Saturday, December 3, 2005
Re: Lawn Ornament no More
Posted by on 12.3.05 @ 6:36PM
Larry: Sure. Let's meet at the nearest track.
A Lawn Ornament No More
Posted by on 12.3.05 @ 3:57PM
Give me a ride over Christmas, Jed? Although I'd think it'd be frustrating having a car like that in northern Virginia.
No More a Lawn Ornament
Posted by on 12.3.05 @ 9:24AM
Yes, somehow -- as if by magic, and surely not by driving an unregistered car - my Mustang Cobra accrued the mileage required to overcome the idiotic DEQ computer code and has passed Virginia emissions testing. It is now street-legal. And I am ready to turn it loose, all 390 horsepower, six speeds and wide, low-profile tires. Now all I need to do is win the SueBee honey contest. The prize is a street-legal version of Richard Petty's "Superbird." Beau and Luke Duke? Amateurs. Unranked amateurs.
Friday, December 2, 2005
Pooty-Poot's SAMs
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 7:58PM
There aren't many things that make our fly guys pause, but the threat of the "double-digit" SAMs -- surface to air missiles -- are right at the top of the list. These Russian-made systems are enough to deny all but stealth aircraft the ability to take out whatever they're defending.
Now, ready for the good news? Russia, which is helping Iran build its nuclear facilities and thus giving essential support to its nuclear weapons program, has agreed to sell its TOR-M1 double-digit SAM system to Iran. The TOR is comprised of the SA-15 "Gauntlet" surface to air missile mounted on a large tracked vehicle. It can fire on the move and can defeat not only aircraft but missiles and precision-guided munitions. It's missiles can take 30-g turns, which means you ain't gonna out-turn it in any manned aircraft.
Bad Vlad Putin, who the prez once said was "a man with whom I can do business," is giving Israel the business. When Iran gets the double-digit SAMs, Israel -- lacking stealthy aircraft -- won't be able to attack Iran's nuclear weapons facilities with any likelihood of success. Which will leave us with the option of doing it ourselves or allowing Iran to achieve its nuclear ambitions.
All those who think we shouldn't take what the Brits call "active measures" to stop Iran from getting the TOR M-1, please go sit in a corner until you're called on again.
HRC & Recently Profiled Arkansas Abortionist
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 3:28PM
According to this article at LifeSiteNews.com, the Arkansas abortionist the Los Angeles Times profiled the other day, William F. Harrison, has claimed Hillary Clinton as a former patient. In an Amazon.com review of Bill Clinton's autobiography, Harrison wrote: "I have known Bill and Hillary Clinton personally since they both moved to Fayetteville to teach at the University of Arkansas law school in the early 1970s. I met Hillary first as her physician and she soon introduced me to her then boyfriend, Bill."
Seuss vs. McCain
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 2:25PM
Senator John McCain has made the NYT best-seller list again. Except this go around, as PW Daily reports, he has a children’s best-seller on his hands. Character Is Destiny is the
Or perhaps we are seeing the beginnings of a new Rove-like campaign tool -- begin catering to the 14 - 17 year-olds now, three years out from the next presidential election. By 2008, a majority of those readers will be of voting age.
Bullying Lamar
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 1:40PM
The Democratic Party is going after Lamar Outdoor Advertising for not accepting its "Shame On You, Jean Schmidt" billboards. Yes, this is the foremost concern of the out-of-power party in America: the business decision of a private company over a couple billboards in Ohio.
TAS readers may recognize this incident as similar to some Pennsylvania conservatives' problems in getting Lamar to carry their billboards. Apparently, Lamar's prudence runs both ways. Prudence is a key word here -- true censorship, as traditionally understood, involves an outside imposition of authority. Lamar's decision is akin to a private newspaper declining to run abortion ads. No one told them not to -- it's just the sort of business they'd rather not conduct.
San Francisco Democrat
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 1:24PM
How serious is Hillary about 2008? Plenty, if this San Francisco Chronicle report is on target. All of it centers on her pending appearance December 20 at "a benefit for the Bar Association of San Francisco's charitable programs." Before 3,000 at the Masonic Auditorium, she'll chat with Jane Pauley, in an informal format that will showcase her "warmth and sense of personality."
Notes conservative Bill Whalen: "She's avoiding a speech because when she does that, she often goes into a mode that can best be described as 'ex-wife from hell' " -- which the Chronicle characterizes as "a strident, formal tone that particularly rankles male voters."
One thing Hillary doesn't want to do, Whalen tells the Chronicle, is "get into a conversation about the troops, about the impassioned San Francisco-Cindy Sheehan view" on the war in Iraq. If she can pull that off, she's home free.
Re: Back to Alito
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 10:59AM
Jed, Postie Charles Babington reported that the Specter meeting is a "sign of Republican nervousness." Sen. Specter's a party man when it's convenient for the party's opponents.
Spending
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 10:56AM
Sen. Bill Frist, in his economic briefing, just said the Senate will focus on spending "like a laser beam." With fiscally responsible Republicans like these (yes, Frist called the budget "fiscally responsible"), who needs Democrats?
Re: New Jobs Numbers
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 10:49AM
I (temporarily) withdraw carping about the White House's PR effort: the President is scheduled to celebrate the strong economic performance in the Rose Garden at 10:45 -- in 10 minutes (our clock is fast).
Back to Alito
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 10:28AM
Having had their ears pinned back on Iraq by the president's speech at the Naval Academy, the Dems are oscillating back to the only other issue they care about: abortion. In this case, the cause du jour is the 17-page memo on Roe that Judge Alito wrote in 1985. Why, thunders Ted Kennedy, didn't you mention this when you answered the Judiciary Committee's questionnaire?
Alito's memo outlined a strategy to whittle away at Roe instead of attacking it head-on. Which, regardless of anyone's strategy, is the likely course of events. State after state will, as the New Hampshire parental notification law did, take pieces of the abortion issue and return it to the states' legislative processes. More and more of them are likely to be upheld by the Roberts court, and almost assuredly would were Judge Alito to become Justice Alito. Which is why the pressure on the Dems to filibuster the nomination is growing daily.
Today, Sen. Specter has called Alito to a meeting, after which Specter plans to speak to reporters. This may be a big nothing, or it could be Specter's first turn against Alito. Specter can take cover behind the omission of the memo Kennedy rails about, and if he does choose to raise concerns about Alito's full disclosure, this could be a sign of bigger troubles to come. Anyone who believes Specter is on board with the administration, or with Alito, is betting on the wrong horse.
New Jobs Numbers
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 9:59AM
The Labor Department reported this morning that American payrolls grew by 215,000 jobs and unemployment held steady at 5 percent. Today would be a great day for a good-economic-news White House PR offensive. For more on the baseless economic pessimism, see TAS economic editor Brian S. Wesbury's column in the Wall Street Journal. Daniel Henninger makes similar, though more general, points about the White House's failure to communicate effectively.
A Favorite Author
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 9:38AM
Though two letter writers in today's Reader Mail may give you a different impression, our Tom Bethell is very widely admired. Check out Sam Karnick's gushing comments, which he's posted on his (and Jay Homnick and Hunter Baker's) excellent Reform Club site.
'Career' Is Code Word for Liberal Democrat
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 8:47AM
The Washington Post has outdone itself in disingenuous reporting. Today's front page, above-the-fold headline "Justice Staff Saw Texas Districting as Illegal" is the one of the most agenda driven news stories of the year. Dan Eggen only finds news at the Justice Department when career employees complain about decisions made by their political appointee superiors. Funny, these stories never appeared when the Clintons were in the WH and Janet Reno was opening day-care centers and stopping FBI criminal agents from talking to the intelligence folks who could have clued them into terrorist plots. Why? Because the majority of "career" employees at DOJ are Democrats who agreed with the radical liberal Clinton policies and who are opposed to all things Republican/conservative. And the Civil Rights Division is the worst of the lot. It is populated with the most activist, liberal Democrats in the federal government -- acolytes and former staff of John Conyers, Henry Waxman, Pat Leahy, Ted Kennedy, etc.
The Post conveniently paints these "career" employees as the people who really care about the issues and really know the law. They are neither. They are liberal hacks who, if federal government employees could be tossed, would have been tossed for insubordination and incompetence in the first term.
Perhaps the Post could give a little credit to the political appointees who are among the best and brightest attorneys in America today -- think a host of younger Ted Olsons. And perhaps the Post missed the last 2 presidential elections. Bush won. The American people chose our policies and our legal philosophy. This story, like so many others in the Post and NY Times, is just another piece of liberal trash reporting meant to give Henry Waxman and John Conyers a reason to put out a press release condemning Republican appointees, make outrageous assertions and call for hearings. In fact, I'm pretty sure that Eggen got the memo from the staff one of those two members (his only good sources) who got it from the liberal hacks in the Civil Rights Division, who are still angry that a 3-judge panel on the Court of Appeals found their legal reasoning to be completely flawed and upheld DOJ's ultimate ruling on TX redistricting.
Anyone want to bet we get a press release out of the above mentioned liberals before day's end?
Re: 390-HP Lawn Ornament Contest
Posted by on 12.2.05 @ 8:45AM
The competition has been energetic, and methinks it's gone about far enough. We'll post the finalists today for a vote. (And, no, I've NEVER had that much hair.)
Thursday, December 1, 2005
Anglicans Lead: "Just Cool It"
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 7:12PM
A firm stance by the Anglican Church's newest bishop: "What I would say to the two sides is cool it, just cool it."
IL Pharmacists Refuse to Fill Contraception Rx
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 4:51PM
Gov. Rod Blagojevich was making a good deal of noise about going after conscientious objector pharmacists in the spring. Looks like he did, and East St. Louis Walgreens employees are taking a stand. Good for them.
Worthwhile Canadian Election
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 4:06PM
The Liberals got a no-confidence vote earlier this week, and it looks like the Tories have a real shot at forming the next government up north. Good news: It means that the US-friendly Stephen Harper, whom Colby Cosh introduced to TAS readers during the last election a year-and-a-half ago, could be Prime Minister.
Tonight on Fox
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 3:44PM
I'll be on with David Asman (who's subbing for John Gibson) tonight about 5:30, talking about the Pentagon plan to have US forces do reconstruction. Do we need a Colonial Office? Methinks not.
An Acceptable Discrimination
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 3:20PM
Like Patrick O'Hannigan, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus takes issue with Will Saletan's assessment of the Catholic Church's new document on the ordination of homosexuals at the First Things blog:
Contra Saletan, the Church pastorally cares and prays for people who struggle with disordered desires. But she should not jeopardize the mission of the priesthood by ordaining those who are thought likely to succumb to such desires.
Cardinal Grocholewski, head of the dicastery issuing the instruction, puts it this way: "It is not discrimination, for example, if one does not admit a person who suffers from vertigo to a school for astronauts." More precisely, it is discrimination, although not in the pejorative sense of the term. I suppose it is possible that somebody with a transitory, or even deep-seated, problem with vertigo might be a successful astronaut, but as a matter of policy you don't want to put the possibility to the test.
Roe Nibbling?
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 3:15PM
That's what Slate senior editor Dahlia Lithwick accuses the Supreme Court of in hearing arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood yesterday.
Just to be clear about what's happening today: No one is talking about reversing Roe v. Wade. But I can't count five people willing to apply the holding in Casey to these facts either. Instead most of the court is doing constitutional loop-the-loops to try to save the New Hampshire law, even though they are almost all bothered by the lack of a health exception. Mostly they try to graft a health exception back on, whether or not the New Hampshire legislators wished to have one. The larger point is that New Hampshire nipped and tucked the so-called right to an abortion when it passed this law, and most of the court thinks that is just fine.
This morning we learned that soon-to-be Justice Samuel Alito embraced this nip-tuck strategy years ago. No need to wait for Roe to be overturned. Just eat away at it, one small nibble at a time.
Ah, the Roe-is-inviolate line in the sand. It's easier than arguing that the Court is substantially diminishing Roe (which she concedes is impossible to demonstrate in the first sentence of the paragraph above). So, a la NOW, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood, any restriction of abortion is a lurking threat to Roe. Ms. Lithwick won't actually defend Roe because it's indefensible as legal reasoning, which even many pro-abortion legal eagles acknowledge.
So Roe aside, let's get to Ayotte and Casey. While Lithwick discusses that the dominant standard in American jurisprudence for declaring an entire statute invalid on its face is found in Salerno, she fails to mention that Casey loosened those standards. So if Lithwick were applying Casey as a whole to this case, she would argue that it should be tossed out -- because New Hampshire statute doesn't meet the threshold of being constitutionally invalid "in a large fraction of cases." (This is explained in fuller detail here.) For the Court to affirm the First Circuit's judgment invalidating the entire N.H. statute, it must reject both Salerno and Casey.
Tina's other Mother
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 2:18PM
Wlady: I am indeed listening, but all I'm hearing is an echo. The Chris Matthews mantra -- Tonkin Gulf was a fraud, so is Iraq's WMD -- is a liberal chant now popular among the more fevered antiwar types.
Even more interesting is Hillary's forced recalibration. Preparing to throw her broom into the ring for '08, she has been wisely running to the right of her party on the war. And, as a result, she's been bashed by the Cindy Sheehanite wing of her party. She can't get the nomination without their support, and the Sorosbucks that come with it. Two weeks ago, the Clinton machine was bashing Cindy Sheehan. Now the Sheehanites are reining her in.
According to a fascinating Newsday report, Mizz Clinton, "received thousands of letters and e-mails on the war, many asking her to justify her October 2002 vote authorizing the invasion of Iraq." In response, she's tacking left, and gaining speed. That report quotes a letter she sent out to constituents and -- much more importantly -- political donors, saying, "I do not believe that we should allow this to be an open-ended commitment without limits or end." The letter goes on to say, "Nor do I believe that we can or should pull out of Iraq immediately." Nicely parsed, that.
Howard Fineman wrote that the president wasn't saying we should cut and run, but to "trim and tiptoe." So how shall we characterize Hillary's left turn? It's neither "cut and run" nor "stay the course."
Tina Time
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 1:07PM
Tina Brown does the counterintuitive thing today and defends Bob Woodward -- because she thinks what he has on tape will soon enough bring down the whole Bush operation. More entertaining to anyone who knew her before she became a girl scout is her reference to "the cynicism of quarterly profit-driven conglomerates enslaved to entertainment values." And in case you didn't know, she compares the scandal over the absence of WMD in Iraq to "the secret deal at Suez in 1956" and -- Jed, are you listening? -- "the phony evidence for the supposed Tonkin Gulf attacks." As she writes, "it's not just tragic; it's embarrassing."
December Firs
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 9:35AM
The Washington Times called around to federal agencies yesterday asking what they'll be calling their Christmas trees. Most folks are using the traditional Christmas moniker or don't have an official name. Not so surprisingly, Norm Mineta's Transportation Department calls theirs "holiday" trees.
The Times, They Aren't Changing
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 9:16AM
Predictably, the bitterest criticism of the president's speech yesterday comes not even from the Dems, but from their think tank, the New York Times. In its lead editorial today, the NYT editors presume to speak for the American people, compare Bush to an isolated Nixon, and do their best to revive their campaign to re-create Vietnam in the Middle East. The money quotes:
We've seen it before: an embattled president so swathed in his inner circle that he completely loses touch with the public and wanders around among small knots of people who agree with him. There was Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's, Richard Nixon in the 1970's, and George H. W. Bush in the 1990's. Now it's his son's turn.It has been obvious for months that Americans don't believe the war is going just fine, and they needed to hear that President Bush gets that. They wanted to see that he had learned from his mistakes and adjusted his course, and that he had a measurable and realistic plan for making Iraq safe enough to withdraw United States troops. Americans didn't need to be convinced of Mr. Bush's commitment to his idealized version of the war. They needed to be reassured that he recognized the reality of the war...
...after watching the president, we couldn't resist reading Richard Nixon's 1969 Vietnamization speech. Substitute the Iraqi constitutional process for the Paris peace talks, and Mr. Bush's ideas about the Iraqi Army are not much different from Nixon's plans -- except Nixon admitted the war was going very badly (which was easier for him to do because he didn't start it), and he was very clear about the risks and huge sacrifices ahead.
A president who seems less in touch with reality than Richard Nixon needs to get out more.
Wow. I didn't know that most Americans wanted to cut and run from Iraq.
The problem with the NYT, like the rest of the Michael Mooron Dems, is that they are crazed by the fact that they aren't succeeding in their principal short-term goal. They can't delegitimize the tiny minority of Democrats -- Lieberman and Clinton, most notably -- who are saying we can't do what Keller, Abramson and the rest of the Sheehanite Timesies want us to do. Which is to cut and run. If they can't marginalize those Dems, they can't regain the control of the debate they had before the president's speech yesterday. Which is putting them all in line for Vitamin P.
The Times -- desperate to regain control over the debate -- today resorts to saying Bush is even worse than their ultimate boogey man, Nixon. Sorry, kids, but outside of your news room and chic gatherings of the Hollywoodenheads, nobody buys it. Well, at least nobody who doesn't work for CBS, Newsweek, or MSNBC.
Economy Booming
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 8:21AM
We neglected to note this here, but the Commerce Department revised upward third quarter gross domestic product figures yesterday -- 4.3% growth instead of 3.8%. Naturally, the WSJ is bullish (sub. req'd): "We interrupt your daily doom-and-gloom programming with a word from the economy." Now if only the President would tout this as loudly as his predecessor did and let Americans know it.
Managing The New Alito Document
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 8:11AM
The new abortion ammo for/against Judge Alito probably will not substantially hinder his confirmation. He weathered the 1985 Justice Department application release well, thanks to the White House's successful message control under Steve Schmidt. Schmidt convinced the press and most moderates that Alito must be evaluated as a judge, not a political job-seeker. Schmidt's already working from that successful playbook on this newly released memo:
"Judge Alito should be evaluated on his 15 years of jurisprudence as a federal judge where he has authored hundreds of opinions," Schmidt said. "On some of those cases, he has upheld abortion rights. In other cases he has not. To leap to conclusions and try to infer future decisions from 20-year-old memos borders on the silly."
Re: Letter from Toyota
Posted by on 12.1.05 @ 7:56AM
Glenn Reynolds says Holman Jenkins is wrong to be so dismissive of hybrids. He says his Highlander "gets double the mileage in town."
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Global Freezing in History
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 7:51PM
Jed, the Gulf Stream has shifted before, north, in the middle ages. It caused a major global power realignment, because it brought the great codfish schools with it -- and moved that source of national wealth marginally out of reach for the vessels of Spain and Portugal at the time. England and the cities of the Hanseatic League benefited, to the extent that by the mid-1300s, the League had taken over global control of the salt fish trade.
Global Freezing?
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 6:42PM
Another wonderful EUnuch day comes to an end. The first face transplant (partial one, at least) was accomplished surgically in France. And those who are the most ardent supporters of the Kyoto global warming treaty, inevitably, are now facing the prospect of a -- wait for it -- mini-Ice Age that could engulf Europe.
From the Department of Stuff We Can't Make Up comes the report that the ocean current that gives Europe its balmy (atmospheric, not political) climate is failing and may create another ice age on the Continent. The (intemperate) money quote?
The North Atlantic is dominated by the Gulf Stream -- currents that bring warm water north from the tropics. At around 40° north -- the latitude of Portugal and New York -- the current divides. Some water heads southwards in a surface current known as the subtropical gyre, while the rest continues north, leading to warming winds that raise European temperatures by 5°C to 10°C.But when [the study] team measured north-south heat flow last year, using a set of instruments strung across the Atlantic from the Canary Islands to the Bahamas, they found that the division of the waters appeared to have changed since previous surveys in 1957, 1981 and 1992. From the amount of water in the subtropical gyre and the flow southwards at depth, they calculate that the quantity of warm water flowing north had fallen by around 30%.
Does that mean that the French will be dying in droves from the cold as their elderly and infirm did in summer 2003's heat wave? Does it mean that the "science" of global warming is a lot of hooey? Does it mean that everything in God's green earth ain't our fault? To borrow a phrase from the Foxtronauts, we report, you decide.
Re: Charlie Brown
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 6:37PM
Wonderful points about the wonderful Charlie Brown Christmas special, Dave, but you inadvertently make the point about how impoverished current productions are. CB was made in 1965. That's the TV equivalent of re-running "The Tennessee Ernie Ford Show," to name only one of that era's unabashed TV Christians.
Penn. Pay Grabbers in $300K+ FL Homes
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 6:08PM
It sure pays well to be a Pennsylvania state legislator. So well, in fact, that two key players in approving the recent unconstitutional pay raise, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ralph Cappy and Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer both own Bonita Springs, Florida, homes in the same gated country club community. Cappy's Florida home is valued at $333,000 and Jubelirer's at $317,000. Those homes are in addition to their Pennsylvania homes.
Straight Talk From Toyota
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 5:29PM
Still enchanted with the Prius? You'll reconsider after reading Holman Jenkins' fine column today, which doubles as the letter from Toyota that'll never be written:
...Let us assure you that the Prius remains one of the most fuel-efficient cars on the road. Toyota applauds your willingness to spend $9,500 over the price of any comparable vehicle for the privilege of saving, at current gasoline prices, approximately $580 a year.
And should the price of gasoline rise to $5, after 10 years and/or 130,000 miles of driving, you might even come close to breaking even on your investment in hybrid technology.
We recognize that our customers have an "emotional" relationship with their vehicles. This transcends even the regrettable truth that driving a fuel-efficient car does not yield any substantial benefits for society if it doesn't save the owner money.
...
We share your belief that the days of the internal combustion engine are numbered. Further research by our economists suggests this will happen when the price of gasoline rises high enough to make alternative technologies cheaper than gasoline-powered cars.
Dem Disarray
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 3:30PM
So just a couple of hours after Vichy John Kerry was trying to convince us that the Dems really weren't calling for withdrawal from Iraq, up pops Mizz Pelosi to say that Cong. Murtha was right, and we should begin pulling out of Iraq as soon as possible.
This, so far, is a pretty good day. It's the first one in a long time that it must be more frustrating to be a Dem than a Republican.
Christian Christmas Programming
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 3:16PM
I have to differ with Lisa Fabrizio's article today decrying the lack of Christian Christmas movies and television specials.
First, the study of Advent/Christmas television programming she cites seems rather narrow in its failure to mention It's a Wonderful Life or "A Charlie Brown Christmas." I concede the abysmal state of most other Christmas/holiday specials, but Charlie Brown is truly a treat. With most of the Peanuts crew caught up in the very sort of Christmas celebration Fabrizio would probably dislike, Charlie Brown grows fed up and rebels against their commercialism. Not finding the answer in pure anticommercialism, Charlie Brown is exasperated and asks, "Can anyone tell me what Christmas is all about?" Linus, who has quietly followed Charlie Brown throughout the episode, finally speaks up with his answer, "Sure, Charlie Brown, I can tell you what Christmas is all about." He asks for the lights to be dimmed, a spotlight appears on him, and everyone is silent as he recites the visitation of the Magi from the second chapter of the Gospel according to Luke. It's a Wonderful Life may not be explicitly Christian, but it is a traditional Christmas movie with a Christian message.
These two programs attract a great deal of attention every Advent and Christmas and are among the most popular programs. Last year's airing of "A Charlie Brown Christmas" netted 13.6 million viewers, the only Christmas program to break into the top 20 for the week of December 6-12, and beating "Law & Order: SVU" and "60 Minutes." The ratings for "Charlie Brown" barely fell short of viewership for "Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer," which had 14.9 million viewers during the week of November 29- December 5. I couldn't find ratings for It's a Wonderful Life, since it didn't break into the top 20 programs.
Fabrizio seems also to miss the point of the study she cites. It concludes:
The lack of outrage by Christian viewers means that either Americans are satisfied to keep their faith separate from their viewing habits or that the networks are reflecting the culture's acceptance of Christmas as a secular holiday.
Take it one step further by applying a little market economics: if there's a lack of Christian Christmas television programming (or movies, for that matter), it isn't some Hollywood conspiracy. Hollywood types may be happy to oblige the cultural demand, but they're still running a business. If Americans, and American Christians, aren't watching Rudolph or other rather meaningless Holiday programming, then the networks won't air it. If they favor actual Christmas programs, the market will respond accordingly. This lack of Christian programming begins with the viewers.
For those interested in a great Christian Christmas special, settle in for "A Charlie Brown Christmas" Tuesday, December 6, at 8 p.m. EST on ABC. NBC is offering It's a Wonderful Life Friday, December 10 at 8 p.m. and Christmas Eve at 8 p.m. Beyond that, I'd recommend Christians seek their Advent and Christmas sustenance somewhere else besides the idiot box.
The Kennedy Takeover of the California GOP
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:56PM
So Maria Shriver's counsel has been taken. The San Francisco Chronicle details Schwarzenegger's new chief of staff, fittingly named Susan Kennedy: A Gray Davis appointee, she "made her name as a political operative as the head of the California branch of the National Abortion Rights Action League. A longtime gay rights activist, Kennedy married her partner, Vicki Marti, in a 1999 ceremony in Hawaii attended by many California political insiders."
Politically Incorrect Science at Heritage Tomorrow
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:43PM
TAS senior editor and "Capitol Ideas" columnist Tom Bethell is elaborating on his new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, tomorrow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington at noon. If you can't make it to the event, do the next best thing and buy the book.
See How Easy That Was?
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:12PM
Ok, let's review the bidding. The president gives one really good speech, tells the world that we're not getting out of Iraq because of car bombers and assassins, and what's the result?
The Dems are in full retreat. Kerry's rebuttal? Listen to Rush now. He's got it precisely right. Kerry has the pedal to the metal in reverse. No, no, no. We weren't talking about withdrawing from Iraq. We were demanding a schedule for success. Right.
The president has finally engaged. We can quibble about what he said, but he's finally put the Dems on the defensive. Of course they were talking about quitting and running. Of course none of them were asking how we could win. Of course they were all saying it's unwinnable, a war based on lies, another Vietnam. Now they have been called on it, and they're toppling like a house of cards in a high wind. Messrs. Bush and Cheney have found the right tone. They need to keep singing long, loud and continuously.
Breakthroughs in Unethical Cloning
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:10PM
A report in TIME Asia Magazine shows that unethical coercion of women has contributed to the work of Dr. Hwang Woo Suk, Korea’s chief stem cell researcher. After failing to receive a sufficient number of donated eggs from the public, Hwang's head scientists were obliged to offer $1,500 to female lab workers to give up their eggs. About twenty women working for the study complied. TIME says one of the researchers stressed that the “cloning breakthroughs would have been impossible without a steady supply of eggs.†That suggests the job security of these lab workers would have been threatened had they not complied, however voluntarily. On stepping down from his head position at the “World Stem Cell Hub,†Hwang admitted “being too focused on scientific development," as as result of which "I may not have seen all the ethical issues related to my research.â€
Embryonic stem cell research’s reliance on women’s eggs is just one more ethical hazard for this science. Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council notes, “The UN General Assembly -- at least in this one area -- has correctly understood that ‘donations’ of eggs, which will be needed for cloning and embryonic stem cell experiments, will inevitably lead to exploitation of women.â€
Ayotte: A Limited Invalidation?
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:07PM
If the Court excised the health exception and declared the law invalid in cases of medical emergencies:
Scalia: Why should the doctor who's negligent and doesn't know what he's doing, why should he be protected.
Dalven: We believe that would be unconstitutional to send a doctor to jail for acting in good faith.
Scalia: That would be the case in any medical malpractice case.
Ayotte: Planned Parenthood Faltering
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:01PM
Planned Parenthood's counsel, Jennifer Dalven, is really getting beat up over their challenge to the entire statute while making a very narrow argument, from Ginsburg and O'Connor to Roberts and Kennedy.
Ayotte: Medical Emergencies
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 1:00PM
Justice Kennedy is arguing that a medical emergency could be addressed through the judicial bypass. Dalven is replying that once a minor arrives in the ER, it's too late for her to go to court and seek an exception to parental notification.
Scalia: Surely not the delay for a quick phone call. If NH sets up a special court with an abortion judge, why wouldn't that work?
Dalven: If it only takes an instant call to the judge to get approval for an abortion, then what's the point of the statute.
Chief Justice Roberts: Why didn't the physicians preemptively challenge the bypass process instead of the whole law then?
Dalven: No matter how fast the bypass procedure, it would be insufficient.
Roberts: So why does this implicate the vast majority of the
cases? ... This is a facial challenge. There's no enforcement
challenge at all.
...
Ginsburg: Why couldn't we rule that the NH statute is invalid to
the extent that it fails to protect situations in which there's an
imminent danger to health? Why wasn't that the appropriate judgment
of the First Circuit in this case?
Dalven: That would solve the constitutional problem, but that's not the best course of action.
Ayotte: Planned Parenthood's Case
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 12:53PM
Their counsel, Jennifer Dalven, is leading with the fear of a medical emergency. "The undisputed evidence here is that ... every minute puts [the women] at risk."
Ayotte: Standards for Facial Challenges
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 12:46PM
Solicitor General Paul Clement: Ayotte isn't even meeting a large fraction of cases in which the statute would be invalid.
Souter: That was true in Casey.... After Casey, I don't think one could plausibly argue that Salerno is the standard....
Kennedy: If not Casey or Salerno, how should I rule?
Clement: In favor of the state... their case is based on a one in a thousand possibility.
Ayotte: One Application
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 12:34PM
Listening to the oral arguments in the Ayotte case: Scalia mentioned that it's rare for the Court to invalidate a law if only one application violates rights.
The Silence on Lieberman is Deafening
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 12:22PM
Will someone please explain how Jack Murtha caused an uproar and Joe Lieberman was largely ignored? That's a rhetorical question...
Meanwhile, POTUS gives another great speech at the Naval Academy and the cables have gone out of their way to let the Ds rewrite history, warp the reality of the real progress being made in Iraq, and distort the truth for political gain.
Clearly, the MSM wants Iraq to be Vietnam (and all that connotes) as badly as the folks at Moveon.org and the DNC.
THAT Gary Hart?
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 12:16PM
Yes, a fellow member of the political graveyard elite (qualification: U.S. senator, ran for president, failed, thinks folks still care what he thinks) has spoken for John Kerry. John Kerry's PAC/shadow campaign just sent a fundraising email under Hart's name:
When John Kerry called for the withdrawal of 20,000 troops over the holidays, and the majority of remaining combat troops by the end of 2006, linking bringing troops home to clear benchmarks, you added energy and passion to that initiative.
When John Kerry called for accelerated training of Iraqi troops, greater international involvement, and improved reconstruction efforts, you amplified his voice.
Now, because of your efforts and those of all these Democratic leaders, make no mistake: the wheel has turned in the national debate over the war in Iraq. The American people have responded to the tough questions we've been asking because they had the same ones. The result is that the Bush Administration is being forced to engage in something they've gone to great lengths to avoid: an open debate about the war in Iraq.
I guess it's too much to hope that if I don't give money, Kerry will stop calling for retreat?
RET Has Been Talking About This All Week….
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 11:57AM
Today is the 131st anniversary of the birth of Winston Churchill.
Out of the Park
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 11:45AM
A reporter friend of mine tasked with covering the Bush speech for a major daily newspaper which shall go unnamed here (suffice to say the outlet in question has not been all that friendly to this administration) just remarked to me that the president "hit a home run" in Annapolis and "really reclaimed a lot of momentum." The seasoned reporter was visibly moved just talking about it. I'll be interested to see if his true impression of the event makes it past his editors...
RE: Today's Speech on Iraq
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 11:13AM
To read the full document on Iraq, "Victory in Iraq", released by the White House this morning, please click here.
Preemptive Reading
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 10:41AM
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in a recent interview, defended the Administration's policy of detaining potential terrorists, as a necessary component of the "War on Terror." Apparently Administration policy wonks have been re-reading works by 19th-century philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who advocated arresting people from groups with a tendency to commit crimes. Bentham also advocated torture as a means of securing "confessions."
Today's Speech on Iraq
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 9:16AM
The president will outline his strategy for winning in Iraq today in what is being billed as a major speech to be delivered at the US Naval Academy. According to information being released by the White House, the president will say that victory in Iraq comes in three parts:
*Short term, Iraq is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces.*Medium term, Iraq is in the lead defeating terrorists and providing its own security, with a fully constitutional government in place, and on its way to achieving its economic potential.
*Longer term, Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well integrated into the international community, and a full partner in the global war on terrorism.
More later on this. The biggest and most obvious problem with this is that almost nothing is said about the wider war. The president is making the same enormous mistake he has made since 2003 by implying that once Iraq is over, the war is over. It is essential to lay out our goals for Iraq. But to do so without saying that they are only one step in the war -- and in the context of defining victory in the global war on terrorists and the nations that support them -- weakens the case on Iraq.
If You Can't Beat 'Em, Join 'Em?
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 8:44AM
Gov. Schwarzenegger appears poised to appoint the former executive director of the California Democratic Party as his chief of staff.
390-Horsepower Lawn Ornament Contest
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 8:19AM
Duane Patterson, one of the evil geniuses behind the Hugh Hewitt Show, picked up on the idea of using my new car as a lawn ornament. If you are adept at photoshopping, and want to win a Crosley Solo radio for your imaginative entry, check out the contest we're running on RadioBlogger.com. Some of these are pretty funny. Duane will pick the top ten and post them separately for a listeners' vote to pick the winner. Have at it, folks.
Last Blog Before One-Handedness
Posted by on 11.30.05 @ 6:31AM
In about 20 minutes, I'll leave my desk for minor shoulder surgery which will put me in a sling for a few weeks. How I'll manage to type, which is life itself for me, I don't know.
So a last blog note before going under. On Yesterday's "On Point" broadcast on NPR, host Tom Ashbrook introduced a show about what he called "a sickening culture of corruption" in the Republican party. I do not sympathize with bribe-takers like Randy "Duke" Cunningham, but I do want to remind Mr. Ashbrook of an earlier Presidential administration. Maybe three names will do the trick: Mochtar Riady, John Huang, Ron Brown.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Post-Duke Appropriations
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 4:08PM
Now that "Top Gun" has flown the coop, the interesting stuff begins.
Republicans in the House we are talking to say that the Cunningham exit will be the first real test to see how much influence Leader in Limbo Tom Delay actually still has.
Duke Cunningham had a seat on House Appropriations, and now that seat is up for grabs. The thinking is that another California Republican will get it, but word out of leadership office is that that seat is not necessarily a lock for a Left Coast heiney. Appropriations Committee chair, Jerry Lewis, a Californian, has told other committee members that he intends to fight hard to keep Cunningham's seat in California's grips.
Acting majority leader Roy Blunt is said to be pushing to give the Approps seat to a loyal Republican not necessarily from California, though no names have yet been floated. Obviously, Appropriations seats are some of the most coveted in the House.
Under normal circumstances, the Majority Leader would have a bit more say than the average member of the the House Republican Steering Committee, which makes the committee assignments. Typically, Tom Delay has had what amounts to two votes on the committee. House Speaker Dennis Hastert's vote counts as five.
But it isn't yet clear that Blunt has that two-vote power to flex, and Hastert hasn't clarified matters. According to one House insider, Delay expressed his opinion to Hastert: Blunt should not have the extra say over his fellow members. But Hastert may need to give Blunt something, if only to ensure that Blunt remains a viable leadership figure to the caucus.
My Tai
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 3:54PM
Put aside the indictments, scandals, and tearful confessions for a moment. "Cute" is not usually a word attributable to almost anything here in DC. But today, the Tai Shan countdown begins. And "cute" is merely one adjective for this newest resident of Washington. D.C's pandas-on-loan from China have paid off in PR, if not in tax dollars, for Washington. Tai Shan (meaning "peaceful mountain" -- yes, yes, the name has evoked lots of chatter in the capital), our little panda, was born to proud parents four months ago, and he will make his inaugural public appearance next week. What an auspicious, harmonious, prosperous, and blessed event this Inauguration will be, for who can possibly hate a little panda?
To see a pre-public video clip, click here.
Merry Holiday
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 3:49PM
I must say I am encouraged by the backlash I sense this year against the nutty, runaway trend in our society whereby the term "Christmas" continues to be replaced with the word "Holiday." From the protests against Wal-Mart, to Speaker Denny Hastert's laudable recent order that the Capitol Christmas Tree -- re-named the Capitol Holiday Tree a few years back -- be restored to its proper name, to FNC's near-obsession with the issue, it's just nice to see that not everyone is willing to tolerate this nonsense anymore.
Sure we've got a long way to go on this one, but at least the creatures are stirring, so to speak...
Today on the Hugh Hewitt Show
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 2:14PM
I'm subbing for Hugh again today, 6-9 p.m. on Salem Radio nationwide.
We'll be talking about the daily stuff, but this one takes the cake. Our fave Promise Maker -- Sen. Ernst Stavro Spectre -- is now saying that Terrell Owens is being treated too harshly by the NFL. Republicans seem tolerant of his, ah, flexible compliance with the promises he's made on everything from judicial confirmations (several of which are held up in Committee and between Committee and the floor) and he's apparently holding up the reauthorization of the Patriot Act by his single refusal to sign the conference report.
Those actions directly conflict with the promises he made to get the committee chairmanship. Bad enough, no? But now he's interfering with the NFL. This man has to be stopped.
Lieberman on Iraq
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 1:31PM
Sen. Joe Lieberman's piece in today's WSJ is both right on the substance and enormously important. He is right in saying we can't cut and run, and explains why quite well. The piece is important because it shows that there still are Democrats who aren't giving in, as Jack Murtha did, to the vast majority of their leaders who believe the only answer to Iraq is to create another Vietnam.
But Lieberman's money quote is not on those central points at all. At the end of the article, he quotes past of a conversation he had with a Marine commander:
I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: "I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates."
Though that is encouraging and inspiring, as Lieberman said, it sent a shiver down my spine. What that Marine said is the ghostly echo of what I heard over thirty years ago from the men fighting in Vietnam. They never understood that -- in the minds of the Ted Kennedys, John Kerrys and Ramsey Clarks -- Vietnam wasn't winnable or worth fighting for. They don't understand that now those same architects of defeat believe the same of Iraq. And aim for the same result.
Randy Republicans
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 1:04PM
Does the indictment and resignation of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham confirm that, as Nancy Pelosi et al. would have it, the GOP's culture is one of corruption? The L.A. Times today finds a leading conservative who might agree:
Conservative activist Paul Weyrich, head of the Free Congress Foundation, said he thinks the Democratic charge may stick. "Frankly, Republicans are held to a higher standard, mainly because they are the ones who always preach morality," Weyrich said. "I think voters are going to punish them over this.
Perhaps voters should also be informed that Carol Lam, the U.S. Attorney who nailed Cunningham, is, as the L.A. Times story also reports, a Bush appointee.
An Evolving Theory
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 12:51PM
Michael Powell's Washington Post review of the new Darwin exhibition at New York's American Museum of Natural History is generally praiseworthy but Darwinists won't like his singing off key late in the piece: "...in its eagerness to declare the grand evolutionary questions settled, the show takes its lone stumble. Only four decades ago, most paleontologists rejected the theory, now broadly accepted, that comets and volcanic eruptions delivered mass extinctions and so played a key role in speeding evolution. Nor are scientists clear on the mechanism by which one species evolves into another; curator Eldredge and the late scientist Stephen Jay Gould crafted the once heretical theory of punctuated equilibrium, which holds that species sometimes evolve in grand leaps."
Then Powell notes that one prominent scientist, Simon Conway Morris, is now arguing that "even very distant species share structural similarities and journey toward inevitable complexity. This suggests to him that evolution adheres to an architecture."
Architecture? Sounds like intelligent design.
Powell said the exhibit's curator, Niles Eldridge, will "shrug" if you bring these complications up to him. Not mentioned in Powell's piece, though alluded to in his noting that Eldridge is associated with the theory of punctuated equilibrium, is that Eldridge once acknowledged in the 1980s that the fossil record does not support Darwin's expectation that it would eventually prove his theory of gradual transitions. "The pattern that we were told to find for the last 120 years does not exist," Eldridge was quoted in the New York Times as saying.
Soros Linked to Main Street Republicans
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 12:32PM
George Soros' support for the "Main Street Republicans," the Congressional moderate Republicans who oppose drilling in ANWR and helped sink the slight decreases in Medicare growth earlier this month, isn't exactly news. But the group is apparently working to covers its tracks, notifying blogger Michelle Malkin that her linking of Soros and the Main Streeters is false and libelous and asking her to cease and desist. Malkin strikes back with a detailed case supported by extensive evidence of the links between Soros and the Republican Main Street Partnership.
Downes and Out
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 12:26PM
Leave it to the New York Times to turn the death of the well-liked Pat Morita into an occasion of grievance against the "lousy system" in which Morita had prospered. "It's distressing to think that the life's work of one of the best-known, hardest-working Asian-American actors is mostly a collection of servile supporting roles," Lawrence Downes writes in a special op-ed. But if Morita was "servile," how could he have been the font of Eastern wisdom in the wildy popular "Karate Kid"? Was it "servile" of Morita to appear at the Democratic convention in 2000 to sing the National Anthem (a happy event not mentioned by Downes)? There he was, an American interned during World War II, charming the Staples Center audience and, as I recall, even sporting a pony tail! And, unlike Bill Clinton earlier that week, he never bowed to the delegates.
Alito's Way
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 12:24PM
Judge Samuel Alito's confirmation process continues apace this week, and there should be some news. According to Senate leadership sources, the Senate Judiciary Committee expects to receive in the next couple of days his questionnaire. One expects it will be complete and pass muster with Sen. Arlen Specter. Also, word out of the Department of Justice is that there may be a data dump of sorts on Alito in the coming days, as well.
Back to Muhammad Ali
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 10:10AM
In the New York Sun today, Daniel Pipes explains why President Bush's bestowal of a Presidential Medal of Freedom on Muhammad Ali "represents...the nadir of his presidency." Did the president really have to praise Ali for "his beautiful soul" and as "a man of peace"?
Newsflash: Homosexuality Divides Denominations
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 8:52AM
Read all about it. The Globe spans faiths in anticipation of the release of the Vatican document today restricting active homosexuals from the Catholic priesthood.
Abortionist as Hero
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 8:48AM
The L.A. Times profiles Arkansas abortionist Dr. William F. Harrison. Brace yourself before reading this gruesome article. The piece is a shadow of objective journalism in its depiction of Harrison as one front in the abortion wars. But the author, Stephanie Simon, makes sure that the reader comes away with a benevolent view of the good doctor -- 20,000 abortions under his belt, and not a one in the third trimester -- and seeing abortion as the only option for his young "patients."
Still, there are a few moments of honesty. The author depicts being in the room during an abortion, bringing out the inhumanity of it all. And amazingly, Dr. Harrison admits he is "destroying life."
Books Galore
Posted by on 11.29.05 @ 8:14AM
Sen. George Allen, Fred Barnes, Roger Ebert, Grover Norquist, Al Regnery, RET, and others have a few suggestions for your Christmas shopping. Don't miss TAS's annual Christmas book list.
Monday, November 28, 2005
A Sad Day for the Republic
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 8:05PM
Rep. Cunningham resigned from office after pleading guilty to taking bribes today. While it's a sad day for citizens who trust elected officials, there are two bright aspects: 1- Justice is apparently being served, and 2- Good for him for owning up to it like a man. These low standards shouldn't be so laudable, but that's the world in which we live.
Bethell on WJR Detroit Tomorrow
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 4:43PM
Catch Tom Bethell, TAS senior editor and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, on WJR 760 AM in Detroit tomorrow morning from 10 to 10:30 a.m. on the Frank Beckmann Show.
Abortion Survivors?
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 4:42PM
Yesterday the Sunday Times brought attention to the tragic fact that about 50 babies are born in Britain each year due to failed abortions. The likelihood of a baby’s survival increases with every week of gestation. Medical experts are now suggesting Britain no longer allow abortions beyond 18 weeks (6 weeks lower than its current 24 weeks) to avoid the risk of child survival.
The article also notes that it is not a crime when a fetus is successfully aborted inside the womb. But when the abortion fails and the child dies due to complications outside the womb, it is punishable as murder. Incidents like this highlight the grisly standard of when it is lawfully acceptable to terminate a life: only so long as it is inside a mother's womb. But should location of the body at the time of death be sufficient to determine what makes or doesn't make the act homicidal?
Network
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 3:26PM
This article contains good behind-the-scenes reporting on Ted Koppel's departure from ABC. According to one producer quoted in it, ABC executive David Westin wanted Nightline to be a superficial, Good Night America-style show. "I was told that people want to go to bed happy," he says. Among other problems rankling Westin was that Koppel's negotiated salary kept rising as the show's ratings kept dipping. Koppel even offered to plow some of his salary back into the show's production. Now Nightline has three hosts, but Westin figured this is cheaper than one.
Re: The 390-Horsepower Lawn Ornament
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 1:47PM
To answer our readers' questions, the ride in question is an '03 Mustang SVT Cobra. And to the suggestion that I turn it back over to nitwit#4 to rack up the miles, I have to say not only no, but #$@! no. Why should he have all the fun? We are working things out, as I indicated to Larry, in proper Dukes of Hazzard fashion. Stay tuned. As to the problems with the old El Camino, I can only sympathize. The Mustang needs no mods to pass, only the elimination of the stupid computer code. As to reprogramming the EPROM, I'm concerned that other things could be erased in the process. Don't you have to erase all to re-code an EPROM? That, to be sure, is waaaaay beyond my computer skills.
Sen. Specter's Broken Promises
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 1:19PM
We'll be talking about how many promises Arlen Specter made to get the Judiciary Committee chair (and how many he's broken so far), the Prez's 4:40 p.m. immigration speech and a lot more today on the Hugh Hewitt show (6-9 pm EST, Salem Radio Network). I'm subbing for Hugh today and tomorrow. Hope you can listen in, and call. 800-520-1234. See ya on the radio.
Re: TR McCain
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 12:56PM
Dave: You're very right about the fine Stephen Moore piece on McCain. I only wish it were longer, so that we could have also heard about such McCain problem areas as the McCain-Feingold incumbency racket and the Gang of 14 cooptation of judicial nominations. A week earlier, according to Kausfiles, David Brooks told Chris Matthews that conservatives have warmed up to McCain. My first reaction to that was that Brooks was speaking merely for himself and other "national greatness conservatives," who've been McCainiacs since at least 2000. Moore, however, hardly one of them, confirms the thrust of Brooks's claim, noting that McCain is not only "the front-runner among GOP presidential contenders in all the early horserace polls," but that "many conservatives, after his impetuous presidential run five years ago, are turning to him as the party's savior and the only antidote to Hillary Clinton."
Meanwhile, it required a David Broder column to remind the political world that McCain is a staunch defender of the Iraq war (if not of the Bush-Rumsfeld prosecution of that war). Evidently progressive opinion can give him a pass on that front, so long as he leads the way in opposing Bush administration insistence on "torture" in its dealings with captured enemy combatants.
Aspiring to Be TR
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 11:45AM
Don't miss Stephen Moore's WSJ interview with Sen. John McCain that ran over the weekend. Though Moore is giddy to be in the presence of "a genuine American hero," he closely examines McCain's economic philosophy and finds a mixed bag: a pork slasher aspiring to be a modern-day Teddy Roosevelt.
Iraqi Solidarity
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 11:08AM
Cindy Sheehan enjoyed a "traditional Iraqi meal" on Thanksgiving with fellow protesters in solidarity with civilians killed in the war, reports the Los Angeles Times. Iraqi civilians killed by Saddam Hussein before the war were unavailable for comment.
EUnuchs Meddling
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 10:07AM
See what Aznar is up against? A EUnuch minister is now saying that any EU members harboring the secret CIA terrorist detention centers may have their EU voting rights suspended. From Breitbart:
"EU Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Franco Frattini warned Monday any EU nation found to have operated secret CIA prisons could have their EU voting rights suspended. "I would be obliged to propose to the Council (of EU Ministers) serious consequences, including the suspension of voting rights in the Council," Frattini said at a counter-terrorism conference."
As I've written before, in Inside the Asylum, membership in the EU and membership in NATO are a conflict of interests. Whenever a NATO member goes along with contradictory EU defense policy they may be in violation of their obligations under the NATO treaty.
NATO Wakeup Call?
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 9:26AM
Jose Maria Aznar -- the former Spanish PM tossed out of office days after the 3-11 Madrid train bombings -- is appealing to NATO members to wake up and smell the coffee, to join together to defend each other from Islamic terrorism. In a good -- but horrifically unrealistic -- piece in today's WSJ (sub req'd), Aznar says that NATO should be reorganized around fighting that threat because homeland security can no longer be differentiated from the broader concepts of national security. Here's the money quote:
"Sept. 11 was also a strategic revolution for NATO. Traditional concepts like containment and deterrence were no longer viable in the face of global jihadism; relying on passive or reactive defense, as NATO did for more than four decades, meant, in fact, putting at risk the lives of our citizens. Yet going on the offensive, or taking preventive measures against Islamist terror, was something NATO was not prepared to deal with even after activating its collective defense provisions: It had never done so; it had never needed to. But now it is time to change. Islamist terror has struck many of us: the U.S., Spain, Turkey, the U.K., Russia, to name just the countries which are members of, or related to, NATO."
The problem Aznar faces is that NATO has become a debating society, neither equipped nor organized to cooperate and fight. Germany, Italy and Spain, among others, have reached a state that can only be called unilateral disarmament. It's nice to think about reorganizing NATO to fight against terrorism, but unless the EUnuchs are willing to multiply their defense expenditures by a factor of ten and sustain them at that level for at least a decade, NATO is a hollow shell. And Uncle Sam shouldn't defend nations that refuse to defend themselves.
Re: Measurements
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 8:23AM
Larry: No, it is 390-horsepower, but a good bit taller than 23 inches. But your idea of wringing it out on a track is not one I'll dismiss. Hmm. Speed is electronically limited to 155 mph, according to the specs, so about two hours would do it. If I can hang on that long.
More fun with the 390 hp etc.
Posted by on 11.28.05 @ 5:55AM
Jed:
Hmmm, 390 hp, ruby red, is it also about 23 inches high? Well, whatever, here's a solution. Have a flatbed tow truck take it and you to a private race track -- there are such -- and knock yourself out. Should take about 2 hours and 15 minutes, right?
Larry
Sunday, November 27, 2005
Germ Warfare
Posted by on 11.27.05 @ 10:20PM
Andrew Sullivan is fighting a germ insurgency. I'm stunned by the lack of pre-infection planning that has resulted in this quagmire. Though we may still win thanks to the bravery of the common white blood cell, it sometimes seems unlikely. The shocking revelations about abuse of imprisoned germs were particularly disheartening. Ultimately Sullivan's cold and flu medicine must be held accountable for its failure. That means drinking swampwater instead of medicine. Swampwater has struck a somewhat more gay-friendly political posture than medicine, but the suggestion that support for swampwater over medicine is about homosexuality, and not about the war on germs and other issues, is an unanswerable smear.
(Disclaimer for the humor-impaired: I hope Andrew feels better soon, and am not actually suggesting that he ought to drink swampwater.)
Re: The 390-HP Lawn Ornament
Posted by on 11.27.05 @ 9:16PM
John: Methinks the dealership has about as much of a clue about how to deal with this as my 6-month old lab puppy. He, at least, would know to chew on the leather, and his attitude is vastly less arrogant and hostile than the service manager. I wouldn't try the jacks myself. Vibration of the car, at any appreciable wheel speed, could take it off the jacks and let fly across Loudoun County by itself. Which is one of the few things worse than letting the jokers from the dealership have it. No, methinks we'll play Dukes of Hazzard for a coupla days between here and our normally-distant haunts. And then take it to a real expert we know in Falls Church.
I trust that by week's end, we'll be laughing about it, remembering the nonsense only as a redundant proof of the Gipper's adage that government isn't the solution, it's the problem. Nevertheless, this is the most idiotic Catch-22 I've come across in many moons.
Re: The 390 Horsepower Lawn Ornament
Posted by on 11.27.05 @ 8:52PM
Jed: Why would the dealership need to drive it around for a few weeks? Why not just lift all four wheels off the ground with a few jacks and set a brick on the accelerator for an hour or two, then refill the tank and repeat? They could clock the necessary mileage in less than a day.
The 390 Horsepower Lawn Ornament
Posted by on 11.27.05 @ 1:21PM
Thanksgiving Eve was a joyous occasion in our household, and not only because of the arrival of two of the four twentysomethings (well, three if you count one young lady in tow). #4 son drove in from Laramie, Wyoming in my new supercar.
Having purchased it in September from its original owner in Colorado Springs, and registered it in the Commonwealth to get temporary plates, said registration had expired on his arrival. On Thursday afternoon, I dutifully drove it to our formerly favorite Ford dealer and delivered written instructions to perform an emissions inspection (a legal predicate to obtaining a permanent registration) and adjust the timing and other functions necessary for it to produce maximum power at this altitude (what one does for a car that operates at above 5,000 feet, as this had, is slightly different than for a car that operates here at near sea level.) Ay, and there's the rub.
For, I am now informed to my utter dismay, when one performs the tuning before the emissions test -- as these descendants of Werner von Braun did -- one implants the "P-1000" code in the vehicle's on-board computer thanks to a new rule propounded by Virginia's Department of Environmental Quality. Thinking they must bar people from cheating on their emissions inspections, the DEQ requires that the P-1000 code block emissions testing from the time the car's settings are changed until the car is driven another 300-400 miles. Which I explained to the folks at DMV yesterday after waiting two hours for my turn. Only to be told that no registration can be issued without the report of a successful emissions test, and no extension of the temporary registration can be granted for any reason. At this point, I became convinced that it was neither Mr. Warner nor Mr. Kaine who held Virginia's governorship, but Major Major. The "experts" at the dealership say they cannot do anything to bypass the code, and suggested that I return the car to them so they can drive it for a few weeks to reach the point at which emissions testing can be done. Right.
As things stand now, I can: (1) drive illegally to eliminate the computer code and pay whatever fines and tickets accrue; (2) find a spot on our spacious fields for a ruby-red 390-horsepower lawn ornament; (3) move to one of the many Virginia counties that doesn't require emissions inspection; or (4) move to a state which has a government that hasn't completely lost its mind. Options 1,3 and 4 are under consideration. What would Yossarian do?
Re: The Sweet Science
Posted by on 11.27.05 @ 7:51AM
Wlady, it's because Ali refused the draft, was barred from boxing for a period, and then returned as a martyr. He attained designated worship object (DWO) status at that time. Interesting rhetorical questions: How many elements of DWO status (black, female, gay, HIV positive, labor union, communist, radical, etc.) does a figure have to have? Are there any absolute essentials? Would a Rocky Balboa-type white Ali have been possible? Poor Italian kid refuses Selective Service with the counseling of his religious leaders, and so forth?
- The Continuing Crisis
- Herbert Hoover's Long-Awaited Magnum Opus
- Uncle Sam and the Chinese Dragon
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
