"I can't wait until 2008"

A must watch video. Enjoy!

HT: Hugh Hewitt (3/28/2007)

Year of the Donkey?

Pete Du Pont analyzes the strategy of the left leading up to the 2008 election. "Are the Democrats rising, or just listing to the left?" he asks. His conclusion is they are mostly "listing to the left" and if they are not careful they will have a Republican President take office in January 2009!

His most interesting paragraph regards Mrs. Clinton and her real agenda:

• "There are many more clues to the Democratic Party's revitalized '60s liberalism. Mrs. Clinton has told us that "we are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good," which means bigger government and fewer individual choices. She has also pledged to do in her administration what she tried to do in her husband's: "When I am president, we will have universal health care coverage in our country." "

With this vision and with the "cut and run" tactic all of the Democratic candidates are now promoting, if we don't elect a Republican President in 2008 we are going to have a very rough time going into the teen years of the twenty-first century!

A thought: the above quote - "we are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good," - sounds familiar to me. Could it be several world movements tried this in the twentieth century and most failed?

Numbers I continue thinking about...

Since February 12, 2007, (43 days):

• 150,500 abortions have taken place in the U.S.
• 4,945 people have died on our highways in the U.S.
• 86 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq
• 86 U.S. soldiers have died by accident worldwide

Comments?

Global Warming - Michael Barone summarizes the current situation

In his column "Gore's Faith Is Bad Science" Mr. Barone explains why we should tread very carefully trying to affect the Earth's climate. His penultimate paragraph is a summary of the conclusion I have come to:

• "Gore and his followers seem to assume that the ideal climate was the one they got used to when they were growing up. When temperatures dropped in the 1970s, there were warnings of an impending ice age. When they rose in the 1990s, there were predictions of disastrous global warming. This is just another example of the solipsism of the baby boom generation, the pampered and much-praised age cohort that believes the world revolves around them and that all past history has become irrelevant."

Note the word SOLIPSISM: the view that the self is all that exists or can be known.

His theory fits with a lot of other things going on in our society, so why not this?

'A Triumph for Pelosi' Embarrassment

Todays Wall Street Journal editorial exposes the supplemental spending bill which was passed by the House of Representatives yesterday for what it is: a rejection of the war in a very un-principled manner by 216 Democrats and 2 Republicans, with the swing votes being purchased with $25 Billion of pork. And all this posturing for a bill that has no chance of becoming law.

The Democratic Party should be ashamed! If you don't want the war, have the courage to not vote to fund it!

Want to understand the fired U.S. Attorney kerfuffle?

Charles Krauthammer in his "Unnecessary Scandal" column has the clearest explanation I have seen of the "scandal".

It is not a scandal, just business as usual by the administration and mistakes in tactics which have opened the door for the "get W" at any cost crowd. Too bad they can't put their energies into more constructive efforts!

More on Bias

Dean Barnett writes on the "dead tree" MSM problems and his take on the problem with newspaper bias. The left biased newspapers are losing sales each quarter and yet do nothing to stop this slow bleeding. You know my theory: their agenda is more important than their business at this point in our history!

Hard to believe, but I see no other answer.

"Bush Lied is a Big Lie"

Debra Saunders writes a good summary attacking the historical revisionism that most of the left insists on propagating. I cannot understand why they continue to do this when it is so clear that there were no lies.

Hatred of W and the irrationality it causes is the obvious reason. But it is a losing strategy in the long run, so I hope they keep it up.

Pacifists, who are flexing their muscle in the Democratic Party, are another reason. They will do or say anything to stop a war; even a justified war.

Honesty would be the best policy for both these groups. Disagree with the tactics, but don't undermine the effort with distortions of the facts which are easily checked.

Bias?

The New York Times shows its bias in subtle ways. A great example today in an editorial - "Students' Right to Free Speech" - that shows a concious effort to support their agenda by distorting their presentation of the facts. Note the two emphasized parts of this paragraph:


"The Bush administration joined the school district in arguing that schools have broad authority to limit talk about drugs because of the importance of keeping drugs away from young people. But if schools can limit speech on any subject deemed to be important, students could soon be punished for talking about the war on terror or the war in Iraq because the government also considers those subjects important." (my emphasis)

The first "importance", which you can't tell is from the Bush Administration or the school district, is speaking about a very predominant view in our society, that keeping drugs away from young people is good.

What does this have to do with "government also considers those subjects important."? Seems to me they should know that the society is split on both subjects they reference, so one would assume - without an agenda - that the government and the school district would take a quite different view limiting speech in this area. Therefore, students would not be "punished" for speaking on these subjects.

The writer knows this. The agenda wins out!

Christopher Hitchens reminds us why we're in Iraq

In "So, Mr. Hitchens, Weren't You Wrong About Iraq?" Mr. Hitchens battles all the historical revisionism in the MSM. Do you remember all these facts?

His closing FAQ (the column is done in the FAQ format that Dean Barnett often uses):

"So, you seriously mean to say that we would not be living in a better or safer world if the coalition forces had turned around and sailed or flown home in the spring of 2003?"

• "That's exactly what I mean to say."

Immigration

Ruben Navarette promotes the center position (he and W) in his latest column: "The Place to Be in the Immigration Debate."

Problem is the Immigration Debate is now on the wrong problem! We do not yet need to worry about the 12 to 20 million illegals in our country until we stop the inflow at the borders. This sounds too simple, but if you take a deep breath and think about it, this MUST happen before we can resolve the current debate.

Just imagine your change in attitude if the Government could guarantee you the entry of no more illegals across the Mexican border. We would all be much more likely to take the central position.

Taking that position now is only adding fuel to a fire that threatens our laws and society!

Tierney Sutton

Ran across a great Jazz vocalist this week. I am typically not into the music scene, so this may be old news, but Tierney Sutton is really good! You can read about her here.

I downloaded her first album "Introducing Tierney Sutton" (1998) at emusic and enjoyed all the songs - especially "The Song is You" and "My Heart Stood Still".

She doesn't sing, in my opinion, she "plays her voice." Listen, and you'll know what I mean!

Plaudits to the Philadelphia Inquirer!

An opinion piece published in the Philadelphia Inquirer today ("One Last Thing/Taking closer look at Al Gore's truth" by Johathan Last of the Weekly Standard) contradicts my opinion in the previous post that the left-leaning MSM does not let us have both sides of many issues, including global warming. I congratulate them! And I wonder when the NYT will publish this piece and NPR and PBS will have Mr. Last on for an interview (maybe they have!).

The most interesting paragraph was the following:

• "What's more, some broad historical evidence, such as that presented by Thomas Gale Moore in his book Climate of Fear, suggests that Earth's "warming periods" have been accompanied by advances in human civilization. As the saying goes, past performance is not an indication of future gains. But if the climate were to warm gradually, it's not obvious why man wouldn't adapt and flourish again, as we have in the past."

Perhaps, if man is contributing to global warming, it is simply a planned part of existence to further the advances in human civilization. Possible?

TWO TAKES ON ALBERTO GONZALES AND THE U.S.ATTORNEY "SCANDAL"

Bias in the Main Stream Media (MSM) is always interesting to look at and compare in order to understand our own bias.

Here is the New York Times editorial from 3/14/07.

Here is the Wall Street Journal editorial from 3/14/07. I'll let you make up your own mind on which presents the least biased view.

NOTE: the thing we should all remember is that all of us have bias, and everything we read and hear shoud be calibrated for that bias.

Ruben Naverrette: "The Complicated Job of Being a Father"

Mr. Navarrette is one of my favorite columnists. He writes for the San Diego Union-Tribune and I consider him a center-left columnist (he may disagree with that!) who is thoughtful and logical - traits that I feel are quite often lacking on the left.

"The Complicated Job of Being a Father" reminds me of Peggy Noonan - and that is not a small compliment as I hold her writing a peg above most - taking a personal event and relating it to the society, particularly the political ether of the moment, in a way that is not only insightful, but instructive to the reader. The column talks about Conway Twitty, Rudy Giuliani and Barack Obama, before it reaches the penultimate paragraph and his conclusions on how he will raise his new-born son:

"...Here's the plan: I'll push him to excel, and I'll demand that he give his very best efforts to every task. I'll teach him what it means to honor his responsibilities. I'll teach him to treat everyone with respect and to never look down on anyone. When there is conflict - as there will be - I'll treat him with respect. When the time comes to choose a path in life, I'll try to let him make his own decisions and mistakes, as long he doesn't harm himself or others. And if he fails, I'll try to catch him.

I have to. That's my job."

Speaking as a father who has been through that arduous task: "You have the right plan, Mr. Navarrette, and understanding it that clearly at this early stage will guarantee success!."

Premature Politics and Early Character Assassination

Thomas Sowell writes about our rush to the 2008 Presidential Season and some of the negative effects happening. I could not agree more with his conclusions on why character assassination works. The following quotation is so right on it hurts:

"The significance of character assassination goes beyond a cynical ploy by politicians. Such ploys are effective only because they appeal to many people who cannot conceive of anyone opposing their political agenda without those political opponents being stupid, evil or corrupt.

In other words, many no longer consider it necessary to meet arguments with counter-arguments, evidence with counter-evidence or logical analysis with logical analysis to the contrary.

Not even in our education system are logic and evidence the touchstones. Not since the days of the Hitler Youth have young people been subjected to more propaganda on more politically correct issues.

At one time, educators boasted that their role was not to teach students what to think but how to think. Today, their role is for too often to teach students what to think on everything from immigration to global warming to the new sacred trinity of 'race, class and gender.'"

We should all wake up to the truth in those four paragraphs! The brief article is worth the time to read in its entirety.

OBSERVATION - March 3, 2007

While driving I observed the following on the rear window of a Dodge Caravan:

• MY KIDS KICK ASS!
• Kristina Jimmy

This struck me as odd, but as I passed the car I noticed a ROSARY hanging from the rear-view mirror. The two observations together struck me as even more odd!

Coarsening of our society? Comments?

China's Free-Market

Listened to an interesting conversation this morning between Laura Ingraham and Larry Kudlow regarding China. I have great respect for both of these people, but they were not communicating well on at least one aspect of the discussion.

Laura felt strongly that the U.S. should use sanctions and other economic tools to discourage trade with China for certain unacceptable Chinese actions such as the pirating of intellectual property. Her argument was based on our success in doing this during Reagan's administration which eventually led to the disbanding of Soviet Communism.

Larry said that the two situations are not comparable, and that the reason we brought China into the World Trade Organization was to give us leverage to solve these problems over time. He pointed to areas where we are making progress in changing China's policies. I had to think why Mr. Kudlow did not see the situations as comparable and believe I have reached agreement with him.

The Soviet Union was a centrally-planned economy that was never very strong from the beginning. Reagan saw that affecting the Soviet economy with various pressures, including sanctions, had the possibility of bringing down this already weak structure. He was right!

China is a Communist country, just as the Soviet Union was, but is operating under a new paradigm: Free-Market Economy with Central Political Control. With their free-market they have many alternatives if we introduce sanctions or bring pressures to bear that the Soviet Union never had. Many of these could be very detrimental to the U.S. Economy, it seems to me.

I found it interesting to think about since we should all realize that China will take much of our attention during the twenty first century and we need to prepare while we handle the other less significant distractions such as Al Queda, Iraq, Iran and North Korea - not unimportant, but less significant in the long run!