Friday, June 24, 2005

Who do they have writing this stuff?
I just got an email from John Kerry with the subject line "Dividers, not Uniters," and my first thought was: "I couldn't have said it any better myself."

Seriously, don't they realize that a subject line like that can too easily convey the exact opposite of what they're trying to say?

No wonder they lose elections—that's amateur.

True, but
ouch!

Cool
I don't know how useful it is, but this researcher is channeling Dr. Doolittle. This is information that will never serve any purpose in my life, but that I find really interesting all the same.

This is where we're headed
Thanks to yesterday's ruling, we're moving in this direction.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

I've had it up to here
According to CNN.com, it's time for the US to stop funding our so-called allies. No more aid. No more troops guarding their borders. No more funding their little UN pet. CNN.com has convinced me that, in fact, we should be more beligerent and start threatening Canada (or Mexico), asserting claims that it (whichever one we choose) is rightfully a part of the United States. How did CNN do this? Simple:

The United States' image is so tattered overseas two years after the Iraq invasion that communist China is viewed more favorably than the U.S. in many long-time Western European allies, an international poll has found.
Screw 'em—they're on their own.

Cool
From OpinionJournal :

'I feel less alone when I read the books of Ratzinger.' I had asked Ms. Fallaci whether there was any contemporary leader she admired, and Pope Benedict XVI was evidently a man in whom she reposed some trust. 'I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. It's that simple! There must be some human truth here that is beyond religion.'

Ms. Fallaci, who made her name by interviewing numerous statesmen (and not a few tyrants), believes that ours is 'an age without leaders. We stopped having leaders at the end of the 20th century.' Of George Bush, she will concede only that he has 'vigor,' and that he is 'obstinate' (in her book a compliment) and 'gutsy. . . . Nobody obliged him to do anything about Terri Schiavo, or to take a stand on stem cells. But he did.'

But it is 'Ratzinger' (as she insists on calling the pope) who is her soulmate. John Paul II--'Wojtyla'--was a 'warrior, who did more to end the Soviet Union than even America,' but she will not forgive him for his 'weakness toward the Islamic world. Why, why was he so weak?'

The scant hopes that she has for the West she rests on his successor. As a cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI wrote frequently on the European (and the Western) condition. Last year, he wrote an essay titled 'If Europe Hates Itself,' from which Ms. Fallaci reads this to me: 'The West reveals . . . a hatred of itself, which is strange and can only be considered pathological; the West . . . no longer loves itself; in its own history, it now sees only what is deplorable and destructive, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure.'

'Ecco!' she says. A man after her own heart. 'Ecco!' But I cannot be certain whether I see triumph in her eyes, or pain.

Hey, kettle... Republicans are white!
Howard Dean just can't get much more ridiculous. Now he's saying that divisive political rhetoric must be stopped... as long as the other side is to blame:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean called on Bush to "show some leadership and unequivocally repudiate Rove's divisive and damaging political rhetoric."
Honestly, what Rove said (that liberals followed 9/11 with a call for indictments and therapy for our attackers while conservatives prepared for war) isn't that far off base looking at the current political climate. I think after 9/11 we all prepared for war, and then liberals lost the stomach for it and started sounding like this, from John Kerry:
We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance.

As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.
Ideally, for liberals, we'd capture terrorists before they attack, convict them, send them to prison, and reform them from their wicked ways—and that's what Rove was saying. It's not such a bad thought, it's just that hawks like me don't think it's realistic, and subscribe instead to the flypaper theory mentioned below. Liberals (doves) are concerned about creating terrorists by fueling Al Quaeda's propaganda— conservative (hawks) are concerned with drawing out all of those who might be seduced by terrorism and destroying them. I know which one I believe, I don't know which one is right. Karl Rove knows which one he believes and is pretty sure he's right—hence the disdain in his voice when talking about indictments and therapy—but that doesn't mean he should apologize for making an accurate observation. If Dean is so insulted by someone who points out what he believes, maybe he should reassess his beliefs.

And stop being a racist, partisan hack.

If I were dead, I would be too
John Locke is spinning in his grave.

UPDATE [6/23/2005 - 12:55]: Honestly, this isn't all that far a leap from this decision. SCOTUS says as long as there is a clearly formulated plan for economic development, towns can evict and destroy peoples' homes. Mugabe thinks he's doing exactly that.

It's always made sense to me
And I think the theory still holds up. I'd rather the terrorists target our soldiers in a foreign country than our civilians domestically—and I'm not at all embarrassed to admit that.

A breath of fresh common sense
From none other than Lileks.

Hmmm...
I don't know if I like this plan or not, but I join the WSJ editorial staff in congratulating the Congressman and Senator for shaking up the debate, and looking for some real solutions.

Of course, I'm NOT looking forward to the return of the infamous word "lockbox" to the political scene.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Dare I say it?
This seems to be a case of rational environmentalism—economically viable and logical.

Sounds like the nuclear option
From a Yale alumni email newsletter:

Yale Poll Finds Americans Worried About Oil Dependency
A new nationwide poll conducted by the School of Forestry & Environmental Studies shows that Americans are overwhelmingly concerned about the country's dependence on foreign oil and favor efforts to seek environmentally sound alternatives. "This poll underscores the fact that Americans want not only energy independence but also to find ways to break the linkage between energy use and environmental harm, from local air pollution to global warming," said Dean James Gustave Speth '64 '69 LLB.
Well, if you want energy generation without environmental harm, we all know which technology works...

Only Sith Deal in Absolutes

Monday, June 20, 2005

This post dedicated to The Man
USA Today collects some of the most memorable moments of 24 so far. Check it out here.

But it's Voo-Doo Economics, right?
You tell me.

Hmm...
It seems NYC is due for another terrorist attack, and The Man and I are going to be hit:

Bomb

67%

Natural Causes

60%

Gunshot

40%

Stabbed

40%

Suicide

40%

Drowning

33%

Eaten

33%

Disappear

27%

Suffocated

27%

Posion

20%

Cut Throat

20%

Disease

7%

Accident

7%

How Will You Die??
created with QuizFarm.com