John Kerry to task for proclaiming that the U.S. isn't ready for bioterrorist attacks. What Kerry didn't tell you is that he was the only senator not to vote for the Project BioShield Act.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:06 PM EST [Link]
~ MORE STRIFE IN IRAN: SMCCDI reports that "[s]poradic clashes have been reported as taking place, at this time, in the Amir-Abad and Keshavarz areas located in the center of Tehran and near the university."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:04 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S ALWAYS THE JEWS, PART II: Jerusalem Post Op-ed editor Saul Singer is back from his rock star tour of the U.S. and he had an interesting piece in the Post a couple of days ago where he argues that 'neocon' has become a codeword for 'Jew'.
General Anthony Zinni says that George W. Bush and Richard Cheney were "captured" by "neocons" who drove them to war. Vanity Fair titled its longest article ever "Neoconned: The Path to War." And now retiring Senator Ernst Hollings has written that the only explanation for the war in Iraq is "Bush's policy to secure Israel." This is not subtle. It is anti-Semitism in one of its most classic and purest forms. Knowingly or not, it tears a page from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, once again "revealing" that the Jews control the world. Regardless of where one stands regarding American foreign policy, anti-Semitism must be recognized for what it is and condemned like any form of bigotry.
Hollings now claims that charging him with "anti-Jewish stereotyping or scapegoating is ridiculous." If so, one wonders why he did not mention the much larger number of Jewish advisers and cabinet officials who served in the Clinton White House, or the fact that he himself, though a Democrat, voted for the war in Iraq.
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 03:54 PM EST [Link]
~ OH YEAH...: I guess everyone knows by know that George Tenet resigned today as head of the CIA. My only response? Why did it take so long? He seemed a decent enough chap but considering the hammering he's been taking since September 11, 2001 you'd think he would have bailed a long time ago.
Despite all the flattering words that are being sent his way Tenet's greatest legacy will be a CIA that still doesn't seem to have changed much since the terrorist attacks.
Posted by steve @ 02:25 PM EST [Link]
~ HE NEVER DID CARE: Former Canadian PM Jean Chretien will be heading to Iran as a representative of a Calgary-based oil company and Stephan Hachemi isn't very happy. Hachemi is the son of Zahra Kazemi, the Iranian-born Canadian citizen who was murdered by the Iranian government one year ago while Chretien was prime minister.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:21 PM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: A few days ago I mentioned a new poll that showed Canadians weren't afraid of private health care. Today the Vancouver Province runs my thoughts on the subject. If you live in Vancouver go out and buy a copy (I think I'm on page A20). I'd post the text but CanWest is pretty anal about exclusivity.
Posted by steve @ 01:51 PM EST [Link]
~ KERRY'S HOUSE OF KETCHUP: What a week for Sean...first a rebuke by Glenn Reynolds and a new Kerry's House of Ketchup!
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:54 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, June 2, 2004 SELF-PROMO ALERT: Gay marriage has now been legal in Massachusetts since May 17. So has the sky fallen yet?
I have a piece running today in The American Spectator that tries to answer that question.
Posted by antle @ 11:07 PM EST [Link]
~ MODO WATCH: It's the beginning of another month so you know what that means: Another Monthly Maureen Dowd Watch. MoDo gave Catherine Seipp a lot to work with during May:
In her May 9 column, for instance, she scolded the vice president for "being more Jack Palance than Shane" (whatever that means), and Rumsfeld for resembling a Jack Nicholson character. But that's just Maureen at the movies, fluffy and inane as usual. More remarkable was the deep thinking she attempted at the beginning and end of last month.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:41 PM EST [Link]
~ SHOCKING DEVELOPMENT: SOME BEATLES SONGS WERE INFLUENCED BY DRUGS!: I know, you're as shocked as I am. Paul McMcCartney fessed up today that some of the Beatles songs were influenced by the band's use of drugs.
"A song like 'Got to Get You Into My Life,' that's directly about pot, although everyone missed it at the time," McCartney said.
"'Day Tripper,' that's one about acid (LSD). 'Lucy in the Sky,' (search) that's pretty obvious. There's others that make subtle hints about drugs, but, you know, it's easy to overestimate the influence of drugs on the Beatles' music."
Subtle? How about this one:
A little help from my friends
What would you think if I sang out of tune,
Would you stand up and walk out on me.
Lend me your ears and I’ll sing you a song,
And I’ll try not to sing out of key.
I get by with a little help from my friends,
I get high with a little help from my friends
Oh yeah, and the fact that they used to call marijuana 'tea'. Dude, we were totally out of the loop on that one! Despite my snarkiness, I'm a monstro-huge fan of The Beatles and Day Tripper is actually one of my favourite songs.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:34 PM EST [Link]
~ UMMM, THANKS MR. OBVIOUS: By know -- if you're Canadian -- you heard that two Liberal cabinet ministers ambushed Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper during a campaign swing through Toronto yesterday. An expert says that it's a sign of a campaign in trouble.
Allan Tupper, a political scientist from the University of British Columbia, said political parties usually send out young activists to do their heckling, not cabinet ministers.
"It's certainly not a tactic that one would presume is used by a party that's in the lead," he said.
Duh.
Read on. PM Paul Martin says that the ambush wasn't planned but Liberal campaign co-chair David Herle fessed up and said that more were likely to occur.
Posted by steve @ 07:25 PM EST [Link]
~ HE'S RIGHT: (Via The Corner) Sci-Fi author Ray Bradbury doesn't have many kind things to say about Michael Moore.
Posted by steve @ 03:28 PM EST [Link]
~ GOOD SHIP LOLLIPOP GOING DOWN: It's a fact that if the Liberal Party wants to win an election, they must win Ontario and a huge chunk of Quebec. It's also their Achilles Heel. According to a poll released by the Toronto Sun this morning, Liberal support in Ontario is sliding.
Paul Martin's campaign ship is taking on water in Lake Ontario, scuttled by Dalton McGuinty's budget and plunging confidence in his own leadership, a Sun Media poll suggests. The poll of more than 3,100 Canadians conducted by Leger Marketing -- the largest survey of voter sentiment to date -- shows trust in Martin sinking to just 27%, down from 39% two months ago.
The Sun Media/ Leger poll puts Grit support at 35% nationally, with the Conservatives at 30% and the NDP at 17%. Quebec's BQ party has 12% support, with the Green Party trailing at 5%.
In Ontario the race is even tighter, with the Liberals pegged at 39% backing and the Conservatives at 37%.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:25 PM EST [Link]
~ STUPID ONCE. STUPID TWICE: NDP Leader Jack Layton once again stated that PM Paul Martin was responsible for the deaths of some homeless people in Canada.
But Layton sought to qualify the comments, which drew criticism even from some of his own party members, by saying that politicians at all levels –and Canadians in general – shared some of the blame.
"Canada as a whole has not responded to the affordable housing crisis," Layton told a CBC forum in Vancouver on Wednesday night.
Apparently the CBC travelled in time to quote Layton. I was reading the Toronto Sun last week and learned that Layton once told a reporter that it was necessary to spend $500 million a year for five years in order to solve half of Toronto's homeless problem. Read that again if the number didn't stagger you. Meanwhile, Layton had much problem leaving Toronto City Council with a nice little sack of cash. If he was that worried about the plight of the homeless, he'd have donated it to a shelter.
Memo to New Democrats: I know you elected him your leader only last year and he's in the midst of an election campaign, but seriously, think about a new leader as quickly as you can. Otherwise you'll find out what non-party status means over the long-term.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:23 PM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: I have a piece today in the Kitchener-Waterloo Record's Insight page concerning Stephen Harper's promise to pump more money into the Canadian Armed Forces. I laud Harper for recognizing more money is needed but argue that it won't solve the most serious problems facing the military. If you live in Kitchener-Waterloo pick up a copy of the paper, if not, read it by clicking "More"
[more]
Posted by steve @ 02:50 PM EST [Link]
~ THE THIRD RAIL IS NO LONGER UNTOUCHABLE: As sacrosanct as Social Security is in the United States, medicare in Canada is that much more. Well, apparently not. A poll was released Monday which suggests over half of Canadians aren't opposed to a private parallel health care system in Canada.
The poll found 51% favour a two-tier system, with support highest in Quebec, at 68%, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan, the birthplace of medicare, at 57%.
Michel Kelly-Gagnon of the Montreal Economic Institute, which commissioned the poll by Leger Marketing, said it is evidence the parties should be debating two-tier medicine.
"This is really in Canadian politics the ultimate taboo," Mr. Kelly-Gagnon said.
"It has to be broken ... If we're going to decide as a nation not to allow for a private, parallel system, so be it, but at least let it be done in a rational, objective debate where people pull out actual arguments, and not some sort of bogeyman about the two-tier system."
Unfortunately no political party would ever actually discuss a parallel system during an election campaign.
Read on.
[Update - 3:13pm] It seems you can't find the story anymore so here's a link to the institute's page on their poll.
Posted by steve @ 03:04 AM EST [Link]
~ NEXT THEY'LL HAVE TO CHANGE RELIGIONS FOR A SEMESTER: The University of Texas is considering requiring students to study another culture for a semester and not surprisingly some people aren't too pleased.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:58 AM EST [Link]
~ JOHN KERRY: INSANE: I've campaigned with more than a few politicians during election campaigns and the first lesson you learn is that when you bump into a very hostile voter, the only thing you should do is extricate yourself as quickly and painlessly as possible. A lesson that John Kerry didn't apparently learn.
Ted Sampley, a former Green Beret who served two full tours in Vietnam, spotted Kerry and his Secret Service detail at about 9:00 a.m. Monday morning at the Wall. Sampley walked up to Kerry, extended his hand and said, "Senator, I am Ted Sampley, the head of Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, and I am here to escort you away from the Wall because you do not belong here."
At that point a Secret Service officer told Sampley to back away from Kerry. Sampley moved about 6 feet away and opened his jacket to reveal a HANOI JOHN T-shirt.
Kerry then began talking to a group of schoolchildren. Sampley then showed the T-shirt to the children and said, "Kerry does not belong at the Wall because he betrayed the brave soldiers who fought in Vietnam."
Just then Kerry - in front of the school children, other visitors and Secret Service agents - brazenly 'flashed the bird' at Sampley and then yelled out to everyone, "Sampley is a felon!"
I'm not saying what Sampley did was appropriate -- making political statements at war memorials is always a dicey proposition -- but what Kerry did was stupid beyond measure.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:05 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, June 1, 2004 WORK DAY: Sorry for the lack of blogging -- perhaps the most commonly used phrase on this blog in the past two weeks. Today is work day for me as I have a few articles and several resumes to send out. Blogging and publishing a magazine is all well and good but I like to eat as well. See you later tonight.
Posted by steve @ 03:08 PM EST [Link]
~ IRAQ HAS NEW PRESIDENT: The Iraqi Governing Council today chose Ghazi Mashal Ajil al-Yawer as Iraq's new president. Nope, I don't know a damned thing about him outside of the fact he's a Sunni Muslim and a civil engineer. He does seem to be respected by both Sunnis and Shias so perhaps he's the best man possible for the gig.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:32 AM EST [Link]
~ CARNIVAL OF THE CANUCKS #20: A new Carnival of the Canucks has arrived and wouldn't you know it contains a link to a blog article that has people declaring Enter Stage Right is racist. Oh well.
For the record we're neither "deranged" nor racists. We're just conservatives and you may disagree with us but save the threats tough guys.
Read on.
[Musings Archive Index] [Back to New Musings]
