Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2010

Iranian Nukes?

Michael J. Totten interviews Martin Kramer about the prospect of a nuclear Iran. It’s a deep discussion of the entire situation in the Middle East; read it all. Kramer concentrates especially on the division between problems in the Levant (Israel, Lebanon, Syria) and problems in and around the Persian Gulf. The conclusion:

Martin Kramer: It’s absolutely central to the strategy to maintain this division. And the only way to maintain it is for the United States to demonstrate tomorrow that it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons or to allow Israel to act unilaterally. The Gulf is a zone of American dominance, and the only way to assert that is to do what Carter did with the Carter Doctrine, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. He said there should be no outside power or local power that is allowed to challenge the United States in the Gulf. And a nuclear Iran clearly crosses that line.

If even Jimmy Carter was compelled to issue a doctrinal statement in the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan about the Persian Gulf, one would think that Barack Obama would see the need to do something similar. Obama should especially feel compelled to do so because there’s a question mark there. He should declare the Persian Gulf a nuclear-free zone. It’s too much to talk about the Middle East as a nuclear-free zone at this time, but the Persian Gulf is nuclear-free now, and it’s time for the United States to come out and say it should remain nuclear-free.

 

MJT: I have a hard time imaging Obama doing anything of the sort.

Martin Kramer: Yeah. Well.

MJT: But I suppose one never knows.

Martin Kramer: It would be an astonishing lapse if a man who promised to roll back nuclear proliferation watched proliferation develop in one of the least stable parts of the world, a place where the United States has only been able to maintain even a modicum of stability by a massive projection of its own forces. The region is of prime interest to the entire world for its energy resources. If it becomes nuclearized, it will be the one thing for which Barack Obama would always be remembered by history, and he would be remembered by history as a failure.

Read Full Post »

The Firing of Juan Williams

Juan Williams speaks out about his own firing:

Well, now that I no longer work for NPR let me give you my opinion. This is an outrageous violation of journalistic standards and ethics by management that has no use for a diversity of opinion, ideas or a diversity of staff (I was the only black male on the air). This is evidence of one-party rule and one sided thinking at NPR that leads to enforced ideology, speech and writing. It leads to people, especially journalists, being sent to the gulag for raising the wrong questions and displaying independence of thought.

Daniel Schorr, my fellow NPR commentator who died earlier this year, used to talk about the initial shock of finding himself on President Nixon’s enemies list. I can only imagine Dan’s revulsion to realize that today NPR treats a journalist who has worked for them for ten years with less regard, less respect for the value of independence of thought and embrace of real debate across political lines, than Nixon ever displayed.

I went to college with Juan Williams, and, though I disagree with him on many issues, I’ve always found him to be intellectually honest, open-minded, and willing to engage in real debate and discussion. Most commentary on the left seems to consist mostly of name-calling and straw man fallacies; Williams shows respect for his opponents and their opinions even when he disagrees with them. That, of course, is part of what got him fired.

Roger Simon suggests that Congress pass a “Juan Williams law,” prohibiting all government funding or bailouts for any news organization operating domestically. I think that’s an excellent idea. I’ve argued against funding for NPR for years. What justification has there ever been for having a government-funded news organization? It’s especially important now, for as one of Roger’s commenters points out, “we do not need to pay for the privilege of being lied to, lied about and destroyed from within.”

Some further thoughts:

  1. Bill O’Reilly told Juan on his show last night that this is good for him; he’ll get a fat book contract to write about what you can and can’t say in America. Undoubtedly true. Fox News has already offered him a $2 million, 3-year deal.
  2. Bill also told him that he’s now far more popular than he was a day before. Also true. Most air travelers have had a thought similar to the one he reported at some point since 9/11; they now realize that the arrows of political correctness are pointed at them.
  3. The CEO of NPR in effect called Juan crazy. That was foolish, making her look crazy and vindictive and opening up a new avenue of legal liability.
  4. Once again we see that leftists are far more intolerant than conservatives. Michael Barone observes, “An interesting contrast: while many NPR listeners apparently could not stomach that Williams also appeared on Fox News. But it doesn’t seem that any perceptible number of Fox News viewers had any complaints that Williams also worked for NPR. The Fox audience seems to be more tolerant of diversity than the NPR audience.” Roger Ailes: “Juan has been a staunch defender of liberal viewpoints since his tenure began at Fox News in 1997. He’s an honest man whose freedom of speech is protected by Fox News on a daily basis.”
  5. We also see that leftists can’t think clearly. The standard line seems to be that Williams said that all Muslims are terrorists. But obviously he said no such thing. He reported his own feelings. He also said he regretted them. But all it takes to make his feelings rational is some correlation, in general or at an airport, between being a Muslim and being a terrorist. Leftists look foolish when they deny that there is such a correlation. And don’t forget the recent terror alert asking travelers to be on the watch for Mumbai-style attacks!
  6. NPR’s action, at the start of early voting for the Congressional elections, emphasizes how intolerant, out-of-touch, and biased the media are. This can only be good for Republicans. Elizabeth Scalia (who has lots more good stuff; read the whole thing): “I wonder if it was smart of NPR to–12 days out from an election where leftism is headed for a defeat of rejectionre-inforce the perception that both liberalism and the media are out of control; that they have utterly cast off their former roles as champions of free speech and free thought, in favor of compulsory conformity.”

UPDATE: Victor Davis Hanson pretty much says it all.

Read Full Post »

Sociologist-in-chief is dusting off his cliched and inaccurate rendering of evolutionary biology to explain why voters are reacting so negatively to Democrats,

Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,’ Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. ‘And the country’s scared.

OK, when I read this (up to the ‘Obama’ in this quote) I thought BO was talking about the Democrat candidates, Democrats in general, and Jamie Galbraith in particular.

This is a very, very rich quote to mine, which is why so many people are donning their hard hats and setting the blast caps. The country’s scared: he finally has that right. I mean, give him credit (come on, you can do it): he isn’t calling us a bunch of racists. The rest of the quote has him attributing our “fear” to the economic downturn.

But, of course, Barry the Science Guy can’t even get his “fight or flight” response right. We lower order animals-who-vote are purely emotional and can’t process “science.” My very, very first reaction to this was, “So, show me the ‘science.’ What ‘science’? What ‘facts’ are so compelling that only someone in the grip of terrorizing fear can turn a blind eye and vote against a Democrat, and you know, tell a pollster that they not only miss George Bush, they’re getting a little nostalgic for Sweater Boy?”

Those were the days: real hair and cardies with pockets.


Fun fact: the sweater that Jimmah wore for his Oval Office Thermostat speech is in his Presidential library/museum. Contrast with Hawaii B-O, who keeps the temps at +75 F. I say we send November 3 condolence packages of sweaters to Chairman Zero with little notes saying, “It’s a cold, cold world out there and cold voters are Republican voters. Aloha means ‘good-bye,’ too.”

Read Full Post »

How timely and topical. Brett Favre takes one in comedic fashion, right where most of the discussion about him has been this season. Like Homer says, “it works on so many levels.”

Read Full Post »

Here’s Your Bill for 2010

Some liberal web sites have been distributing a purported bill for an average taxpayer, asking, “What part do you not want to pay for?” They’re implying that the Tea Parties are making a fuss about nothing, that the tab for government services is quite reasonable. The bill is meretricious, using 2007 data, taking a family that owes only $5,000 in taxes, and then showing items that add up to far less.

I thought it might be interesting to see what the federal government has spent in fiscal 2010 for an average family of four. I took total spending, divided by the population of the United States to get per capita numbers, and then multiplied by four to get a bill for government services for a family of four. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. The list is incomplete; the items don’t add up to the total precisely.

Steel yourself. I was shocked by these numbers. Keep in mind that they’re only federal spending; state and local governments, combined, spend almost as much.

This is what the federal government spent, apportioned to an average family of four:

Social Security $10,027
National defense 9,313
Medicare 5,920
Medicaid 4,341
Welfare 3,705
Unemployment 2,516
Interest 2,432
Veterans 1,615
Transportation 1,379
Education K-12 1,089
Housing assistance 997
Mortgage assistance 721
Education, general 680
Foreign aid 534
Medical research 482
Agriculture 430
General government 396
Police 373
Community development 369
Environmental protection 311
Higher education 264
Basic research 241
Courts 238
Energy 199
Water supply 161
Foreign military aid 128
Prisons 100
Public health 57
Recreation 52
Total $48,180


That’s just about the median family income. It gives a new relevance to this joke about tax simplification:

UPDATE: Add in state and local government spending and the tab comes to over $80,000!

Read Full Post »

There is lots of speculation over on Twitter as to the title of the book thrown at Obama this weekend. If you search #bookthrownatobama , you will get a lot of info, a sample:

  • The Constitution For Dummies
  • Hawaiin Citizenship Made Easy
  • U.S. History 101
  • Dorf On Golf In 57 States
  • Wheres Waldo’s Job?
  • The U.S. Health Care Act of 2010 (it killed 3 people behind him)
  • How I learned to stop worrying and love Big Brother Obama

And my favorite …. (from Caleb Howe (@CalebHowe) who I met at the Red State Gathering here in Austin)

  • One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, At Some Point You’ve Caught Enough Fish

PS   Another twitter suggestion …   Kindles are lighter.

 

Read Full Post »

The One Nation Rally

The Left’s One Nation Rally in Washington was getting more airplay on CNN and MSNBC than Glenn Beck’s rally did, despite its smaller size. (CBS estimates 87,000; Beck’s rally drew many times that. Stations were driven to use images from the Beck rally and the Tea Party to make it look as if the crowd was large!) I wonder whether CPUSA members, and members of similar socialist groups, really believe that they reflect the true face of America. John Hinderaker sums it up:

Two comments on today’s “One Nation Working Together” event in Washington:

1) Four hundred organizations, including all the major labor unions, the NAACP, the Sierra Club, Code Pink, the Green Party, the Communist Party, the United Methodist Church, Planned Parenthood and hundreds more were not able to turn out as many people as Glenn Beck.

2) One of the stated purposes of the gathering was to protest against lack of civility in public discourse. The program was opened by Ed Schultz.

The Left may be in even more disarray than we thought.

UPDATE: Here’s an estimate of 50,000, 6-8 times smaller than the Beck rally. (HT: Instapundit.)

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit has the pictures.

Read Full Post »

“Wow. Just Wow.”

That’s what one commenter has said after viewing the video released in support of the 10:10 initiative, and international effort to get people to cut their carbon emissions 10%. My thoughts exactly. I thought I was watching a heavy-handed spoof of the totalitarian impulses behind the environmental movement. And then I realized that it wasn’t a spoof. Good grief.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 54 other followers