Mailvox: saluting WND

JM thinks it's the right place to write:

As a retired Marine who served in almost every corner of the globe during my two decades, a man who saw the deliberate insidious socialization of our education system before my kids were even in school, and has been expecting the "Manchurian Candidate" since I first read the book, I am rather picky in my choice of news sources....

You could not find a better journal to write for; you obviously are not told what to write or to slant your writing, and most of your peers on board are in the same boat. I don't always agree with you, but I never have yet found factual reason to dispute you, only opinion-oriented issue. WND is the only place I can go where I can read only fact-based news, or I can wander into the myopia of the liberal side of things and get a feel for what the liars are publishing today.

This is among the first journals I've ever had the opportunity to take as a news source that I can expect to find facts, and opinions that are supported by the facts and the events that surround them. Joe Farah has established a new paradigm and someday, he will be noted for it.

Joe always insists that his is not a new paradigm, but rather a return to an old one. Regardless, I admire what he has done even if I would have done it rather differently. And, one must conclude, less successfully. Possibly the best thing about Farah is that he simply does not possess the contempt for the taste of the masses that pervades so much of the media and the intelligentsia.

Comments ()

Time will tell

Bernanke and company don't have the gold standard to blame this time around:

There are "troubling similarities" between the US President's actions since taking office and those which in the 1930s sent the US and much of the world spiralling into the worst economic collapse in recorded history, says the new pamphlet, published by the Institute of Economic Affairs. In particular, the authors, economists Charles Rowley of George Mason University and Nathanael Smith of the Locke Institute, claim that the White House's plans to pour hundreds of billions of dollars of cash into the economy will undermine it in the long run....

The study represents a challenge to the widely held view that Keynesian fiscal policies helped the US recover from the Depression which started in the early 1930s.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that according to those widely held views, neither the financial crisis nor a continued depression next year is even supposed to be possible. If, as they insist, the gold standard was responsible, then how are such similar results even theoretically possible in its absence?

Obama and the Congress are making things worse, of course, but they can't possibly be blamed for next year's economic downturn. That's been in the cards for years, if not decades. My primary concern isn't the extended downturn itself, but rather the state's customary resort to war as a distraction for an angry populace. For those interested, the IEA paper, "Economic Contractions in the United States:
A Failure of Government", is available for download in PDF format.

Comments ()

WND column

Fall of a Red Czar

I am occasionally asked why I would ever choose to write for WorldNetDaily. I am, after all, a columnist who has been nationally syndicated by Chronicle Features and Universal Press Syndicate. My scribblings have appeared in newspapers ranging from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and the Boston Globe to Pravda and the North Bay Nugget. I was one of the first St. Paul Pioneer Press columnists to be syndicated in the paper's 150-year history, and I'm the only one who was ever syndicated twice, for two different columns. I'm considering either a gardening or a women's shoes column just so I can go for the trifecta. I don't know anything about either subject, but since Paul Krugman has an economics column, that can't possibly be a problem.

Comments ()

A little less than that, actually

It's always funny to see a fat old dog attempt to perform a new trick:

I don't travel in circles where people say, `I have faith, I believe this in my heart, and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith.' That's just a long-winded religious way to say `Shut up' or another two words that the FCC likes less. But all obscenity is less insulting than `How I was brought up and my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you could ever say or do.'

Forget my upbringing and my imaginary friends. The lingering odor of the dried sweat in the socks I wore to the gym last week means more to me than anything Penn Jillette or any other comedian moonlighting as a philosopher could ever say or do. And why would anyone possibly care what one particular collection of atoms might happen to "think" anyhow, assuming, of course, that "thinking" even means anything at all given the absence of scientific evidence for material consciousness.

My dear atheists, you desperately need to find some better champions. The Sam Harris debacle should have taught you the intrinsic danger of relying upon comedians. Now, if you don't mind a little helpful advice, I suggest not settling for the first Asperger's victim to start yapping away about his personal unhappiness with history and human society and finding someone who is at least capable of reading a book or ten. Speaking of which, I read with some amusement Victor Stenger's comment in his latest book: "Day and other anti-atheists refuse to accept the new atheist argument that the communists did not commit their crimes in the name of atheism.”

Well, yes, that's quite true. We do refuse to accept it. What Mr. Stenger unaccountably fails to mention is that we do so on the perfectly rational basis of it being an absolutely stupid argument that is obviously and verifiably false and is not accepted in any other context. Second, it would not matter in the least if the atheist communists did not commit their crimes in the name of either communism or atheism, as the pertinent and inescapable fact is that they committed those crimes. Third, as it happens, it is undeniable that statistical and documentary evidence alike shows that both their atheism and their communism played important roles in their decisions to commit those crimes.

UPDATE - It's worth noting that anti-semitism is not merely left-wing, the concept, which is specific, ethnic, and distinct from generic religion-based Jew-hating, was literally invented by an atheist:

As for anti-Semitism, which is more specific than mere Jew hatred, it's simply not true to say that it was invented by the political right. It was invented by Wilhelm Marr, a German radical, atheist and leftist. He coined the word, and concept, in his 1879 tract The Way to Victory of Germanicism over Judaism (Der Weg zum Siege des Germanentums über das Judentum). Unlike the old-fashioned Judenhass — Jew hatred — anti-Semitism was modern and scientific, unconcerned with theology. It was progressive! Indeed, Marr hated assimilated Jews more than orthodox ones.

Comments ()

A whiny little communist

My dear Mr. Jones, it may be vicious, but it's not a smear when they're quoting you directly!

"I am resigning my post at the Council on Environmental Quality, effective today. On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.

Never write anything that you don't understand can and will be used against you. The reason I am always careful to articulate my more controversial opinions is that I know perfectly well that they'll eventually be appearing on Wikipedia or a blog somewhere. Of course, because I know what I'm doing, my critics are usually forced to avoid printing the direct quotes because those never sound anywhere nearly as bad as the inaccurate and exaggerated summaries.

Jones, on the other hand, clearly didn't. The direct quotes were damning, which is why he had no choice but to resign.

Comments ()

Obama voters vs WND

Megan Mcardle, who voted for Obama, likes the idea of boycotting the largest independent right-wing news site:

This strikes me as a very good idea. If the right ever wants to get back in power, it needs to start policing its lunatic fringe.

You'd think a woman who calls herself an "econoblogger" would be capable of doing basic math. I have no idea why anyone pays her any attention whatsoever, considering how reliably clueless she is about politics and economics alike. Her analysis is on the level of those who believe that the Republican Party must abandon social conservatives order to seek the support of one-fourth that many social moderates. Rockefeller Republicanism isn't a viable political strategy, it's little more than evidence of historical ignorance and innumeracy. It's precisely the same incompetent strategery that advises embracing John McCain and rejecting Sarah Palin. And it's the same sort of ideological "policing" that saw the Republican Party reject the only presidential candidate who foresaw the financial crisis and the failure of the occupation in Afghanistan, Ron Paul.

Commenters there have already pointed out the obvious: there is zero evidence that an ideological "lunatic fringe" harms the mass appeal of any political movement. And there is actually a fair amount of evidence to suggest that a hard-core ideological element tends to help the core cause by making the base look like a more reasonable and moderate compromise. As William F. Buckley learned to his obvious chagrin, ban the Birchers and the next thing that happens is you're the one labled a crypto-Nazi.

As for the boycott, does anyone seriously believe that seeing some Obama voters and Republican squishes pointing fingers at WND in an attempt to curry favor with the moderate Left is going to harm it in the slightest? Considering how unpopular the present Republican leadership is with the Republican Party base already, it's more likely to underline the independence of WND and assist its continued ascendance on the Right.

Comments ()

Liberal Fascism - The Final Exam

This is the final 25-question test. I would like to thank everyone who participated, especially those 150 or so stalwarts who persevered through what proved to be a particularly brutal winnowing process from the 5,000 or so who took the first quiz on the Introduction. This method of book study obviously isn't for everyone, but I think it is quite safe to say that if you managed to participate throughout the 12 weeks and pass the final, you probably now know the contents of the text better than anyone except Jonah Goldberg himself.

I'll be posting my post-study review of the book here later today; it might be interesting to contrast that with my initial review, in which I gave the book an 8/10 rating. But, I doubt those who participated throughout will likely disagree that a close and detailed reading of the book will force one to conclude that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. This is not a criticism nor does it detract in the slightest from the importance of the book, it is merely an observation based on reading through the book three times.

In any event, I hope that those who participated found this to be a worthwhile exercise; as before, my own level of participation in the discussion fell well short of my intentions. Fortunately, there's seldom a shortage of intelligent regulars here willing to pick up the slack.

Comments ()

Correction

Conservatives back Obama on Afghanistan

Prominent conservative foreign policy thinkers and activists who backed the Iraq war are circulating a letter to President Obama supporting his engagement in Afghanistan against criticism from left and right, and urging him to stay the course.

The letter responds in part to a widely-circulated column by conservative columnist George Will, headed "Time to Get Out of Afghanistan." The letter is a mark of the longstanding rift in conservative foreign policy circles on the use of American power abroad, and it echoes divisions on the right over the Iraq war. The letter quotes President Obama at length and approvingly.

The headline would be more accurately titled "Fake Conservatives back Obama on Afghanistan and Anywhere Else He Wants to Send Troops". Look at the list! Kristol... Podhoretz... it's the collection of mediocre, second-generation neo-conservatives. The conservative movement has destroyed itself by permitting these charlatans to infiltrate and take over the commanding heights of the so-called conservative media. And if Obama wins a second term, don't be surprised if they suddenly morph into neo-liberals.

Comments ()

Worse than stressed

If we're in an economic recovery, why are things going worse than the stress test's adverse scenario? Calculated Risk has the details - with graphs!

This is a quarterly forecast: the Unemployment Rate for Q3 is an average of July and August (rounded to 9.6%), and will probably move higher. Once again, the unemployment rate is already higher than the "more adverse" scenario. Note also that the unemployment rate has already exceeded the peak of the "baseline scenario".

U3 is 9.7 and U6 is 16.8. Not good times.

Comments ()

VPFL rosters

The draft is on Sunday and I'll be sending out the league registration info today, so send me the names of your three keepers before Saturday midnight. You don't have to keep anyone, but three is the most you can keep. I'm leaning towards Aaron Rodgers, Greg Jennings and Clinton Portis myself, but I haven't made up my mind yet.

Greenfield Grizzlies - (WB, let us know if you're in....)
Bernard Berrian (Min - WR)
Kerry Collins (Ten - QB)
Braylon Edwards (Cle - WR)
Jeff Garcia (Oak - QB)
Marvin Harrison (Ind - WR)
Jamal Lewis (Cle - RB)
Greg Olsen (Chi - TE)
Pierre Thomas (NO - RB)
Kevin Walter (Hou - WR)
LenDale White (Ten - RB)
Carnell Williams (TB - RB)
Matt Prater (Den - K)
Buffalo (Buf - DEF)
Philadelphia (Phi - DEF)
Pittsburgh (Pit - DEF)

Clay - Alamo City Spartans
Joseph Addai
Cedric Benson
Tom Brady
Plaxico Burress
Reggie Bush
Lee Evans
Andre Johnson
Eli Manning
Heath Miller
Santana Moss
Dominic Rhodes
LaDainian Tomlinson
Jason Witten
Robbie Gould
Baltimore DEF

Cynical Black Mouth Curs
Matt Cassel
Jay Cutler
Matt Forte
Maurice Jones-Drew
Julius Jones
Dustin Keller
Brandon Lloyd
Robert Meachem
Muhsin Muhammad
Antwaan Randle El
Tony Romo
Roy Williams
John Carney
Green Bay DEF
New York Jets DEF

Mattos - Judean Front

Kevin Boss
Dwayne Bowe
Drew Brees
John Carlson
Patrick Crayton
Brett Favre
Calvin Johnson
Willis McGahee
Randy Moss
Kevin Smith
Jonathan Stewart
Michael Turner
Rob Bironas
Jacksonville DEF
Minnesota DEF

Gadspeed - Masonville Marauders
Ronnie Brown (Mia - RB)
Laveranues Coles (Cin - WR)
Warrick Dunn (TB - RB)
Antonio Gates (SD - TE)
Peyton Hillis (Den - RB)
Domenik Hixon (NYG - WR)
T.J. Houshmandzadeh (Sea - WR)
Vincent Jackson (SD - WR)
Darren McFadden (Oak - RB)
Mewelde Moore (Pit - RB)
Philip Rivers (SD - QB)
Amani Toomer (KC - WR)
DeAngelo Williams (Car - RB)
Stephen Gostkowski (NE - K)
Dallas (Dal - DEF)

InklingStar - Valders Valkyries
Marion Barber (Dal - RB)
Anquan Boldin (Ari - WR)
Isaac Bruce (SF - WR)
Antonio Bryant (TB - WR)
Jason Campbell (Was - QB)
Chris Cooley (Was - TE)
Owen Daniels (Hou - TE)
Shaun Hill (SF - QB)
Steven Jackson (StL - RB)
Sammy Morris (NE - RB)
Chad Ochocinco (Cin - WR)
Steve Smith (Car - WR)
Nick Folk (Dal - K)
Neil Rackers (Ari - K)
Chicago DEF

PeterAnthony - Silver Spooners
Tatum Bell (Den - RB)
Dallas Clark (Ind - TE)
Jerricho Cotchery (NYJ - WR)
Michael Jenkins (Atl - WR)
Marshawn Lynch (Buf - RB)
Donovan McNabb (Phi - QB)
Kyle Orton (Den - QB)
Terrell Owens (Buf - WR)
Adrian Peterson (Min - RB)
Ben Roethlisberger (Pit - QB)
Eddie Royal (Den - WR)
Wes Welker (NE - WR)
Ricky Williams (Mia - RB)
Jason Elam (Atl - K)
Tampa Bay DEF

SoonMoon - Winston Reverends
Marques Colston (NO - WR)
Frank Gore (SF - RB)
Tim Hightower (Ari - RB)
Torry Holt (Jac - WR)
Larry Johnson (KC - RB)
Peyton Manning (Ind - QB)
Brandon Marshall (Den - WR)
Zach Miller (Oak - TE)
Matt Schaub (Hou - QB)
Tony Scheffler (Den - TE)
Steve Slaton (Hou - RB)
Chester Taylor (Min - RB)
Reggie Wayne (Ind - WR)
Adam vinatieri (Ind-K)
Indy DEF

Comments ()

Two bad wars

The neoconservative Republicans have been trying to push both the Afghani and Iraqi occupations as necessary "good" wars in the national interest. The supposedly antiwar Democrats, on the other hand, tried to distinguish between the "good war" in Afghanistan and the "bad war" in Iraq. The Democrats had it half right; neither war was necessary although taking out the Taliban was justified by virtue of their public declarations of war on the United States. But, there was never any justification for the so-called national building that excused eight and six years of military occupation.

Now that George Will has voiced Republican doubts about the ongoing wisdom of attempting to maintain a post-war peace in Afghanistan that is bloodier than the actual war, the usual suspects are out in full throat attempting to decry his belated recognition that continued occupation of foreign countries is detrimental to American interests. Here is one particularly egregious example quoted on NRO:

Here is a disturbing fact to ponder: If George Will were commander in chief, we would, under his leadership, have begun and lost two wars of enormous consequence. The damage to America — militarily, geopolitically, and morally — would be staggering. The boon to militant Islam — militarily, geopolitically, and in terms of morale — would be incalculable. Yet nowhere in his most recent column does Will even begin to grapple with what surrender in Afghanistan would mean — to that country, to Pakistan, to jihadists around the world, to confidence in America’s word and will, and to our national-security interests. And while Afghanistan, like Iraq, is a very difficult undertaking, declaring defeat at this stage is unwarranted and terribly unwise. If General David Petraeus thinks the task is hopeless, then I will take a hard second look at the war. But if George Will declares it hopeless, I will simply take a hard second look at his record.

Mr. Will has earned the reputation as one of the finest columnists alive, and one of the better ones our country has ever produced. I have admired him in the past, and I learn from him still. But on Iraq and Afghanistan, he has been wrong, unreliable, and unsteady.... Now, like then, America needs spirited realists, not defeatists. We need individuals who believe a nation must be willing to fight for what is right even when it is hard. We need people who are going to resist the temptation to eagerly support war at the outset and then prematurely give up on it. What we need, in other words, is what George Frederick Will once was.

This is blather, sheer ad hominem blather. The staggering damage to America and the incalculable boon to militant Islam was made the moment that it was decided to stay in Afghanistan and Iraq rather than smash the offending regimes and return home. Historically and militarily ignorant individuals like Mr. Wehner and Mr. Kristol fail to recognize that Osama bin Laden's entire strategy was baiting the West into the sort of war that it could not win. The British Empire couldn't win this type of war, the Soviet Union couldn't win it, and the United States will not win it either.

To argue the necessity of a bankrupt republic's military occupation of two foreign nations is irresponsible in the extreme. The fact that George Will is late in recognizing the realistic limits of military power does not mean that these limits do not exist. And no general is ever going to kill his career by announcing that the situation is hopeless, especially when he has complete air supremacy, sea supremacy, and a numerical advantage.

Bill Kristol's newfound love for argument about national security is more than a little ironic, considering that neither he nor the rest of the neoconservatives slavering for war with Iran, Pakistan, and Russia as well as Afghanistan and Iraq have ever bothered to engage in anything approaching a rational argument about it in the past. Back when the general perception was that things were going well, Kristol preferred action to talking about the obvious long-term strategic problems. Now that things are going poorly and those strategic problems are becoming obvious to everyone, Kristol suddenly wants to talk rather than act.

America and its allies are going to end their occupations and withdraw, sooner or later. If the dwindling number of those who support the ongoing wars think that the ramifications of such a withdrawal are negative if America chooses to withdraw now, they should consider how negative they will be if America is forced to withdraw instead. The longer that American troops are forced to continue their pointless occupations, the more likely it is that their retreat will be a forced one. An immediate end to the occupations is definitely in the national interest of the American people.

Comments ()

Fed doubletalk

Fed minutes: officials saw recession's end in Aug

"With the downside risks to the economic outlook now considerably reduced, but the economic recovery likely to be damped" Fed policymakers agreed that it didn't need to either expand or cut back those programs.

They didn't see it coming, they didn't recognize it for the first six months, but now they're able to spot the moment that it ends... and yet the contracyclical Keynesian measures still remain in place. Perhaps you believe that THIS TIME they've got it right. I'm a little more skeptical.

Comments ()

Stay home September 8th

While it would be much better not to put them on the Yellow Bus of Doom at all, I encourage parents of public schoolchildren to refuse to subject them to this melodramatic bit of Orwellian weirdness:

President Obama’s Address to Students Across America September 8, 2009 PreK-6 Menu of Classroom Activities: President Obama’s Address to Students Across America

Before the Speech:
• Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama and motivate students by asking the following questions:
Who is the President of the United States?
What do you think it takes to be President?
To whom do you think the President is going to be speaking?
Why do you think he wants to speak to you?
What do you think he will say to you?
• Teachers can ask students to imagine being the President delivering a speech to all of the students in the United States. What would you tell students? What can students do to help in our schools? Teachers can chart ideas about what they would say.
• Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?

During the Speech:
• As the President speaks, teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful. Students could use a note-taking graphic organizer such as a Cluster Web, or students could record their thoughts on sticky notes. Younger children can draw pictures and write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:
What is the President trying to tell me?
What is the President asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?
• Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about: What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?

Obama has transformed from amusingly incompetent evil to downright creepy with this overt attempt to further build his cult of personality. Yes, please do explain why is it important that children listen to their masterselected officials. And writing down "personally meaningful" phrases? In the immortal words of John McEnroe, "you cannot be serious!" But, on the positive side, it would be hard to imagine a better demonstration of the infantilization of the American Left.

Comments ()

A useful proto-panic

This is bizarre, especially given the complete lack of scientific evidence that swine flu is any more dangerous than any other flu. But, as Rahm Emanuel says, no would-be dictator ever wants to waste a pandemiccrisis:

A "pandemic response bill" currently making its way through the Massachusetts state legislature would allow authorities to forcefully quarantine citizens in the event of a health emergency, compel health providers to vaccinate citizens, authorize forceful entry into private dwellings and destruction of citizen property and impose fines on citizens for noncompliance.

If citizens refuse to comply with isolation or quarantine orders in the event of a health emergency, they may be imprisoned for up to 30 days and fined $1,000 per day that the violation continues.

It's interesting to see the increasing multitude of factors that now trump the Constitutional rights of Americans. Do Americans still believe they live in the "most free country on Earth"? It is rapidly becoming clear that they do not.

Comments ()

The missing line

Mish uncharacteristically omits to connect one important pair of dots while citing more support for the deflationary scenario:

Eastern Europe, Spain and Ireland are now all experiencing the beginning of deflation. We believe that we will see much more deflation to come, which will have broad ramifications across the European banking sector. The periphery countries are net debtors, and the rest of Europe is the net creditor. When a debtor can't pay, the creditor suffers. Germany, France and others will need to cope with recapitalizing the periphery and Spain. In the words of Plautus, "I am a rich man as long as I don't pay my creditors." A deflationary spiral means that most of the debt will need to be written off, and the creditors will have to absorb the losses.

Spain is not the only country facing deflation. It is a problem for the entire European periphery. Ireland, for example, has the highest rate of deflation in the world. Prices in Ireland are falling at an annual rate of 5.9%, well ahead of the drops in other countries - only Thailand, at 4.4%, comes even close.

That important question is: what did Spain, Ireland, and Eastern Europe all have in common. The answer, unfortunately for the green shoots-spotting crowd in the USA, is "housing booms". As crazy as the US housing bubble was, the Spanish, Irish, UK, and Estonian bubbles were all even more out of hand. Germany, France, and Austria, on the other hand, saw no bubbles and therefore should be relatively well-positioned to the extent that they are not exposed to the deleveraging taking place elsewhere.

Comments ()

So, give it back

If Hawaii's pagan abos want to return to living in grass huts, I see no reason why they shouldn't be permitted to do so. They have the same right of self-determination that everyone else does. Let them reclaim their queen, their sovereignty, and their old way of life. But then, don't permit them to immigrate to the mainland when they belatedly realize that they miss that whole haole "technology" thing either:

* The last day of school has long been unofficially designated "Beat Haole Day," with white students singled out for harassment and violence. (Haole — pronounced how-lee — is slang for a foreigner, usually white, and sometimes is used as a racial slur.)
* A non-Native Hawaiian student who challenged the Hawaiian-preference admission policy at a wealthy private school received a $7 million settlement this year.
* A 12-year-old white girl new to Hawaii from New York City needed 10 surgical staples to close a gash in her head incurred when she was beaten in 2007 by a Native Hawaiian girl who called her a "fucking haole."
* A vocal segment of Native Hawaiians is pushing for independence to end the "prolonged occupation" by the United States and governance by natives.
* Demonstrators shouting racial epithets at whites disrupted a statehood celebration in 2006.

Needless to say, none of these would qualify as "hate-crimes", since they're not directed at anyone on the official victims list. The reality is that very few minorities actually believe in equality or diversity or multiculturalism; for the most part, they simply make use of those ideological concepts in order to obtain more government largesse. Only those who happen to be in the sizable majority have the luxury of feigning belief in the equality myths. It's ironic, of course, that those who understand pagan abos don't like seeing their lands invaded by European Christians are completely incapable of understanding that the same holds true for Scandinavian-American Lutherans being invaded by African Muslims. I wonder if we'll be able to convince the Hawaiians to take Obama with them when they depart the Union? After all, he was born there, right?

As evidence that the equality myth was always about obtaining power, not equality, I give you this woman's insane demand for equality through inequal distribution:

If as many women as men use the loo in any given public place, and they take longer over the deed, we should be allocated more lavatories. In Britain, however, the rule remains that the number of appliances in women's loos must equal those in men's.

Now that is the true voice of the "equality" advocate. Meanwhile, the rational observer wonders how a property-owners decision regarding the number of restrooms could possibly be considered a legitimate concern for the national government.

Comments ()