Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Waist Deep in the Big Muddy

...and the damn fools said; "Move On!"

Liberals drop public Sheehan role

The disgusting, neo-Nazi, moonbat and Stalinist Sheehanoia support groups fear they have "muddied" her message?

Sorry. They aren't climbing off Cindy's back because we didn't get "her" message, or that we were unclear about it. It's the clarity they've found to be the problem.

It isn't that they muddied her message, it's that they took it over; it's that they made her grief into an unsustainable public spectacle; it's about the too public effects of the agitprop they fed her; it's about the fact they were caught changing a mother's grief into their own brand of Bush hatred and, mostly, it is because it isn't working.

If Cindy hadn't become perceived as a MoveOn Moonie, MoveOn wouldn't stop the ad campaign. They don't give a rat's ass about anything except damaging George Bush. If that promotes ad hominem attacks over policy discourse, so what? Bushitler should be impeached! Then we'll talk about our surrender in Afghanistan and Iraq.

If you believe "the protesters will no longer receive strategic and political advice from Fenton Communications, a large, left-wing public-relations firm", please realize that that means only that there will be no more trackable finances. Fenton, et. al., will be giving "pro bono" support even as Mintwood Media Collective, picks up the "down home, grass roots" flavors of Ben & Jerry's.

I guess that means dropping calling the past 250 years of US history "evil", and it means no longer associating with Cindy when she repeats their mantra about other mothers of soldiers who've died defending their country as 'brainwashed' supporters of 'murder and mayhem'.

Cindy is damaged goods. They did it. They know it.

They even tell us what a joke this change is:
Organizers of the bus tour expressed hope that they might continue to receive financial donations from powerful liberal advocacy groups such as MoveOn and TrueMajority, which was founded by Ben & Jerry's ice cream magnate Ben Cohen. But they are focused on soliciting contributions from people who oppose the Iraq war.

"We're renting the buses; we're collecting the funding to make it all possible, so this is a grass-roots effort," said organizer Nancy Lessin of Military Families Speak Out, one of four groups paying for the bus tour.

The other groups sponsoring the trip are Gold Star Families for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War and Veterans for Peace.

Organizers said they would continue to receive support from high-profile groups such as Code Pink, a women's group that holds weekly war protests outside Walter Reed Army Hospital. Code Pink protesters brandish signs with such messages as "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton."
Link to Discover the Network mine. Check the rest of the above groups there yourself.
Too late folks, Cindy's cover is blown. Now you need Joe Wilson.

Update: 6:52PM See also this post at Q&O for an anti-war reporter's view of Camp Cindy and its denizens. Good reporting.

Monday, August 29, 2005

Department of Departments Department

Gun Control Canada

Edmonton Sun

EDITORIAL: So much for gun control
Well, there's only one of two choices here, and neither one reflects terribly well on current Liberal crime policies. Either these guns are getting into the country through the United States or from other countries through our ports of entry and the federal government's customs agents are not able to prevent it, or these guns are, in fact, originating from here in Canada and the $2-billion boondoggle of a gun registry is - surprise, surprise! - not stopping criminal from using guns.
Heh.

Saturday, August 27, 2005

Michigan Apologizes, all of us


Since it is the State of Michigan, and specifically The University of Michigan, that provides a platform for Juan Cole, Michiganians should be particularly offended by his slimy anti-Americanism.

Recently he slandered Steven Vincent, a recent murder victim of jihadists in Iraq.

It's nice to see Lisa Ramaci-Vincent, Steven's wife, rip Cole a new one.

Thanks to Murdoc Online.

This has been around for a few days (and I have several other posts I haven't gotten to), but if you do not already know of it, please read. It's worth keeping alive in any case.

One, Two, Many

At NRO John Lott dissects Canada's gun laws and the idea that gun crime arises from guns smuggled in from the US.
...Drug gangs that are firing guns in places like Toronto seem to have little trouble getting the drugs that they sell and it should not be surprising that they can get the weapons they need as well.

The experiences in the U.K. and Australia, two island nations whose borders are much easier to monitor, should also give Canadian gun controllers some pause. The British government banned handguns in 1997 but recently reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four years from 1998-99 to 2002-03...

With Canada's reported violent-crime rate of 963 per 100,000 in 2003, a rate about twice the U.S.'s (which is 475), Canada's politicians are understandably nervous.
TOTH to Of Arms and the Law.

Friday, August 26, 2005

Criminals, by Definition, Don't Respect the Law

People are being shot on the streets of Toronto.
More than a dozen people have been killed over the past month in the city alone, leaving politicians and police scrambling to come up with a plan to stop the bloodshed.
A recent victim was a campaigner against violence and was the father of 10:
A father was gunned down last night in the same Scarborough apartment building courtyard where he weeks ago staged a ''Stop-the-Violence'' barbecue, residents said. ...

Police said there was an altercation, and he was shot more than once by a man.
"He was shot several times" is the non-PC way to put it. My first thought is that if he had had his own gun he might have survived. Maybe he'd only have been shot once. Or not at all.

I know the neighborhood at Markham Road and Eglinton Avenue.

The very first house I ever bought was 4 miles away. If I still lived there I would be appalled, and I think the people who live there now should be appalled. I would also be afraid because I was legally prevented from effectively defending myself. Who would defend me and my family?

Obviously, not the police - even though the
guarantee of police protection is why Canada decided this law-abiding man could, and should, be disarmed.

The Toronto Police were not able to protect this father of 10, though that promise is implicit in exercising the power to prohibit him from simple and effective self-defense.


Under Canadian legal assumption, the Toronto Police should be condemned for this death. They ungrammatically advertise that they exist "To Serve and Protect."

In this case they neither protected nor served. That they've promised to do so is folly, and that they should be held to this idiotic standard is only appropriate because they've embraced it.

The Toronto Police think increased street gun-violence arises from handguns smuggled in from the United States, or being stolen from law abiding Canadians.
Police Chief Bill Blair has said gang rivalries have been intensified by increased access to guns that have either been smuggled from the United States or stolen from gun owners in Canada
Maybe; though accepting this theory means recognizing restrictive Canadian gun laws as useless.

Maybe, though criminals would find another source if all the guns in the US vanished tomorrow and all the registered guns in Canada had already been stolen. Canada's borders are generally porous, after all.

Maybe, even though private possession of handguns has, for all practical purposes,
been banned in Canada since the Plains of Abraham.

Notwithstanding, you can sympathize with Chief Blair's angst-ridden search for a reason for the failure of the gun-ban outside the virtue of Canadian law. He
could never have become Police Chief in TO without getting behind the gun-registry program.

A program that has
spent over 2 billion dollars, and has obviously failed.

Those Canadians who have registered their guns have been charged about 140 million dollars for the privilege. Every man woman and child in Canada, therefore, had to cough up a difference of about $60 in order to eradicate gun crime.

Cheap. If effective.

The politicians need someone to blame when the number of shootings goes up despite their assurances of increased protection in exchange for decreased freedom and higher taxes.

But, this "increased handgun violence due to outside forces" meme is senseless and indefensible.

For all practical purposes, private possession of handguns has never been an issue in Canada. The costly registration program didn't change the law regarding the weapons in question. They were already banned.

So, if one would blame increased smuggling, one must also demonstrate why that makes the slightest sense.

There is no logical reason for increased smuggling of handguns from the US. Why does Chief Blair think it relevant to mention it? (This exercise is left to the student. Hint: Gerhard Schroeder at election time.)

There isn't even any evidence for the Chief's contention in his own department's statistics.
According to Toronto police statistics, about 1,200 guns have been seized so far in 2005, consistent with previous years
His own employees statistics demonstrate either; a) they are incompetent, or b) their Chief is a liar, or b1) he is a fool.

The Toronto Police cannot simultaneously claim Toronto thugs have increased access to guns (maybe from the US, or maybe stolen from law-abiding Canadians), and that they can't find any of those guns.

If you conduct a hugely expensive gun confiscation/registration effort and that is followed by an increase in gun crime, you've either got to modify your reasoning or blame outside forces.

The most gun-restrictive city in the United States, Washington D.C., has the highest rate of gun crime. If any reality deprived do-gooder on either side of the 49th could ever take a hint Canadians and Americans could learn from each other.

As it stands, we have elitist BS artists in ascendance.

Update: 11:49AM, 27-Aug-05, from Christie Blatchford. Apparently the victim wasn't quite the model citizen initially reported. This information reduces the irony content, but changes nothing else. Replacement irony would be if he was shot with his own illegal gun.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

How Canada Could Help in Iraq

Click to enlarge.


Our northern neighbors have extensive experience in Constitutional conversation... interminable conversation.

Since the Canadian Constitution was repatriated (brought home from the United Kingdom) in 1982, you might wonder why this Globe and Mail cartoon is dated 1991.

That's how long it took to not resolve Canada's outstanding issues of Federalism.

See here and here for a history.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Ooo la, la, those Quebecois Federalists.

Actually not, since Quebec still hasn't signed the Canadian Constitution, despite that document's concessions, for example, to PQ control of immigration and language.

Readers who do not know about this should be advised that Quebec requires all immigrants to learn French at the expense of English - in an officially bilingual country. Now they're trying to further control Western oil.

Similar issues are raging over the Iraq Constitution. Want to bet which country resolves them first?

TOTH to Small Dead Animals for this, National Energizing Western Separation Program:
...a Montreal accounting professor called on the federal government yesterday to nationalize the oil industry
Thanks to professor Leo-Paul Lauzon for giving us a very clear idea why any given Iraqi might reject such a perverted idea of Federalism. So should Albertans.

I have a very funny old cartoon about Canadian Constitutional negotiating competence somewhere. I'll see if I can post it tomorrow.

I ask again: Where are the Alberta bumper stickers reading: "Let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the Dark!"?

Worth Reading


Leak: Draft of Bush Answer to Cindy Sheehan - from Scrappleface.

Scott Ott is a lot more than just a funny face:
Dear Mrs. Sheehan,

You have asked me to identify the noble cause for which your son died. I have not answered you personally out of respect for the nobility of your son's sacrifice.

Being president forces me into the spotlight, but I would rather stand in the shadows of men like Casey Sheehan.

Directing national attention on my response to your protest creates a distraction from what matters. The focus of our attention, and our admiration, should rest on people like Casey Sheehan, who stand in the breach when evil threatens to break out and consume a helpless people...
It gets even better.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Virtual Galt's Gulch(es)?


Arnold Kling at Tech Central Station writes:
A columnist in India, Subir Gokarn, has observations that might apply equally well to the United States.
"I've often been asked for my opinion on what the country's sunrise sectors are. My response, at first tongue-in-cheek, but becoming more and more serious over the years, is that anybody who decides to compete against the government has a great chance of succeeding. Four activities come easily to mind...
See Incumbent Politicians vs. the Long Tail for the four activities.

See also Kling's We Need 250 States.

Sunday, August 21, 2005

Master Cpl. Arron Perry


Thanks to Neale News.

Top Canadian sniper quits in frustration
A Canadian Forces sniper who set a distance record by killing an al-Qaida fighter from more than two kilometres away has quit in frustration and may go into mercenary work.

Master Cpl. Arron Perry made national headlines twice in 2002: the first was anonymous, after he shot an al-Qaida fighter in Afghanistan from 2,430 metres, a world record.

The second was public and ugly. Perry, 33, and a 13-year veteran, was accused of discreditable conduct after he allegedly cut the finger off an al-Qaida corpse, defecated on another and then had his picture taken with a corpse that had a lit cigarette hanging from his lips and a sign around his neck reading "F**k Terrorism."

The investigation was eventually dropped and no charges were ever laid, but Perry's reputation was left in tatters.

A military ombudsman's investigation was launched into whether Perry and other snipers, who were seconded to an American unit to provide cover fire and support, were unfairly treated after their return from Afghanistan.

Five of the snipers received the Bronze Star from the U.S. military for their efforts, which included killing about 20 members of al-Qaida. ...
This blog recently asked: Where will the next Sergeant Ernest "Smokey" Smith come from?

The question goes unanswered, and may be becoming unanswerable.

Arron Perry would like to be an instructor. I think there is a place for him in the US military. I hope that happens and that he brings his "FT" picture with him.

A New Century

She knew. One glance at that smug countenance glaring through the open window of the booth was all I needed. She knew I had voted for Bush just as surely as she knew that Bush lied. And now this Royal Canadian Customs Officer was to make me pay for it. The pickup truck I was driving had been her first clue, but my big mistake was the yellow ribbon on the tailgate. Those cameras let them see more than just license plates.

“I want to see your passport and another piece of picture ID” she glared. I don’t have a passport and told her so. “Then I need your birth certificate and two pieces of photo ID”. I had to inform her in my most humble tone of voice that I had no birth certificate either. “Then how can you prove your citizenship to me?” she demanded. I told her that I had been crossing from Michigan to Canada for 40 years and never needed to do so previously. But of course she was ready for that and recited chapter and verse of Canadian law to me. And so it went for what seemed like half a day. The portly Customs Officer contemptuously berated me, repeatedly demonstrating her power and the power of the Dominion over Bush-voting, pickup-driving cowboys.

But in the end, the power of Yanqui dollars won the day. I was allowed to cross in the reasonable (but false) expectation that I would spend lavishly my ill-gotten hard currency in the t-shirt shops of Stratford and Kingston.

I cannot remember a summer when I did not vacation in Ontario. We were so close to our cousins that we accepted their currency and defended their soil as if each were our own. Growing up in Michigan two things were certain: the supremacy of the automobile and the friendship of Canada.

We had been side by side in the trenches of WWI. In the late 1930s the U.S. Army was allowed to build a road across Canada connecting Alberta and Alaska. In the next war we both sent pilots to the Battle of Britain, fought together in the hedgerows of France, and shared intelligence freely. Canadian Sailors on corvettes defended our merchant ships against the U-Boat menace with their lives and vice versa. We were jointly proud of “the longest undefended border in the world”. With NAFTA we formalized an example of free trade for the entire world. In Iran Canadians risked their own safety to save the live of U.S. diplomats.

And so it was in the now distant 20th Century when Michiganians saw smiles and heard in sincere friendly tones, “Welcome to Canada”.

Update 10:15AM, 2-Oct-05. Removed some Interent Explorer "artifacts". I do have to check this more often in IE. ;)

Things You Will Read in the Lansing State Journal - 2


The Lansing State Journal today published an editorial entitled 'Peace Mom'. It follows in its entirety:
Some of you may not care for Cindy Sheehan's brand of protest. She's the "Peace Mom" who began a vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch, seeking an audience with the man who ordered U.S. troops to war. (She recently left to visit her ailing mother, but plans to return).

Even Americans who oppose her methods, and anti-war message, ought to admit that Sheehan's is a compelling story of war's cost. Her 24-year-old son was killed in Iraq last year. She has met President Bush before - and said complimentary things about him - but Sheehan's attitude toward the war, and Bush, have changed. Now, she's something of a media star.

None of which diminishes her grief. It is no less genuine than that of other, grief-stricken parents who have lost sons and daughters in Iraq - but who support the war.

Sheehan is a face of war we don't see often enough; the one far from the battlefields, the one in a daily fight against immeasurable loss. Look at her and, like it or not, the haunted face of war stares back.
I don't think we have the "haunted face of war" here. We have the haunted face of paranoia and derangement.

I've pointed this out to the LSJ editors:
If Sheehan's face is "a face of war we don't often see enough", I'd say the 30,000 references in the last 2 weeks have balanced that off.

I think she deserves all respect and sympathy for the loss of her son.

Dishonoring her son's decision by promoting ultra-left-wing fantasies of America as evil deserves contempt. It is fundamentally different from protesting the war.

Whether or not Sheehan's face is "a face of war we don't often see enough"; it is certainly the face of virulent anti-Semitism and hard-core hatred of America on principle. The loss of her son does not make the following true:

"We have no Constitution. We’re the only country with no checks and balances. We want our country back if we have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog sh-t in Washington! Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq. It’s OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons but we are waging nuclear war in Iraq, we have contaminated the entire country. It’s not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. Hypocrites! But Israel can occupy Palestine? Stop the slaughter!"

This was Sheehan's introduction for Lynne Stewart -"recently convicted of conspiracy and for passing along fatwas (Islamic religious edicts) from Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman to his terrorist followers in Egypt’s Islamic Group." - at San Francisco State University in May/05.

Perhaps Ms. Sheehan's grief has been captured and redirected into the nether regions of conspiracy theory. In any case, the face we see is not one of reason.

More Sheehan commentary:
"Our country has been overtaken by murderous thugs....gangsters who lust after fortunes and power; never caring that their addictions are at the expense of our loved ones, and the blood of innocent people near and far. We've watched these thugs parade themselves before the whole world as if they are courageous advocates for Christian moral values....and for the spread of democracy."

George Bush and his neo-conservatives killed my son, America has been killing people on this continent since it was started. This country is not worth dying for.”

"Could my son be dead because of an evil-neo con Pax Americana agenda? Wake up dude. This government has always been in the business of killing people. What is even better is if we kill people who are a different color or not Christian."

"We began the killing as soon as we stepped foot on these shores and the killing has gone on unabated for over 200 years."

Amrica was evil long before her son was killed. America is to be depised on principle.

This is her comment on what the content of her 2nd meeting with Bush would be:
"You tell me the truth. You tell me that my son died for oil. You tell me that my son died to make your friends rich. You tell me my son died to spread the cancer of Pax Americana, imperialism in the Middle East. You tell me that, you don't tell me my son died for freedom and democracy.'"

It's somewhat at odds with what she said after she met Bush in Jun/04:
"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis," Cindy said after their meeting. "I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."

I think she is deserving of pity twice. Once because she lost her son, and once because she has become unhinged.

She is not automatically due sympathy or respect for what she says.

Hers is the face of anguish and confusion so deep as to be far beyond its root cause in someone not resident in a mental hosptial, and it is a sad thing for her and for reasonable discourse.


Added to Blogroll


Michael Yon : Online Magazine
Michael Yon, author of "Danger Close," is currently in Iraq. Email: MichaelYonIraq@hotmail.com Michael Yon is an independent, informed observer chronicling the monumentally important events in the efforts to stabilize Iraq. His dispatches have the benefit of his life experiences without drawbacks based on deadlines or demands of marketplace. The cost of these dispatches is borne solely by Michael. Readers who enjoy these dispatches and want to support Michael's mission in Iraq, can make a contribution...
Worth checking out and supporting. Here's a long example, Jungle Law, of reporting you probably didn't know existed.

TOTH to Small Dead Animals.


Saturday, August 20, 2005

Diane Feinstein - Right for Once


TOTH to Little Green Footballs for bringing this AP story to my attention: San Francisco Shuns Retired USS Iowa
The USS Iowa joined in battles from World War II to Korea to the Persian Gulf. It carried President Franklin Roosevelt home from the Teheran conference of allied leaders, and four decades later, suffered one of the nation's most deadly military accidents.

Veterans groups and history buffs had hoped that tourists in San Francisco could walk the same teak decks where sailors dodged Japanese machine-gun fire and fired 16-inch guns that helped win battles across the South Pacific.

Instead, it appears that the retired battleship is headed about 80 miles inland, to Stockton, a gritty agricultural port town on the San Joaquin River and home of California's annual asparagus festival.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., a former San Francisco mayor, helped secure $3 million to tow the Iowa from Rhode Island to the Bay Area in 2001 in hopes of making touristy Fisherman's Wharf its new home.

But city supervisors voted 8-3 last month to oppose taking in the ship, citing local opposition to the Iraq war and the military's stance on gays, among other things.

"If I was going to commit any kind of money in recognition of war, then it should be toward peace, given what our war is in Iraq right now," Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi said.

Feinstein called it a "very petty decision."
It's far worse than that.

It's clear that elected officials in a major US city lack any historical perspective and that they would be perfectly content with losing the Battle of Iraq so long as al-Qaeda respects gay rights... and signs on to Kyoto.

Executive summary: San Francisco government is dangerous to your health and sanity.
Executive
précis: Terminally Stupid!.

Go Stockton! Boycott San Francisco.

Friday, August 19, 2005

Steyn on Sheehan - Hold your tears


Mark Steyn. Brilliant. As usual.

This piece you must read. There are excerpts below, but the intellectual clarity and depth of this essay is barely represented, even in extensive quoting.
...Ever since America’s all-adult, all-volunteer army went into Iraq, the anti-war crowd have made a sustained effort to characterise them as ‘children’. If a 13-year-old wants to have an abortion, that’s her decision and her parents shouldn’t get a look-in. If a 21-year-old wants to drop to the Oval Office shagpile and chow down on Bill Clinton, she’s a grown woman and free to do what she wants. But, if a 22- or 25- or 37-year old is serving his country overseas, he’s a wee ‘child’ who isn’t really old enough to know what he’s doing.

...‘Cindy Sheehan is my hero,’ says Christine Lahti, former star of TV’s Chicago Hope. ‘You can run, Bush, but you can’t hide. Her courage is waking up America.’ Evidently it woke up motion-picture personality Viggo Mortensen, who flew to Crawford on a pilgrimage to Mrs Sheehan. For the press corps, it’s not exactly the Spielberg/Clinton summer summit in the Hamptons, but it’s as close as they’re going to get.
Note to self: add Lahti and Mortensen to boycott list.

Cindy herself is somewhat less tolerant:
...‘We have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog shit in Washington! Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq.’

... ‘You tell me the truth. You tell me that my son died for oil. You tell me that my son died to make your friends rich. You tell me my son died to spread the cancer of Pax Americana.... You get America out of Iraq, you get Israel out of Palestine.’

...‘America has been killing people on this continent since it was started. This country is not worth dying for.’ That was part of her warm-up act for a speech by Lynne Stewart, the ‘activist’ lawyer convicted of conspiracy for aiding the terrorists convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Finally, the coup de grace:
...if Mrs Sheehan can insist her son’s corpse be the determining factor in American policy on Iraq, I don’t see why her marriage [divorcing over her activism] can’t be a metaphor for the state of the Democratic party.
Amen.

Keep Your Stick on the Ice


Neale News has a link titled Obscure US cable channel wins rights to broadcast NHL games...

Comcast Cable subsidiary OLN is available in 64 million American homes.

A better link title might have been: Obscure Sport to be televised in 64 million American homes.

This news will be especially important to those homes that don't already receive CBC on cable. Oh, and that also care about Professional Hockey.

I am, myself, partial to the Habs, but I'm unusual for a Yank.

Margot's a Kidder


Onetime actress, former babe and recently lapsed Canadian Margot Kidder deserves to be granted the courage and purity of her convictions. She has taken up US citizenship in order to be able to protest the war in Iraq.

I, for one, thought Canada was doing a credible job of protest in this regard already.

Apparently, Ms. Kidder thinks she can do better. Is a loopy actress calling Bush a moron better than a loopy Cabinet Minister (say, Carolyn Parrish) doing the same thing?

I'm open to the possibility. As a newly minted American she might have more effect on US foreign policy and world harmony, in general, than has Canada since 1965. She probably has more money to spend on defense, for example.

We'll assume she's not motivated by the relative advantages of US citizenship - like lower taxes, better health care and generally more freedom (though with her history she can't get a concealed carry permit in Michigan).

One can only say that she's done weirder things than this.

You do have to wonder if she realizes that, from now on, the taxes she pays support the war she's protesting.

Nah.

It does strongly argue for immigration reform, though.

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Ob-Gyns with 10 Month Waiting Lists


In 1971, when I applied for Landed Immigrant status (roughly speaking, getting a “green card”) in Canada, one of the requirements was a physical examination.

I knew nothing about the Canadian health care system, much less any doctor in Toronto. Yellow pages in hand, I called doctors until I found one who could examine me on the schedule mandated by Immigration Canada. This essentially random act resulted in my first exposure to the workings of the Canadian health care system.

At the appointed hour I explained to the doctor the reason of my need for a physical exam. In a clipped British accent, which I at first thought might be quaintly typical of Canadian professionals, he explained how health care worked. He told me that the government set fees for all procedures and that he accepted the rate they would pay for my physical.

What he would not accept was payment from the Ontario Ministry of Health for that service. He expected me to pay.

While I’m absorbing the fact that Ontario is going to pay for this physical even though I’d been in the country for only 2 weeks, he explained that the Province would send reimbursement directly to me. When I received this check I was to pay him with the proceeds. (With a little stretch you can imagine that this arrangement had something in common with HSAs.)

Having given this speech before he did not pause for Q&A, but went directly to the statement that he had moved to Canada from Britain to avoid being a government employee. He’d accept the government fee schedule, but he would not take their money.

Being well steeped in the literature of libertarianism and objectivism, I grasped his point immediately.

There existed a market related pricing mechanism. If you were happy with the doc you had, and if he would accept the government payment as a total payment, the transaction would be complete. If you liked a doc who wanted more money, you were allowed to pay it and he was allowed to accept it.

The government had set a floor price for the “commodity”. My new doctor wasn’t going to give the health bureaucrats the satisfaction of kowtowing to it. He was preserving the right to set his own fees.

Over the course of the next decade the Federal government decided that doctors should no longer set fees for their own services. Doctors, on the other hand, still thought it reasonable that they be allowed to set their own fees, a practice labeled by the government as “extra billing.”

That is, if the doc charged more than the government fee schedule, you had to pay the difference.


When the phrase "extra billing" stuck, you knew the docs were toast.


Since the individual provinces actually paid the doctors, the Feds had no direct control. They simply threatened to withhold “Federal” funds, i.e., the taxes collected from individuals in the provinces but sent to the Feds, if “extra billing” was not outlawed by that province. (Like our own 55 MPH speed limit, or .08 blood alcohol.)

To cut to the chase: After desultory provincial opposition the market for health care was banned. The result is a health care system declared unconstitutional by the Canadian Supreme Court.

Julia Necheff, of Canadian Press, reports that as result of this failure of central planning the
Canadian Medical Association proposes a “parallel private health care” system.

What?! If doctors had continued to be allowed to set their own fees there would not be this (particular) crisis in Canada’s health care system. This Rube Goldberg fix would never have had to be proposed

The mealy mouthed comments from Canadian Medical Association President-elect Dr. Ruth Collins-Nakai, merely demonstrates the fact that doctors in Canada have become proletarian lackeys, much less government employees:
[She] disputed that the medical association is endorsing private health care, as critics have charged.

The primary concern of physicians of Canada is that patients have timely access to quality care based on need, not ability to pay, said Collins-Nakai, a pediatric cardiologist in Edmonton.
If you’re going to quote Marx: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”, as a defense of anything called “private” business, maybe you should just shut up.

Some of the Canadian Medical Association voters got it right:
Supporters of the motion said too-long waiting lists are an urgent problem, the system is faltering and it needs help from the private sector.

"Governments have had 40 years to get the monopoly system right and the casualties are piling up - one of them has been my wife," said Dr. John Slater of Comox, B.C.

"I have stopped believing in Santa Claus and I have stopped believing the government will ever fix the monopoly system."
The simple solution is market pricing; already shown to work. A parallel private system can only be elitist, and its only virtue would be to make Prime Minister Paul Martin’s private health plan available to a few more wealthy Canadians.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

New London. Time for New Guy Fawkes?


This is hard to believe. It needs independent confirmation. I've seen it a couple of times in the blogosphere, but with only the following reference. It seems so improbable that New London city fathers would press their scrufulous greed so far.

Still, they've had encouragement from SCOTUS, or as Nancy Pelosi would say, G-d. I guess that excuses a certain amount of economic smiting among the Limousine Liberal coterie..

The Fairfield County Weekly reports on continuing abuse of property owners resulting from Kelo vs. New London.
Those who believe in the adage "when it rains, it pours" might take the tale of the plaintiffs in Kelo v. New London as a cue to buy two of every animal and a load of wood from Home Depot. The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that the city's original seizure of private property was constitutional under the principal of eminent domain, and now New London is claiming that the affected homeowners were living on city land for the duration of the lawsuit and owe back rent. It's a new definition of chutzpah: Confiscate land and charge back rent for the years the owners fought confiscation.
It reminds me of Gaza.

I have to ponder this....

Meeting the issue, by Cal Thomas.
There are many valid reasons President Bush should not meet again with Cindy Sheehan, the mother of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq.

...Here's the reason he should meet with her, but not alone: Other relatives of dead and wounded soldiers and some of the soldiers themselves should be included. He might also invite a few Iraqis who support the effort to free a people long held in bondage by Saddam Hussein and who face new bondage under the totalitarian dictatorship of Islamofacism if this effort fails.

The president should hold the meeting in a public place. Let the criticism flow, but let Iraqi women tell their stories about rape and torture at the hands of Saddam's now-dead sons. Allow Iraqi men to tell about life under Saddam and how grateful they are he is gone. Wounded soldiers and families of the dead would speak in support of the war effort. Members of Mrs. Sheehan's own family could come. They posted a letter on the Drudge Web site in support of the president.
She asks a question of Bush, then someone else asks one of her. They get to tell their stories first, though. Only C-SPAN can cover it. All Rights Reserved. No edited sound bites for NPR interpretation.

There is one flaw. The ground rules of the meeting would be announced, and at this point it is not likely the meeting would ever take place. The anti-Semitic Bolsheviks for whom Cindy Sheehan is a cat's-paw would refuse.

Monday, August 15, 2005

Pollyanna Preposterous?


Canada generally happy with health care, but out of touch with world: survey


Liberals maintain lead over Tories


The health care sucks and the Liberals are a literally a bunch of criminals. See this and this.

Canadians must be the most self-deluded, or self-effacing, people in the world. How else to explain any visible optimism?

I wonder if this alternate reality would be possible if Canada wasn't a neighbor of the US?

You know, it's like your 36 year old son still living with you. American welfare to Canada is actually damaging them twice.

1- No responsibility for being an adult is required - the US miltary will protect us in any event.
2- An artificial bogey-man against which to be morally superior - the US military is evil and US health care is inhuman.

This is at least a consistent explanation for why Prozac sales per-capita aren't reaching unity in Canada. Any takers on where it's wrong?

Detroit Liberalism


See the post at Canada's John Galt on Detroit: Detroit - Taxed and regulated to ruin. A cautionary tale.

Given these facts: Detroit has 12,000 abandoned houses on 36 square miles of vacant land and is losing 10,000 people a year - it's no surprise.

If we can learn from Canada, we can certainly learn from Detroit. Run!

Sois Prêt


The Canadian Broadcarping Castration reports: Doctors say Canadian hospitals not ready for disaster

Sounds they already are a disaster:
"The places where we would have usually put our surge patients such as hallways, such as perhaps doubling up beds in rooms that were designed for one. . .all that's already being done," said Daniel Kollek, executive director of the Centre for Excellence in Emergency Preparedness.
Italics mine.

Dean Purports, You Deride


From the Washington Times:
Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation" yesterday [Sunday 14-Aug], the fiery former Vermont governor said, "It looks like today, and this could change, as of today it looks like women will be worse off in Iraq than they were when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq."
An estimated one million Iraqis, murdered by Saddam, could not be reached for comment. Nor could their mothers.
The mothers went to break the bars of cells looking for the ones they lost 5, 12 or 20 years ago and other women went to dig the land with their bare hand searching for a few bones they can hold in their arms after they couldn't hold them when they belonged to a living person.

I recall seeing a woman on TV two years ago, she was digging through the dirt with her hands. There was no definite grave in there as the whole place was one large grave but she seemed willing to dig the whole place looking for her two brothers who disappeared from earth 24 years ago when they were dragged from their colleges to a chamber of hell.

Her tears mixed with the dirt of the grave and there were journalists asking her about what her brothers did wrong and she was screaming "I don't know, I don't know. They were only college students. They didn't murder anyone, they didn't steal, and they didn't hurt anyone in their lives. All I want to know is the place of their grave".

Why was this woman chosen to lose her dear ones? Why you? Why did a million women have to go through the same pain?

We did not choose war for the sake of war itself and we didn't sacrifice a million lives for fun! We could've accepted our jailor and kept living in our chains for the rest of our lives but it's freedom ma'am.

Freedom is not an American thing and it's not an Iraqi thing, it's what unites us as human beings. We refuse all kinds of restrictions and that's why we fought and still fighting everyday in spite of the swords in the hands of the cavemen who want us dead or slaves for their evil masters.

Emigration Issues


Detroit has 12,000 abandoned houses on 36 square miles of vacant land and is losing 10,000 people a year.

And it's the most Liberal City in the US.

Any connection, do you think?


Sunday, August 14, 2005

Richard and Rachel


Richard Cory "put a bullet through his head."

Rachel Corrie chose to die by bulldozer.

Contemplating the difference between the poem and real-life, one might pause to wonder if there actually is any. Suicide was intended in both cases.

Rachel Corrie was willing to be crushed lifeless by a bulldozer in defense of her ideals, but those who make her into a martyr have yet to show similar backbone. Perhaps it is merely that they are not quite so deluded.
Perhaps the ideals of her leaders in this action were somewhat different: Rachel was merely a useful idiot.

Rachel, after all, was defending Hamas against Israel and against the United States, whose flag she burned for world-wide coverage.

So, one has to ask of her leaders in
"peace" ;
"In Rachel's memory, if not in defense of your own principles, why are you not bodily shielding innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq right now? Why are you not defending innocent women and children where they are being murdered daily?


Soldiers of the United States are defending those people with their very lives. Is that why you will not? You confront soldiers of Israel and the United States, but not those of al-Qaeda, Iran or Cuba - is that dichotomy because you know who the real murderers and torturers are?


Please. If your actions are guided by principled anti-violence, tell us why your moral and mortal suasion is absent from the places where real danger to your principles resides?
"

The answer, of course, has already been given: Israel is an Abomination; and the United States is Imperialist. Therefore, innocent people killed by fanatic third parties are not worthy casualties. They're dupes or victims.

This is 180 degrees out of phase. The common thread of Richard Cory and Rachel Corrie is that they are both moral frauds.

There are no peace activist "human shields" placing their bodies between
terrorist murderers and Afghani women or Iraqi children, because the people who equate "human shield" rhetoric with effortless "martyrdom" have an agenda different from the one they claim, not to mention a very healthy respect for their personal well-being - if not for, say, Rachel Corrie's.

Maybe Rachel Corrie just slipped up. She didn't plan to die. So what? She knew as well as Richard Cory that fraud only sustains so far. If she was deluded or otherwise, her "leaders" remain grateful for the PR boon.

Richard's fictional acquaintances revered him until his shocking death.
Rachel's admirers magnify her sad demise to their advantage. Neither was a martyr, but Richard had better human relationships.

Weapons of War


Wretchard, at The Belmont Club, has posted two very interesting items on weaponry.

One leads from WWII to today.
Unintended Consequences

The other discusses the escalation of IEDs and the defenses against them.
The Unstoppable IED

Both worth a read.

Saturday, August 13, 2005

Learning from Canada


Another example from Mark Steyn.

All men are not equal. Excerpt:
Canadian natives, as the most comprehensively wrecked minority on the continent, are a microcosm of everything that’s wrong with multiculturalism. The premise of multiculturalism is that all cultures are equally ‘valid’, but of course that’s bunk: some cultures are better, some are worse, some are successes, some are failures. I’m not being ‘Eurocentric’ here. Perish the thought: an awful lot of European cultures have proved hopeless at sustaining over any length of time representative government, property rights, the rule of law and individual liberty. Those are largely features of the Britannic world — not just of the United Kingdom, America, Australia and New Zealand but also of India, Singapore, St Lucia, as well as Quebec and Mauritius, to name but two francophone jurisdictions all the more agreeable for having spent their formative years under the British Crown.
The lesson is not just from Canada, of course:
In the Telegraph the other week, Boris Johnson mentioned Mary Seacole, a 19th-century black nurse from Jamaica who was in her day as famous as Florence Nightingale. And, reading of her, I was reminded for the umpteenth time of why the British, of all people, should never have fallen for the neo-apartheid of multiculturalism. ‘British’ was the prototype multiethnic nationality: if you were a doctor from Kingston-on-Thames or a nurse from Kingston, Jamaica, or an assistant choreographer from Kingston, Ontario, you were British — and, unlike the Germans, race didn’t come into it. ‘The British,’ wrote Colin Powell of his Jamaican background, ‘told my ancestors that they were now British citizens with all the rights of any subject of the Crown.’
Read the whole thing.

Sgt. Schultz


"I Know Nozzing."

Good post at Democracy Project on what the 9/11 Commission didn't know and when they didn't know it. That would be up until about Thursday.
...the unimpeachable Able Danger report, reluctantly acknowledged to be correct by 911 Commission staffers, may well blow the lid off the ability of the Know Nothings to continue to cloak the truth. For the movements of Atta prior to the terrorist attack, if acknowledged, will support statements by the Czech Republic that link Atta, and hence the al Qaeda attack on America, irrefutably to Saddam's covert intelligence operatives. This is something that surfaced very soon after the attack. The former Czech deputy foreign minster, later ambassador to the UN, gave statements that he personally expelled a high raking Iraqi embassy official in Prague for being a covert foreign intelligence agent after the latter was discovered having met with Atta in the international lounge at the Prague airport in August 2001. There the Iraqi transferred a large amount of cash to Atta, sufficient to fund the completion of the September 11 attack.
One pillar of the criticism of the Battle of Iraq has been the lack of Iraqi involvement in 9/11. I disagree with this point of view for many reasons, but if Saddam did have some involvement with 9/11wil those critics concede that they were wrong? That they "lied?"

Probably not. They'll say they acted on the best intelligence they had at the time - just like the coalition of the willing did regarding WMD in Iraq.

Friday, August 12, 2005

Don't Apologize Nancy


Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America:
"We regret that many people have misconstrued our recent advertisement about Mr. [sic] Roberts' record. Unfortunately, the debate over that advertisement has become a distraction from the serious discussion we hoped to have with the American public."
This is not, of course, an apology. It's blaming the recipients of a communication for their failure to understand.

I beg to differ. It was easy to understand, and it makes quite clear what the moral values of NARAL are. Here's the translation:
"We regret that many people are too stupid to understand the nuance of showing Judge Roberts' picture superimposed on video of buildings blowing up while the audio claimed he supported bombers of abortion clinics. Unfortunately, we screwed up big time. Our media director has resigned. The storm of protest, even from our pet Senators, has caused us to re-evaluate the gulliblity of the American public."
So don't apologize, Nancy. Keep it up. I'm sure there are still a fair few who haven't got your message.

You've set your credibility back two decades.

Step Away from the Trough


No Pork Left Behind From Tech Central Station.

Georgie Busher and the Failure of Fiscal Courage.

Highways? Hogwash.

What he really likes are bridges to nowhere and Federal mandates for bicyle paths.

The 9/11 Omission


Keywords: Able Danger.

If you dip into the blogosphere at all, you're probably already aware of this.

In any case, Captain Ed has the 9/11 Commission's fall into abject disrepute well documented.

If you do not already know that Muhammed Atta was identified in the US as a member of an al-Qaeda cell by 1999; and especially if you do not know the 9/11 Commission was informed of this but did not report on it - this is a must read.

If you do know this history, the chronology and detail is still very useful.

In any case, we clearly need an investigation of the 9/11 Commission and especially of Jamie Gorelick - the Clinton Administration Justice Department lawyer - who created a wall between, and among, our intelligence services that prevented the Atta information from being shared. Gorelick, you may recall, also served as a member of the 9/11 Commission..

While we're at it, I'd like a final word on what top secret documents Sandy Berger contemporaneously stuffed into his skivvies.

Conspiracy theories are not my thing, but if this isn't openly investigated I'll be seriously wondering.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Canada: 3 Examples, 1 Point


First, let us honour Canadian steadfastness in the defense of freedom. Homage to courage and valour is not yet entirely out of style on either side of the 49th parallel - Carolyn Parrish as Lord Haw-Haw to Paul Martin's Neville Chamberlain
notwithstanding.

Sadly, even that unflattering analogy is stretched in once-and-future-
Prime-Minister Martin's case; because he has neither the skill nor the courage of Chamberlain. We dare not even mention honesty.


Martin's character stands in marked contrast to that
of Seaforth Highlander Sergeant Ernest "Smokey" Smith.

On Oct. 21 and 22, 1944, at the Savio River in Italy, Sergeant Smith gave the Germans much more than they could handle. For his heroism he received the highest military honor Canada could bestow; the Victoria Cross. Sergeant Smith just died at the age of 91. He was the last holder of the VC in Canada.

To get the flavor of this man's individual grit this article from the National Post is worth reading, but most certainly you should know Smith's comments:
..."even Germans do not like to be shot." ... he explained 60 years after the Savio River fight, "I don't take prisoners. Period. I'm not prepared to take prisoners. I'm paid to kill them. That's the way it is."
The National Post entitled their article Thank you, Smokey.

An understatement, to be sure, and in keeping with the modesty of Smokey's generation. Check out Flags of Our Fathers for further examples.

Second, and on the other hand, we have a poll showing that a significant number of Canadians would be likely to buy private health insurance, if they were allowed to have a non-socialist health-care market. Ottawa's centralized command-and-control is here most evident.

Third, Kate McMillan at Small Dead Animals brings us info on employment in
Saskatchewan. This encapsulates the Canadian sickness:
...Overall employment grew by 1.4 per cent in the first seven months of the reporting year - well below the 2.1 per cent growth in Alberta and 1.7 per cent growth in Manitoba, but above the national average of 1.1 per cent.

Dig a little deeper into the numbers and you find that private sector employment grew by 1.7 per cent, while government employment grew nearly twice as fast. In fact, there are 5,000 more government employees today then there were back in 2002 - a staggering statistic given Saskatchewan's stagnant population growth. What's worse is that almost all of the new job growth is taken by people 55 years or older, which means we're not attracting or keeping any young people in Saskatchewan.
I have contended that we can learn much from Canada. These are examples. Draw your own conclusions.

Here are mine.

I start with a question: Where will the next Canadian winner of the Victoria Cross come from?

That the era of clear positive examples of Canadian dynamism is many years past, tells us something about why Western Canadians find separatism ever more attractive.

It's about time they did. Whatever happened to the bumper sticker sentiment of the early 70's: "Let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the Dark!"?

Western Canada has absorbed more punishment and disdain, including taxation without any actual representation, (how do Albertans justify paying for 5,000 new government employees in Saskatchewan?) than had the American colonies at the time of the Boston Tea Party.

So what connects "Smokey" Smith with today's Canada?

Nothing.

That's what's so sad. Canada, as recently as the early 70's, was an important country with Western Capitalist values and a backbone. This no longer is a given.

It's been sad to watch, and it should change.

Separation might do that.

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

CAIR-Rot & Schtick


Finally, we're getting some media scrutiny of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

George Bush should have known all about CAIR's, shall we say, questionable antecedents. Instead, he has had these people in the White House. CAIR joined Bush to promote Islam as the religion of peace. Normally, that would imply a gathering of people who believed it to be true.

Bush, if he bought CAIR's version, is even more scary than Dennis Kucinich.

CAIR has been hiding in the forgiving interstices of multi-culturalist relativism while maintaining their own ideals for America. And don't get in the way.

According to CAIR's board chairman, Mr. Omar M. Ahmad:
"Muslim institutions, schools and economic power should be strengthened in America. Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam." Mr. Ahmad went on to say, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

These public statements, recorded by Ms. Lisa Gardiner of the San Ramon Valley Herald on July 4th, 1998 are the subject of CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad's claim of Mr. Omar Ahmad being quoted inaccurately.
There is no report of a request for a retraction and the reporter has stood by the story.

From Kerry a White House invitation would be expected. From Bush it was a disheartening symbolic surrender to relativist PC notionalism.

CAIR can't name the enemy, and they've had almost 4 years. It's even worse when the President can't.

Fortunately, others can:
...CAIR should know better than anyone who does fit the terrorist profile. Three of its own officials were recently convicted of terror-related crimes. One even worked for [Ibrahim] Hooper. He's now in prison for conspiring to kill Americans.

A lawsuit filed against CAIR by the family of former FBI official John P. O'Neill, who was killed on 9-11, charges that the group, which evolved from a known Hamas front, is "a key player in international terrorism."

Congress is investigating CAIR and has repeatedly invited its executive director to deny the mounting terror charges under oath. But Nihad Awad, a Palestinian American, refuses. If CAIR is not tied to terrorism, why not clear the air at a televised hearing?

Tellingly, CAIR after 9-11 refused to single out al-Qaida or Osama bin Laden for condemnation. After the London bombings, it endorsed an anti-terror edict so broad it was meaningless -- and one that was loaded with qualifiers.
This blog had hopes regarding the anti-terrorist "fatwa" issued in late July, and serious doubts about Ibrahim Hooper and CAIR. Sadly, the doubts were more than justified.

The fatwa is a farce.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

The Republic of Alberta

The National Post notes a poll of Western Canadians wherein:
35% of Westerners think splitting from Canada should be explored [and a]nother 40.4% say that if the Liberal party wins the next election they will be more in favour of exploring independence.
All I can say is; "Go, Grits!"

I'm checking out property in Alberta.

So Souix me


A comment
from Reason: on the Notional Correctness Apoplexia Academy; or NCAA:
Go, Persons of Indeterminate Race or Gender, Go!

The NCAA's ban on "abusive" Native American nicknames is many things, but principled is not among them. This move was primarily about primarily about [sic] money and secondarily about small-stakes academic politics.

On the political front, it allows the NCAA, as represented by college presidents, to toss a bone to the lefty identity politics rabble on their campuses, the same folks who chafe at the very existence of multi-million dollar college athletics programs. So there's that.

But as the multi-million part implies, there is big money at stake in the NCAA licensing and associated spin-offs from institutional nicknames, too much to risk some court somewhere decreeing that an Indian tribe somewhere is due 30 years of back royalties. And that's about all there is to it; no need to puzzle over why Illini is offensive but Aztecs is not. There is no rule at work.
Much like the rest of the NCAA's so called oversight of College athletics.

While big time college athletes are by no means amateurs, even if they follow NCAA "rules", the NCAA bestirs itself to remove some of the last traces of Amerind reference from public view.

Jim Thorpe is spinning in his grave.

Pretty soon no young Illini fan will have any reason to wonder about the origin of the team's former nickname. And, if he looks it up, he'll only find references to a variety of sweet corn.

Unfortunately for Illinois, Cornhuskers is already taken.

Sports teams' names, with a few modern exceptions, were chosen to inspire respect and awe. "Abuse" is in the mind of the beholder.

Monday, August 08, 2005

Continuing today's thread


Of a piece with the last 2 posts:

Christopher Hitchens, Losing the Iraq War- Can the left really want us to?

Unfortunate answer to that Chris.

Must Read


Just read this post from Small Dead Animals. And follow the links.

Thanks, Kate.

The Days the Music Died


In the past 10 months Steven Vincent and Theo Van Gogh died at the hands of militant Islamists. They were cruelly, brutally, inhumanly murdered - for the crime of thinking.

This piece by Bryan Preston at Tech Central Station is a wonderful short explanation of why Islamism must be defeated.

It does not discuss the subjugation of women demanded by Islamists. It does not mention the vilification of gays required by Islamists. It does not even generalize the question of the treatment of civilians at the hands of Islamists, not even the videotaped beheadings.

Preston's point is this:
...two of the most prominent casualties are an art critic and a filmmaker. Steven Vincent and Theo Van Gogh both died for the cause of freedom, in their own way exemplifying just why this war is so dangerous, so awful, and will be so difficult to win. Yet win we must.

Both men died because they expressed thoughts that hard-core Islamists found offensive enough to kill for. They died exercising one of the most basic rights we have long taken for granted: The right to think and speak as you please.
This is why we must defeat the Islamist Jihad, and why it doesn't much matter where we do it. Iraq is a fine place to start.

This is why enemy combatants are detained in Guantanamo - for Islamists the wonder is that they weren't summarily executed.

For the ACLU and Amnesty International, the wonder is why these Jihadim aren't being released on their own recognizance.

I have heard no better suggestion on place from any of the battle of Iraq's critics. The criticism I do hear is all unreality-based appeasement.

If making films and writing are death penalty activities, then the wonder is that most American actors and writers, and too many politicians, are in favor of an Islamist victory.

Michael Moore, Tim Robbins, Noam Chomsky, Joe Biden - they're all going to be up against the wall before I am - what are they thinking?

Does Salmon Rushdie refuse to return their calls?

Sunday, August 07, 2005

NCAA bans Indian mascots


The NCAA swings and misses, puts up an airball, punts on second down (first down in Canada), whiffs at the tee and misses an empty net.

The NCAA is concerned about the use of Amerind related sports team names and mascots.


The NCAA should be ashamed of their own timidity.
They hardly scratch the surface of the mascot naming problem. Some Mascot examples.

If the NCAA will ask "How can we continue to have "Seminoles" and "Chippewas" as objects of pride and affection if some hyper-sensitivity-industry group is offended?", how can they not consider the flora and fauna being insulted?

Where are the concerns of PETA represented? How can we continue to call large trees in California ‘Sequoias’?
Where is the caring for industries dependent on latex?

What about the insults to "Artichokes", "Silverswords", "Banana Slugs", "Gila Monsters", "Wolverines" and "Broncos"?

How can persons of Greek extraction bend over to being called "Spartans"?

What can latex dependent industries do to discourage use of "Trojans" as a term of patriarchal power?

And how can the Irish condone the term "Fighting", in an era where we know the "Global War on Terror" is itself subject to euphemization as the “Global Struggle Against Extremism"?

The NCAA obviously has nothing better to do. Its mandate to protect University athletes has become a farce - illustrated by this tempest in a jock strap.

At the very least the NCAA should be boycotted: “Millions for the Chippewas, but not one cent for tribute.”

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Kiddie Porn a Federal Mandate

No word yet if it will be funded or unfunded.

Angry in the Great White North notes this bizarre ruling in Kansas: To be convicted of soliciting sex from a minor via the Internet, you actually have to have been "chat-rooming" with a minor. A cop pretending to be a minor doesn't count.

What difference does it make that you were soliciting sex from a 50-year-old member of your own sex who pretended to be a 12-year-old member of the opposite sex? How is that different from soliciting sex from a policewoman posing as a prostitute?

It seems to me that if your intent is to solict sex from a 12-year-old, then the charge of soliciting sex from a minor is more than somewhat close to accurate. Let's say absolutely close.

A parallel opinion lately comes from the ACLU, who claimed pretending to be attached to the State Department when you're actually with the DoD violates enemy combatants' rights. We gotta protect these guys from deception.

I guess the cops will now have to hire some 12 and 13-year-old girls for the duty of "stinging" these Internet perverts - unless we can get Gitmo detainees to pretend to be 12-year-old females looking for 50-year-old infidel lovers.

It sounds difficult, but it solves several problems.

AuH2O2


Goldwater Peroxide?

Captain Ed notes that Barry Goldwater's nephew is going to run for Governor in Arizona.

If only he turns out to be half what his Uncle was.

Monday, August 01, 2005

Democracy Project


Winfield Myers at Democracy Project has another post worth a look. A great description of JC is included:
...the constant harping of the international left, most recently exemplified by Georgia's greatest embarrassment since Lester Maddox, Jimmy Carter, is exposed as the heartless, rigid ideology that it is. No sense of history, no sense of context, no patience with life as it is lived pervade their myopic worldview. Impatient that earth isn't utopia, they condemn the shortcomings of mankind not with an eye toward genuine improvement in our lot, but with the assurance that allies in the media will trumpet their vacuous pronouncements as proof that hard work and sacrifice will forever fail.

...and he urges bloggers to link to Arthur Chenkoff's Good News from Iraq, part 32.

Done.

Things You _Will_ Read in the Lansing State Journal


The LSJ toady today published an editorial entitled Old-fashioned: Regular courts can handle terrorism.

The title says it all. Our continuing encarceration of jihadists captured in Afghanistan and Iraq is wrong because it violates their Constitutional rights. We don't need no steenkin' Guantanamo when civil liberties there are being threatened by DoD personnel manipulating the thermostat.

The right of life is apparently not among the delineated liberties, because the LSJ is fawning over a judge who let an Islamist bomber off easy.

Contrary to the LSJ opinion, this is the problem rather than the solution.

The LSJ believes that the "insurgents" ensconsed at Gitmo deserve full advantage of our "living" Constitution, though said "insurgents" spit upon its very concept.

The exemplar "why do they hate us" boys must also be granted a complete panoply of criminal-law protection - as if they'd been arrested for pimping in front of 120 E. Lenawee instead of captured trying to kill American soldiers in Fallujah.

Reality check. When did we move from "they don't have rights under the Geneva Conventions" to "they have the same rights as American citizens?"

"Catch and release" has previously only applied to illegal immigrants. Maybe that's how the LSJ views our Guantanamo guests: as involuntary illegal immigrants.

The basis of the State Journal's argument is this:

In late December 2000 (Clinton administration),
an alert Border Patrol agent arrested a terrorist thug crossing in from al-Qaeda-Haven-North, with a trunk full of high explosives. (How did he get that in a country that bans private ownership of firearms, anyway?).

Wait 5 years. The would be mass murderer gets a light sentence.

To the LSJ, the rights of prisoners in Guantanamo and a
mainland criminal trial of this premature-jihaculate are connected. The LSJ doesn't think we're in a war and they can't parse the words "handle terrorism." They think that 5 years between bomb plot and sentencing is quite quick enough, thanks, for prosecuting mass assassination attempts.

Their headline flatly says that this is a good way to handle the war with Islamofascism. They even point out - as some sort of revelation - and apparently seriously, that they can't tell 1-Jan-00 from 12-Sep-2001:
A man accused of terrorism was tried and convicted (pre-9/11) and sentenced (post-9/11) through the normal judicial process in this country
They get the chronology. They just don't get 9/11. This same chronology applies to Zacarias Moussaoui - the "20th hijacker"; a point to which we will return.

I have sent this letter to the LSJ Editor:
Al-Qaeda-trained Ahmed Ressam was recently sentenced for attempting to bomb Los Angeles International airport - 5 years ago. The LSJ (Aug-1) contends this demonstrates - constitutionally - that all terrorists should have their day in "standard courts", despite the fact that the implied routine evidentiary publication would constitute an al-Qaeda counter-intelligence bonanza.

Constitutionally, Mr. Ressam differs from Guantanamo detainees: a-we weren't at war when he was arrested, b-he was arrested on American soil, c-he was "arrested."

A 22-year sentence for conspiracy to commit mass-murder might even work out to 3 months for each stranger he plotted to kill, but he's eligible for release in 14 years. Prosecutors wanted a longer sentence to help obtain Ressam's testimony against 2 alleged co-conspirators. That won't happen now.

Let's hope Judge John Coughenour's fit of petty sanctimony is not as comforting to "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui as it is to the LSJ.
We do need to discuss
Moussaoui, another murderous fanatic being given access to "standard courts". The contents of Moussaoui's computer hard disk, if not for PC BS in DC, might have mitigated 9/11.

Moussaoui started his US apprenticship with al-Qaeda in 1998. He was arrested on August 16th, 2001. He's been handled as a criminal rather than an "enemy combatant". His "trial" has been a farce, with many months being spent determining if he was competant to be his own lawyer. There has also been a lot of jockeying to keep secret prosecution documents out of al-Qaeda's public scrutiny.

The lesson the LSJ has missed is this: Regular courts consistently demonstrate they can't handle terrorism. Period.


For more insight into the judicial theory the LSJ is promoting, read some of
Judge John Coughenour's comments here, they are truly amazing in their arrogance, ignorance and elitism.

The LSJ wastes some of its precious editorial space making the point that this guy is a Reagan appointee (so what?), apparently to claim that if ideologies are "balanced out" we'll get a fair decision.

There is no better argument for reining in an out-of-control judiciary, though that wasn't the LSJ point.