Merry Christmas

To you and yours where ever in the world you find yourself.

dpny 2003

Dr. Dean in Deep doo-doo…

Howard Dean’s assertion that Saddam Hussein’s capture doesn’t make Americans any safer is now creating a firestorm of criticism for the mainstream of the Democratic Party. Yesterday’s Washington Post editorial hammers Dean in a manner usually reserved for a Republican who embraces the Klan. Money graf:

Many will agree with the candidate that "the administration launched the war in the wrong way, at the wrong time, with inadequate planning, insufficient help and at unbelievable cost." But most Americans understand Saddam Hussein for what he was: a brutal dictator who stockpiled and used weapons of mass destruction, who plotted to seize oil supplies on which the United States depends, who hated the United States and once sought to assassinate a former president; whose continuing hold on power forced thousands of American troops to remain in the Persian Gulf region for a decade; who even in the months before his overthrow signed a deal to buy North Korean missiles he could have aimed at U.S. bases. The argument that this tyrant was not a danger to the United States is not just unfounded but ludicrous.

Watch this to get even uglier. The reality is that Howard Dean is the loose cannon on deck for the like of Democratic Leadership Committee flacks like Joe Lieberman and The Clintons. They (correctly) see his leadership of the Democratic Presidential Race as a direct threat to their powerbase. Dick Morris, that charming toe-sucker and avowed inventor of “triangulation” has been saying as much for a while. Mr. Morris has stated bluntly that the only reason Wesley Clark is in the race is so the Clintons can stop Howard Dean from taking over the Democratic Party. With Dr. Dean at the reins of the party (read “the Party Coffers”), the Clintons are frozen out and have to take care to create their party within the party. This they have already done in the form of the “Campaign for America’s Future”, a PAC designed to create a structured alternative within the Democratic Party that they control.

But that may not be necessary. Dr. Dean’s campaign has all the signs he’s ready to self-destruct at any minute. And watchers of this space already know my feelings about Ralph Nader’s impact on the Democratic Party as an institution should he toss his hat into the Presidential Ring. If Nader does enter the race, Dean’s anti-war base will split leaving even fewer Democrats remaining to vote for what’s left in the middle.

End game: Bush crushes the opposition in 2004 with coat tails that cover every state with an Interstate highway; the Clinton’s regain nominal control of the party for Hill’s run in 2008 with their “built from the ground up” apparatus already in place. Unless Mr. Bush decides to change his running mate for 2004 – pulling Condi Rice into the Veep’s slot and sending Dick Cheney over the NSA for a semi-retirement – the coast is clear for Hillary.

Heaven forbid.

At long last….

As I opined a number of months ago, the economy was prepared for a major run during the third and fourth quarters of this year. And I was right, the economy was indeed prepared.

I, however, was not. My Little Business – The Card Group – got so busy so fast that I couldn’t keep up the ferocious blogging pace I set for myself. And being a Capitalist, first thing are first things.

So I’m back. As I close the end of this year, I have a bit more time to reflect on the events of the last months. Let’s start with the Big Stuff first.

Saddam in custody

It’s fun to type that. It’s nice that one of the most evil people of our time is sitting in a cell somewhere being badgered by the CIA interlocutors. And while the world may finally get a peak into the crazed mind of a ruthless dictator (and learn the whereabouts of WMDs), his capture creates more problems that it solves – if you didn’t back the war. Those parties that thought George Bush fils was like the old man and would cut and run before the job was done are now holding a very empty bag that is their future. The Big Losers are, in no particular order:

Howard Dean

The flinty Vermonter first bottled the anti-Bush hatred and left all his rivals to sputter “me too” as fast as they could find a friendly microphone. The only problem with that strategy is that it was completely predicated on Iraq becoming a Vietnam-like “quagmire”.

Dr. Dean is almost an archetypal Boomer politician insofar as he sees everything through the apocryphal filter of 1968. Boomers who didn’t grow up (and their Birkenstock-wearing offspring) still spew the same neo-Marxist nonsense at every opportunity, steadfastly holding to the belief that "The Man" (read "Republicans) "is holding down The People" (read Them and anyone else in the Brotherhood of Victimhood). Iraq had to be Vietnam because they thought it was an unjust war” and as Vietnam was unjust, all wars are unjust. Especially those started by those evil Republicans.

Dr. Dean tapped into that early and hard, corralling the anti-war / anti-globalization / “we love the Kyoto Accords” crowd. These folks visceral hated of people from “the fly-over”, especially those from Texas and very especially those who are religious proved a powerful (and lucrative) hook.

There’s only one problem: these wars are radically different. Vietnam was a war of containment, not liberation. And neither Lyndon Johnson nor Richard Nixon ever sought to capture the leader of the enemy combatant, namely, Ho Chin Mihn.

Bush did. And by doing so, he changed the entire dynamic of the Presidential Race next year. Should Governor Granola carry the day with left-leaning Democratic primary voters, Mr. Bush will hammer him in an avalanche not seen since Ronald Reagan’s the 1984 drubbing of Walter Mondale.

And other candidates are starting to see this as well. When Howard Dean said that, "the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America safer," he managed to make himself appear so out of touch that some of the Democratic Presidential Candidates (and vast majority of the electorate) probably doubted his sanity. Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman's harrange of Dean on NBC's Meet the Press was particularly ugly. He was quoted in the Washington Post saying "If he truly believes the capture of this evil man has not made America safer, then Howard Dean has put himself in his own spider hole of denial."

It is at times like these that I enjoy being a Republican.

The French et al.

It must really suck to be Jacques Chirac these days. Can you imagine: special envoy and Bush family fixer James Baker comes a’calling to ask about forgiving some of Iraq’s debt. Miffed that French companies have been frozen out of re-construction deals, Chirac complained bitterly last week about the “legality” of such a move. Now, he has to listen to Mr. Baker’s tales of how Saddam is squealing like stuck pig, talking often and loudly about this shipment of contraband coming in during the embargo and that secret bank account.

“Oh, the implications if this got out to the public” Mr. Baker intones with the seriousness of a funeral director. “Now, how much debt do you want to forgive.” According to the latest reports, apparently quite a bit. How utterly French to want to be in on the victors spoils in Iraq after we have Saddam speaking slowly and clearly into a video camera.

They’re screwed and they know it. They have to pony up the cash now, knowing what the blow back of what Saddam’s memory would look like in newsprint. The same is true of the Germans and Russians as well. They backed a nag and it’s come back to haunt them.

The Major Media

Nearly everyone from Chris Matthews to Pat Buchanan wanted Mr. Bush’s crusade to fail, if for different reasons. Capturing Saddam is a huge deal and will ultimately lead to the Fox News Channel’s biggest ratings to date. Since they already clobber both CNN and MSNBC in prime time, the cable news rating wars are functionally over. Look for Fox to distill and bottle it’s cable news hour into a 30-minute format to take a run and ABC, NBC, And CBS.

Smart money says Dan Rather will retire shortly thereafter.

The UN

Totally discredited, the UN is now nothing more a collection of neo-socialist also-rans that can not do anything constructive other than hold meetings. Having sat on the sidelines of the Iraq liberation, they too are starting to feel a bit of blow back from none other than the Iraqis themselves. The Iraqi Foriegn Minister Hoshyar Zebari stated: "The United Nations as an organization failed to help rescue the Iraqi people from a murderous tyranny that lasted over 35 years, and today we are unearthing thousands of victims in horrifying testament to that failure.”

Ouch.

And Dr. Dean, et al. want to take the opportunity of Saddam’s capture to turn this back over to the UN. Not a shot guys….

The Rest of the Arab World

Being the head of a despotic Middle Eastern government is probably a safe gig -- for the time being. The future is murkier. Having brought the mighty Saddam down the lowest levels prisonerhood and having images of his dental exam broadcast everywhere have probably sent a few shivers in Iran, Libya, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Whalid Phares wrote in the National Review "... in Tehran, Damascus, Tripoli, and Khartoum, the masters of the palaces know very well that the next time dictators are extracted from holes, it won't necessarily be by infidel soldiers."

Indeed. Revolution is as contagious as the flu and seeing Saddam doing a perp walk might be just enough to topple some of the regions more fragile regimes (read "Iran").

When the Soviet Union fell the political landscape changed enough that the US didn't have to prop up friendly dictators. However, the State Department, in it's permanent quest for stability, didn't see the need to change our relationship with with Middle Eastern thug-acracies. Containment worked, they claimed, pointing to Saddam in his box. September 11th changed everything forever and pointed out the folly of attempting to put state supported terrorists in boxes. President Bush has unleashed powerful forces that may very well spin out of his control. And that's not a bad thing.

The idea that America should state for something positive and contructive -- democracy and liberty -- is not a radical idea. The actual practice of exporting our revolution is. George Bush is a radical American and true giant standing next the likes of Howrd Dean. And the world is already a better place for it.

Okay, I was right

On Friday I wrote that Arnold Schwartzenegger�s poll numbers would come out and that they would be good enough to send the Democrats into a blind panic. Watch for former President Bill Clinton to meet with sitting California governor Gray Davis and tell him to fall on his sword for the good of the team. The Dems will then be forced to rally around sitting Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante. While it�s a little early to tell, my odds on an Ah-nuld Governorship come in at slightly less than even. If a serious �throw the bums out� contagion builds, Arnold is the state�s next governor.

So what does that mean? Rush Limbaugh is right (despite what he says about blogs � earth to Rush, we�re coming. This is the next great wave of the information revolution: Everybody gets a printing press the 1st amendment applies to everyone with a keyboard. But more on that another time.) when he says that the Dems must have California be lock for all presidential races now and for the foreseeable future. The George W. Bush cash raising juggernaut will not slow down and can not be stopped. If the Dems are forced to spend their filthy lucre defending California, they have less to spread around the rest of the country. This puts them at a disadvantage both 2004 and 2008.

What to do? Rally around the Hispanic Candidate, Mr. Bustamonte. Trumpet his accomplishments. Praise his years of tireless public service. Promise even more state money to every grievance group with an ax to grind. Make him everything Gray Davis is not: colorful, lively. Try to get him on Jay Leno�s comedy extravaganza. In short, anything to stop Arnold.

The end result? Maybe a lost cause for the Dems if the if the aforementioned contagion takes hold. And whichever candidate earns the right to face George Bush and his successor, the race becomes a whole lot tougher.

dpny

Another Reason that the Bishop Robinson fiasco bothers me

From James Lilek�s blog:

This story has irritated me from the start, and it has nothing to do with Rev. Robinson�s sexual orientation. The guy left his wife and kids to go do the hokey-pokey with someone else: that�s what it�s all about, at least for me. Marriages founder for a variety of reasons, and ofttimes [sic] they�re valid reasons, sad and inescapable. But �I want to have sex with other people� is not a valid reason for depriving two little girls of a daddy who lives with them, gets up at night when they're sick, kisses them in the morning when they wake. There's a word for people who leave their children because they don't want to have sex with Mommy anymore: selfish. I'm not a praying man, but I cannot possibly imagine asking God if that would be okay. Send them another Dad, okay? Until you do I'll keep my cellphone on 24/7, I promise.

Who are you to judge? is the standard response, and I quote Captain James T. Kirk when asked the same question by Kodos the Executioner: who do I have to be? I�ll tell you this: my nightmare is losing my daughter. The idea of leaving her on purpose is inconceivable, and I don�t care if Adriana Lima drove up the driveway in a '57 BelAir convertible, tossed me the keys and asked me to drive her to Rio, it ain�t gonna happen. I made a promise when I married my wife, and I made another when we had our daughter. It's made me rather cranky on the subject of men who don't stick around. They're letting down the side. They're reverting to type. They're talking from their trousers.

I know, I know, his daughters love him & support him now. So what. Hitler�s dog went to his funeral. (No, that doesn�t make sense, but it�s my favorite wrench to throw in conversations this week.) If he�d cast off his family to cavort with a woman from the choir, I�m not sure he�d be elevated to the level of moral avatar � but by some peculiar twist the fact that he left mom for a man insulates him from criticism. It�s as if he had to do it. To stay in the marriage would have been (crack of thunder, horses neighing) living a lie, and nowadays we�re told that�s the worst thing anyone can do. Better to bedevil other lives with the truth than inconvenience your own with a lie. Right? If others are harmed in the short run, eventually they will be happy because you�re happier. Right?

Heard an interview with Rev. Robinson this afternoon, and he used a phrase that set my teeth on edge: he referred to partnerships as �life-intentioned.� A wonderful weasel word, that: intention. The escape hatch is built right in. It�s as if the intention to stay together is equal to the expressed promise to stay together. But it�s not. Everyone had a faithless lover who did you wrong, and usually blamed everything but free will. It just happened, you know. Wasn�t intending to cheat, but . . . it just happened, okay?

Couldn�t have said it better myself.

dpny

Demise of the Dems

I think I said this earlier in the week: The Democrats are toast. Now Hugo Gurdon of the National Post of Canada says essentially the same thing. Democrats, he argues, have pushed their extreme Left-wing agenda so vociferously � pro-gay everything, pro-abortion, etc � that they risk alienating a good chunk of the their traditional base: Catholics. Money graf:

Thus, we are at the point where the mutual exclusivity of the Catholic and Democratic views has become impossible for intellectually honest people to ignore. Many people of good conscience are therefore leaving the Church, and many people of good conscience will leave the Democrats.

Like I said, The Dems are in trouble. They can�t waffle and be a �pro-choice Catholic� and stay in office; the Vatican won�t let them. (Bet on ex-commincation for all pro-choice Catholic politicians coming soon to a parish near you). All the weasel-words they�ve been using � Mario Cuomo�s famous �I�m personally against abortion but understand that it�s the law� being the best example � won�t give them cover much longer. The hammer will come down.

dpny

Ah-nold!

When Hillary Clinton was elected senator of my state, New York, I cursed loudly and often about the stupidity of the body politic. Hillary was nothing but a celebrity; a woman famous for being the abused wife of the President.

�Ahhhhh,� people would say to me. �But she deserves this because Bill was so bad to her. And she cares about New York.�

It made me crazy. Care and celebrity don't equal competence. And that's what so irks me about celebirity politics. It cheapens the electoral process by making allowing celebrity to trump good ideas and experience.

That stated, I�m tickled to death to see Arnold Schwartzenegger stepping into the recall race in California. I have also developed a visceral hatred of spineless career politicians whose blow-dried looks and focus group-tested rhetoric are absolutely mannequin-esque. Incumbent Gov. Gray Davis has spent his entire career being a bloodless suck-up to every special interest grievance group in the state. Couple that with his total lack of nerve confronting the electricity crisis a few years ago (and his Socialist tendency to try to fix prices at the wholesale level) and you have the current state of California�s finances. Arnold, by not being a career politician � read �by not needing to raise money for re-election� � will have the backbone to attempt to do what he says he wants to do: lure businesses back to California that been chased out by confiscatory taxation and Byzantine business regulations. If you factor in that he�s recruited a lot of former Gov. Pete Wilson�s team that ran Sacramento, he might actually pull it off.

And that would be a good thing. Watch for Arnold poll numbers to come out this weekend and scare the hell out of the Democratic Party, causing them to become hysterical.

dpny

As a former Episcopalian
I find this disturbing, but amusing anyway.

I don�t really understand it. Christianity has religious edicts that are, in essence, like a club's by-laws. Join the club, agree to and abide by the by-laws. Want to become an officer of the club? Really adhere to and believe in the by-laws. Execute them faithfully. Be one of the order.

While I actually support the creation of some mechanism for gay civil unions � after all, how can it be all that different from any other corporation � the Church of my youth selling out both the Old and New Testaments for the silver pieces that are Political Correctness is too much.

I can now see myself in some sort of Orthodox Church � the real old time religion.

Unlike most folks who take August off, I took off July from blogging. I�m back and rearing to go.

Predictions?

Nothing boils my ass like people who make predictions, then don�t stand behind them. Chris Matthews famous line that this invasion will go off like ��Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Desert One, Beirut and Somalia in the history of military catastrophe,� should be used to pound his head into mush. The brazen stupidity of a guy who has his own show is truly amazing. Still, after the fact, he makes no bones about being wrong. Indeed, in the week before Uday and Qusay Hussein were dispatched directly to hell, he was bloviating on Don Imus� nationally syndicated program about how George Bush lied to us by inserting those 12 words concerning Niger and uranium in the State of the Union speech. He then proceeded to get all worked up � demanding a Watergate like inquisition as to how the "American People" were mislead into war.

Dave�s rule of politics number 14: anytime a politician / journalist / talking head uses the term �American People� they don�t give a damn about the American people and are, instead, grinding a political ax.

Earth to Chris: your 15 minutes are almost over. You�ve milked your tenure in Jimmy Carter�s (failed) presidency for about as much as can be hoped for. Just get out.

That stated, my prediction for the Dow has come to pass, peaking at about 9300, before skidding sideways (and slightly down) for about a month. Shortly after Labor Day, it will be off to the races.
The Euro peaked at $1.19 about a month ago, and is down now to $1.12 Watch it slide to par with the buck.
Natural Gas prices are about 10% off where they were when I wrote that they would come down.

Now, why can�t Chris Matthews just admit he was wrong and concede.

Will she or won�t she?

Dr. S and I had a long discussion one Sunday morning about Sen. Hillary Clinton and whether or not she�ll run for president. Personally, I�d love to see it. It would allow for the biggest blowout in US Presidential Election History. And it would permanently marginalize both Bill and Hill for the foreseeable future. I said that the only way she�d run is if there was a hint that Rudy Guiliani wants she Senate seat. Then, she�d have to bolt for the Presidential run rather than get mowed down by the Rudy juggernaut.

Now that Howard Dean as made the covers of both Time and Newsweek, the chattering classes have decided that Hillary must jump in to �save the Democratic Party� from certain annihilation. Now, before anybody takes this stuff as truth, you have to break this into two halves:

1) Will Hillary run?
2) Does the Democratic Party need saving?

As for Hillary, I�ve already answer that question to my own satisfaction: she�ll never run if there is even the slightest possibility of her losing. The only reason she ran for Senate in New York, is that it was a close to being appointed senator as she could get. The late Pat Moynihan gave her his blessing, then promptly died. With a solidly Democratic electorate, she would probably coast to victory against anybody who ran against her. She has to appear invincible.

As for the second question, the answer is a bit more strained. The Democratic Party as it is currently constituted, is not ideological coherent in any sense. It�s pro-choice on abortion, but anti-choice on anything else. It has no economic policy to speak of. It has to military or foreign policy standards of any note. Any criticism of any of it's constituent grievance groups is considered "hate speech" � a blantantly fascist attempt to squelch free speech. In short, the Democratic Party in America is nothing more than a collection of battling grievance groups, united in their blind rage at the Republican Party in general and George Bush in particular.

Guess that never really got over losing in 1994 to Newt and company.

Nevertheless, if things go as I have written in these pages � and the Republican take 50 to 50 in 2004 � watch for the death of Democratic Party. The party of Thomas Jefferson will be replaced by the Greens, which is at least consistent in their ideology. Indeed, if Ralph Nader were smart, he�s run full tilt for president starting now, and kill off the Democrats as a Presidential party now and for the foreseeable future.

Okay, I�m back.

Aruba is perfect. The breeze always blows. It almost never rains. They take American money. Most tourist stay inside their �all-inclusive� compounds, allowing those tourist who hate other tourists (read �myself�) to roam the island freely. If you�re ever there, you have to do King Ribs.

I will return and soon.

About WMD

Odds are, we have them and securing them as I type this. Smart money says we�re just securing them in order to make sure that no one can pilfer them, then have a sale on Ebay�. President Bush will wait patiently while Democrats paint themselves into a corner. Then, he drops the bomb, so to speak.

Some economic notes

I predict:
The Euro will coast for a few months before it starts to tank.
Natural Gas will skid sideways for a couple of months, before it drops to more reasonable levels as well.
Watch for a gradual increase in M1 and a general re-inflating of the economy as the good Mr. Greenspan decides that deflation is even more evil that inflation.
The Dow runs to about 9300, then coasts for a month or so, before it makes the slow climb to 10K early next year. Year end guess-ta-mation: Dow 9885.
Hillary Clinton's book will fall out of the top ten by September.

12 Jun 03 dpny

The head of Al Jazeera on Saddam's payroll?

Yup.

I have not time to write this is up as I'm leaving for Aruba NOW. However, check out Andrew Sullivan's piece on his blog. The link from the Times of London is here.

28 May 03 dpny

Smooth Operator? - Sure!

...I met Sherry on Anastasia Beach, then again at Scarlet O'Hara's in early-March. She was on a brief soul-searching vacation from somewhere in the mid-Atlantic states:

Sherry,

For the past two months I have kept your card on my bulletin board intending to respond. Today I committed myself to make the effort with something more than a brief acknowledgement or obligatory statement of sympathy. Given my circumstance, I am especially able to relate to what you are going through, and have also come to a conclusion, albeit slightly different from yours (detailed below). However, I do agree that we must acknowledge our true feelings, accept the reality, and learn to live, lest be consumed. I truly hope that most of your pain has dissipated since March, when you penned your card.

Now for my "Advice Column" responses��

Response Option #1:
Not to belittle your (past) grief, but this is an interesting case study. Again, if I understand this thing right, you guys had a platonic, sibling-type of relationship - a close friendship that went on for years. I'm trying to remember if you said you lived together - I think you did for all practical purposes. There may have been some sexual "experiment" between you two, but it did not take. Only after his newfound squeeze moved-in, and they strolled arm-in-arm into church, did you realize you actually loved this guy in a sexual way - is this correct? If indeed this is the case, then the course is obvious. You should wait for them to have their first big fight, which they surely will - any day now - especially if she is putting these unreasonable demands upon him, like cutting off all past platonic relations. You should lie-in-wait for this opportunity and then console him in a sensitive, sweet, and maternal way. Then, when he is at his most vulnerable point, like when he is heaving sobs, you should seduce him as if the forces of fate have taken control, and follow through in a most complete way. Damn the torpedos!!!

Response Option #2:
I do wonder whether you should confront this reminder on a weekly basis in church. On the other hand, if you have real friends there, you shouldn't have to leave the church just because of this. The remedy for this unfortunate situation is obvious. You must rid the church of them by resorting to underhanded practical joke techniques to embarrass them publicly. I have always been a fan of Griffin's Shoe Polish. It completely ruins clothes. Can you imagine the commotion caused by their sudden realization during service that the seats of their clothes are completely soiled. Also, salmon eggs are an excellent stinching agent. We used to rip those off from the fishing section of the local Eckerd's and do all sorts of underhanded things to the property of those we disliked. Several such episodes may well chase them off. Remember that slashing tires is just too pass�. Of course, you may be implicated directly in these incidents, and the whole thing could backfire. I bet if you put your mind to it, you could come up with creative ways to humiliate these people without your direct implication.

Response Option #3:
I would sit closer to the front, in this way would not have to see them displaying their silly affection for one another, and they can leave the chapel before you. Continue on your spiritual quest to find the deeper meaning of all this, and eventually you will come to peace and terms with it. One day you will be having coffee or lunch or whatever, and in passing you will converse (perhaps with both), and the friendship will rekindle. Think positive and there are all kinds of possibilities.

So there's some advice; bad advice - perhaps, but I've given you some options, and you are always welcome to solicit opinions from others�..

Now for my conclusions. The above options serve as a metaphor of my current philosophy, which is probably obvious to most, but nonetheless, a revelation to me. It incorporates evolution, which as a scientist, I cannot ignore. It is in contrast to the C.S. Lewis-type drivel about demons stalking and scheming to damn your soul. I would also argue that my philosophy is consistent (somewhat) with the Unitarian church:

Most people (some more than others) behave emotionally much like primates, especially in business, and frequently in personal relationships. They use any means necessary, toeing the gray line of the seven deadly sins, to achieve their selfish objectives - power, pleasure and enrichment. Then, in order to release their guilt, they acknowledge their primitive behavior, call it sin, ask for forgiveness, and temporarily rest easy; Lather, rinse, repeat; Lather, rinse, repeat. We are not perfect, and will never be perfect. This all leads to my final response option.....

Response Option #4:
You should acknowledge your biology, acknowledge your imperfection, come down here and take your frustrations out on me, break my heart, go back home, and you'll be forgiven - you may even feel a little better too.

Waiting patiently,

Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia? Amazing

It appears that those same lovely people that brought the world 911 have struck again, this time targeting foreign nationals in Saudi Arabia. And this has produced the usual caterwauling from the usual suspect, decrying President Bush for being too �distracted by Iraq� to focus on terrorism.

It�s moronic, really. This horrible attack happened in Riyadh. This is where most of the 911 hijackers came from. They have factories over there were suicidal terrorist that hate anything that�s not Wahabbi Islam is to be condemned in the strongest language and then killed. If this is only place they can operated freely � their home turf � ole� GW�s done a helluva thing. I mean, come on, even the Mets win at home occasionally.

The outpouring of anger regarding the fact that apparently the Saudis were warned this was coming and did nothing to stop it � especially from some of the less reasoned personnel at FNC � is a bit disturbing too. Again, this is the Saudis we�re talking about here. They don�t have a terrorist problem. They have a survival problem. The deal they made with the Wahhabi sect of Islam was a Faustian pact. And now the seeds of it threaten the royal family itself.

They�re in trouble and they know it. Even the Arab Press � usually reflexively apologetic for perceived slight directed at Muslims � are starting to realize that this sort of nihilistic exercise does nothing but kill innocents. Linked from Andrew Sullivan genius blog, here�s the money graf:

We have to face up to the fact that we have a terrorist problem here. Last week�s Interior Ministry announcement that 19 Al-Qaeda members, 17 of them Saudis, had planned terrorist attacks in the country and were being hunted was a wake-up call � particularly to those who steadfastly refuse to accept that individual Saudis or Muslims could ever do anything evil, who still cling to the fantasy that Sept. 11 and all the other attacks laid at the doors of terrorists who happen to be Arab or Muslim were in fact the work of the Israelis or the CIA. For too long we have ignored the truth. We did not want to admit that Saudis were involved in Sept. 11. We can no longer ignore that we have a nest of vipers here, hoping that by doing so they will go away. They will not. They are our problem and we all their targets now.

Amazing. I think we�re witnessing a Sea Change in the Arab World. Heads will literally roll and soon. As they say in AA, acknowledging you have a problem is the first step to eliminating it.

Gooberheads Deluxe

It appears that the nine presidential hopefuls from the Democratic side of the aisle can�t get any traction in the public�s eye. A recent survey commissioned by CBS News found that 66 percent of American�s couldn�t name a single Democratic candidate running for president.

Now, we all know it�s a bit early to start paying attention to such things. Indeed, with Clinton lackey Sid Blumenthal releasing a tome that rehashes every single one of the former president�s scandals, it�s not wonder no one else can get any airtime. Coupledwith the frightful release of Sen. Hillary Clinton�s book, and you have a scenario that spells disaster for Sen. John Edwards et al.

Conspiracy theorist � and I know you�re out there � may opine that this is deliberate attempt by the Clinton�s to crush any other pol from building a power base, either to challenge GWB in �04 or Shrill Hill�s chances in �08.

Worry not.

Like Mario Cuomo in the 80s, Hillary will be courted but will never jump in. She will never run in a race where�s there�s the possibility of her losing. And Hill on the ballot would mobilize the troops of �the vast right wing conspiracy�. Personally, I�d lose to see it, but it won�t happen.
But she can�t say she not going to ever run because that would divert the money river that laps at her door. As a non-declared candidate, she can shake down her cadre of toadies and stooges � limousine liberals that detest people from fly-over country.

And we can�t have that, can we.

16 May 03 dpny

Well, well, well�

I�ve been AWOL for a few weeks and guess what happened: the War is over. Despite protestations from the annoying left � who still see everything through drug addled prism of Vietnam � it was a major success. Thousand of GIs didn�t come home in body bags. The Iraqi�s did cheer � a least a little bit � when they were liberated. It didn�t create a wider war. And amazingly enough, other despotic killers are starting to cooperate with the US.

Imagine that.

It seems that George W. Bush � the so-called �Idiot Boy King� that the Left both here and abroad so despises � has pulled off a major military and moral victory. Saddam is dead or hiding so far underground that he can�t really hurt anybody. The Iraqis are free to chart their own course and live their lives in a manner to which they will quickly become accustomed.

Who�da thunk it?

Still. There are the nay sayers, like Mike Farrell and Janeane Garofolo who insist that President Bush is a liar and that there free speech was / is being curtailed because they are getting angry feedback from saying ugly things about the president. Yeah, I guess it�s a shame that actions have consequences that �the people� don�t understand that they should listen to �their betters�.

Memo to glammy Hollywood and Musician types carping about the blowback from their opinions about GWB: you are court jesters and little else. Get over yourselves. Unless, of course you�re doing this to keep your name in the news to prop up your sagging career. Then, I guess it�s okay to not take you seriously.

John Edwards as Clinton Lite

I also thought Sen. John Edwards was a gooberhead and would, in private conversations, decry him as Clinton Lite. However, in light if stories surfacing about campaign finance malfeasant, I guess Mr. Edwards thinks he can make it to the big time. In this story from the Winston-Salem Journal, it appears that the Justice Department is looking into whether or not certain campaign contribution that came from employees of a law firm that understood that their contributions would be �reimbursed�. Money graf:

The investigation was prompted by news reports about $2,000 contributions to the Edwards campaign made by four legal assistants at the [Little Rock, Arkansas-based] Turner & Associates firm. One donor, Michelle D. Abu-Halmeh, told The Washington Post that Tab Turner, the firm's principal lawyer, said he would reimburse her for her donation. Turner said last week that Abu-Halmeh would not be reimbursed.

Shades of Charlie Trie, Clinton�s bag man from Little Rock. It appears the real power base in the Democratic Party, former President Bill Clinton, has anointed him his heir apparent.

Housekeeping

It appears the New York experiment is back on. After months of job searches in the Raleigh metro area, it appears we�re stuck here, for now. Oh, well.

07 May 03 dpny

The value of a free press

There is no freedom in the world like the freedom of an American journalist to say whatever he or she wants. The only criterion for self-censorship is that the report he or she files be mostly true. Absent of actual malice, one can even be wrong in one�s dispatch, and still not be guilty of libel. In America, truth is an absolute defense against libel and has been so for more than 200 years.

Now that doesn�t mean that there can�t be fallout from bad reporting. The Nation Review Online published a list of boneheaded predictions about Iraq II written by avowed Bush-haters that will be used by some on the right (read Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and everybody at the Fox News Channel, to name a few) to hammer their reputation for years. And all that�s fair, I suppose. Freedom of expression is not that same as freedom from criticism. If you say something stupid � like say Trent Lott did � you deserve blowback.

That�s the way America is. Actions have consequences. And I�m cool with that too.

But that�s not the way it is everywhere. In the world of the state-run or state-sanctioned media, reporters, editors and producers have an overt agenda to slant the news in a way that furthers their or their master�s ends. Pravda � �truth� in Russian � rarely printed any truth ever.

As we all have seen recently, a number of the Arab media outlets � Al Jazeera and others � have been broadcasting the statements of the Iraqi Ministry of Information as complete and unvarnished truth, while ignoring the vast reportage coming from embedded reporters of every nationality traveling with the troops. These media outlets have been spoon feeding the most ridiculous propaganda to the Arab Street, who in turn, believed it right up until the time that the statue of Saddam fell on April 9th. They were lead to believe that Iraqi forces would slaughter the Americans and Brits by the thousands on the way to a glorious victory over the infidels.

Then came the letdown. From a standing start in Kuwait, the Americans and the Brits captured Baghdad in three weeks. The Arab Street was flabbergasted. How could this be? We watched the news and there was no hint of this impending disaster. �It must have been treason,� one Egyptian shopkeeper said to a British reporter.

And in a sense, he�s right. The Arab media have engaged in an organized campaign to attack American and �Zionist� interest to the point that they have deliberately misled their readers or viewers. Today, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) ran a piece written by Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, editor of the London-based Saudi newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat lambasting much of the Arab press for this practice. In part, he says:

But when we examine the Arab media, [we find] that little has changed since the previous century. It seems as if today's wars are no different than those of forty years ago. At that time, the Arab media jumped ahead of the Arab armies by making false predictions. They assumed that publishing a headline about downing 100 Israeli warplanes in the war of 1967 would build self-confidence and may even come true in the future. However, those who doze off and wake up in front of Arab TV will not forgive the [Arab] media [for] its lies when the smoke clears up and the truth is seen in full."

"I know that adopting an impartial stand in the [Arab] media world is akin to suicide, because there are many who push the media into extremes, and take 'nationalistic' positions, and maintain that whoever thinks differently is committing treason against the [national] cause. [They maintain] that lying for the sake of the cause is moral and honorable. The Arab media [of today], in these hard times, is slowly turning into the 1967 media; at that time, radio announcers, analysts, and journalists exaggerated acts of courage and covered up defeats, which - historically - became a mockery."

"The Arab media today, with its clear inclination towards exaggerations and false promises of victory, is feeding the public stories that have nothing to do with the real events in the field. Hence, it is replicating the old media, despite the fact that it is broadcasting in color and using electronic technologies�"

"Before the beginning of the [1991 Gulf War], Arabs who supported the Iraqi regime came up with floods of promises that it would be a great war, a second Vietnam, and that tens of thousands of the invaders would return in body bags, and that the Gulf would become a sea of blood. We were deluged with reports about the support of the international street [for Iraq], but soon the whole thing ended with the signing of the Safwan Agreement, in which Iraq surrendered completely, to the surprise of millions�"

"The media, in its reports, should not preempt the propaganda of ministries of information... The best service that [the Arab media] can provide to the public is the truth. This way it will save its reputation that was tarnished in the past, to the point that it became the twin-sister of the inferior political regimes."

This acknowledgement from a prominent newspaper editor, gets to the heart of why Americans are deeply distrustful of Arab culture in general and Arab nations in particular: everything that the Arab Street uses to form its opinions about everything is so biased that it has almost no connection with the rational world. New Yorkers were horrified to hear that the attacks on the World trade Center on 9/11 were being reported in the Arab World as being perpetrated by either a) the Bush administration or b) Israel. We knew the truth. We saw it live on cable. How could they � the Arab Street � not acknowledge that there are people that hate the US so much that they would do exactly the same thing that the so-called martyrs on the West Bank do with such frighteningly regularity?

It was easy. They have been fed a long and steady diet of misinformation and outright lies by their media outlets, with each being more outspoken than the last in their hatred of America and Israel. However, what Mr. Al Rashed just penned, may be the beginning of the end of that sort of treason against the truth. I would like to think that eyes will be opened and the truth in its various forms will be revealed. And that spectacularly erroneous �news� from biased reporters, editors and producers have the same sort of blowback there as here.

11 April 03 dpny

The end is nigh

Well, poor old Saddam Hussein. He�s either dead or quickly on his way towards becoming that way. And his people are free, or at least, freer. The Rumsfeld Doctrine of move fast, pack light and kick lots�o�ass has replaced the Powell Doctrine of move slow, pack everything and kick ass up to a point. A deafening silence surrounds North Korea. Kim Jung Mentally Il has realized that this isn�t the same gang of appeasers he dealt with before. He absolutely knows that any military adventures on his part will end up with him hiding in a bunker listening to American Thunder being dropped on his head 24 hours a day.

Losers, political and otherwise, dot the landscape like so many destroyed pickup trucks on the outskirts of Baghdad. The National Review has a list posted with the offending articles, penned by the likes of Chris Matthews and Maureen Dowd and looking very much like fools. I actually heard Matthews whining to Don Imus about President Bush and Iraq. Matthews, a former Carter staffer, apparently sees everything having to do with the military through the prism of Vietnam. This quote is especially ugly and will no doubt be used as a hammer on his reputation for the rest of whatever is left of his career:

�This invasion of Iraq, if it goes off, will join the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Desert One, Beirut and Somalia in the history of military catastrophe.�

And guess what? The American people are remembering this and are not watching his show in droves. The Fox News Channel�s ratings during primetime are huge and MSNBC�s are in the dumper. Can say that In blame them. On a recent tour of New York City, four out of five bars surveyed had FNC on. The other was tuned to ESPN.

The Million Pound Shithammer

Back in 1987 when I was a pompous graduate student in Greensboro, North Carolina, I got into a beer fueled argument with my good friend Kevin Taffe. At the time, he was convinced that Ronald Reagan was going to topple the Berlin Wall and the man behind it, Mikhail Gorbachev, based on sheer force of personality alone. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I came to the Ronaldus Magnus Fan Club late, not fully realizing his genius until the early 90s when the old Soviet Empire crumbled like a stinky French cheese.

I countered Kevin�s argument by saying something to the effect that Ted Turner was going to do more damage to the Soviet Union that Ronald Reagan ever could. My theory then was that Turner had just started overseas transmission of CNN to Europe and that the apparatchiks would see that the official line they were being fed daily in the Communist Party Press was an avalanche of dog shit and that their bosses were not only cruel, they were stupid as well. CNN, I opined, would change the way the middle managers see themselves and, subsequently, how they would view their country. It would hit the Eastern Bloc like a Million Pound Shit Hammer. I also shouted a prediction: that the Berlin Wall would fall in two years.

I was off by six months.

All that stated, Iran is next for the Shit Hammer treatment. It was no coincident that a pair of al Jazeera reporters got physically chased out of Basrah back to Kuwait by angry Iraqis who knew they�d been fucked by the Arab Propaganda machine.

Think about it; for more than a generation, the mullahs have run Iran like a feudal state and the young people are sick of it. They like American culture and want it now. Bet that some smart somebody, somewhere, creates an Islamic Mtv to capiliatize on this trend. Then starts the downward spiral. Smart money says that the mullahs� days are numbered anyway and they won�t make it intact more than another year. With an all but invisible push from us -- and our hideous youth culture -- the mullahs will be seeking asylum somewhere like Syria or Saudi Arabia.

Oil Drops

OPEC can kiss the days of $30 a barrel crude goodbye as the price in London fell to less than $25 today. Once the Iraqi oil fields start producing at pre-1991 levels, look for the price to hover around $20. Also bet that the economy, juiced by cheaper energy, will be roaring.

The big losers here: the left wing of Democratic Party that bet big on Iraq II thinking it would turn into Vietnam II. They predicted quagmire and got cheering Iraqis welcoming our troops and the prospect of $1.20 gas. When the economy comes barrelling back, they'll have nothing to run on except anger. That'll be good for 37% of the popular vote and Zero Electoral Votes.

Personally, I�m delighted. Nothing makes me happier that a bunch of hand-wringing lefties kicking their Birkenstocks off and bitching about How George Bush Lied to the American People about this War and How He Isn't really the President Anyway, I predict a freefall for candidates Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and John Kerry . Gooberhead John Edwards will do okay running as Bill Clinton Lite. Hillary Clinton comes out a big winner because voted for the war, then "hid under the sofa" (to quote Dick Morris).

And Mr. Bush rolls to a 50 state electoral landslide.

10 Apr 03 dpny

Popular Uprisings

Kuwaiti News as well as FNC are reporting that popular anti-Saddam uprisings are starting to take place in Basrah. This certainly changes the nature of the conflict. This development is probably giving Howell Raines of the NY Times brain bubbles.

God bless'em. I hope the Iraqis enjoy there first days of real freedom. And I hope that the leaders of neighboring countries in the region (read "Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran et al.") understand that the world has changed and their days of living like despotic shitheads are numbered.

The Government is coming

I wrote in this space about a week ago that we would start seeing increase visibility of a provisial government for Iraq. I gave the process about two weeks. Lo and behold, it's happening. It also looks as if we're finding WMD as well.

The End

In every modern American Conflict, there emerge a new cadre of superstar war reporters. Some are in the trenches -- Ernie Pyle, Morley Safer or Arthur Kent all filed fantastic reports from the field. Others sit on the sidelines and comment -- Ed Morrow, Eric Sevareid and Bernie Shaw come to mind amongst others.

The clear wining in the later category is Vic Hanson. For those who don't know, Dr. Victor Davis Hanson is a classics professor at Cal State Fresno (where Dr. S worked at the Ag School) and his perspective on this conflict by comparing it to others from long ago -- and I don't mean Vietnam -- has changed my world view. His syndicated piece today offers yet another reason why we should not stop until the Ba'athist regime in Iraq is completely destroyed and they surrender unconditionally.

Mark Steyn is a genius

Mark Steyn writes a beautiful piece today in which he says that basically, the war was over two weeks ago and what we're seeing now are merely the death rattles. He makes a great point.

05 Apr 03 dpny

The world according to ... Peter Arnett?

Well, it looks as if Peter Arnett has finally been recognized for what he is, and America-hating Kiwi who's been playing both sides against the middle for more than a decade. For those who don't know, Iraqi state TV ran an interview with Arnett, who said that the Pentagon';s war strategy is a "failure" (transcript here). Here's the money quote:

In answer to your question, it is clear that within the United States there is growing challenge to President Bush about the conduct of the war and also opposition to the war. So our reports about civilian casualties here, about the resistance of the Iraqi forces, are going back to the United States. It helps those who oppose the war when you challenge the policy to develop their arguments.

Now, before anybody starts screaming about giving "aid and comfort to the enemy", remember, he's not an American; he can go back to New Zealand and be welcomed as a hero. That stated, he'll probably have to, as word comes today that Arnett has been shit-canned by both NBC and MSNBC.

So where exactly is Saddam?

Who the hell knows? Dr. S and I had a sprawling conversation yesterday, a percentage of which contained a discussion of exactly this question.

James S. Robbins of the National Review Online ponders this query as well. the money graf:

Nevertheless, if Saddam is dead, why are the Iraqis fighting back? If one of his sons or underlings has taken control, why not announce it and fight on under new management or, to avoid further difficulties, cut a deal? Is the terror bureaucracy of the regime on autopilot? No doubt it can function well that way. On the other hand, maybe the commanders keep Saddam �alive� because no matter what happens in coming days they can blame it on him?

The regime on autopilot? Based on what I see pouring our of my cable box, that's where I'd put my money.

The next development

Look to see the Iraqi National Congress recieving more and more face time soon. Smart money says they annouce they are the legitimate goverment of Iraq sometime in the next couple of weeks.

Jonah Nails it

Jonah Goldberg is a genius untainted by politically correct 70s and 80s. His piece today is a marvelous take that follows up nicely to Ralph Peter's analysis in yesterday's posts. Taken together, they explain a whole lot about The Arab World is such a basketcase.

31 Mar 03 dpny

Frank Talk about the Arab World

I was going to write a screed about the complete intellectual bankrupcy of the Arab world, but Ralph Peters does a magnificent job in his column today. No point in screaming "me too".

The blonds of Fox News

I would never have thought to do this, but some cat created a page dedicated to all the blonds on FNC. Maybe that's the reason for their smashing ratings success.

Not in Whose Name?

Loyal readers know my opinion about Andrew Sullivan and that I think he's a genius of the first magnatude. That stated, he has a link from of London that absolutely hammers a big segment of the anit-war movement. Money grafs:

I've just heard a snippet of the most disgustingly me-me-me anti-war advert by Susan Sarandon, in which she intones, "Before our kids start coming home from Iraq in body bags, and women and children start dying in Baghdad, I need to know - what did Iraq do to us?" Well, if you mean what did Saddam do to America The Beautiful, not an awful lot - but to millions of his own people, torture and murder for a start. Don't they count?

Surely this is the most self-obsessed anti-war protest ever. NOT IN MY NAME! That's the giveaway. Who gives a stuff about their wet, white, western names? See how they write them so solemnly in a list on the bottom of the letters they send to the papers. And the ones that add their brats' names are the worst - a grotesque spin on Baby On Board, except they think that this gives them extra humanity points not just on the motorway, but in the whole wide weeping, striving, yearning world. We don't know the precious names of the countless numbers Saddam has killed. We're talking about a people - lots of them parents - subjected to an endless vista of death and torture, a country in which freedom can never be won without help from outside.

Wow. Good stuff.

30 Mar 03 dpny

No Blood of Oil? A Lesson in Math�.

I was walking down Lexington Avenue in New York City yesterday, when I noticed a young woman with impossibly red hair sporting a button on her backpack that read: �No Blood for Oil�.

Apparently, my message hasn�t gotten out.

This war isn�t about Oil. I�ll even go so far as to concede that the first was certainly about Oil. If anything, this is a war to protect banks and insurance companies, but more on that later. Sure, some defense contractors will get a pop, but that was going to happen anyway.

No, this piece is written for those Who Still Don�t Get It (WSDGIs). So, for those who don�t believe, let me do the math for you.

The Math, Part 1

Saddam Hussien�s Iraq produces 2.5 million barrels of oil a day under the UN�s Oil for Food program. At $30 a barrel, that runs to about $75 billion or what President Bush has asked to fight this war if it only goes 30 days. If it goes longer � my guess is six weeks � then he�s going to need more cash. Assuming we confiscate the entire output, the US would need to pump for a year to pay for this. And this assumes two things: a) output doesn�t increase (it will, to pre-sanction levels of 4 million barrels per day), b) the price of oil stays at $30 a barrel (it won�t since volume will increase). If this conflict goes long � and bet that it will � you�re looking at several years production to pay for this adventure.

But we're not going to confiscate Iraq's entire oil output. No, we're just going to pay for it, like everyone else. Energy prices will dip, but only to where they were before Venezuela started cracking up. Unleaded at $1.20 a gallon is not why Mr. Bush jumped into this with both feet.

As capitalist and an entrepreneur, the risk is too long and payoff is to short. And the above assumptions are based on our confiscation of Iraq�s oil, something that no rational person believes will happen. No, like I said, we�ll buy it like everybody else, which negates the whole reason for going, if the reason is oil.

The Math, Part 2

No, if there is a beneficiary, it�s the banks and insurance companies invested in Manhattan real estate.

What? We�re attack Iraq to protect Manhattan real estate values? Yeah, if you're must have some nafarious conspriacy that stipulates that the only reason for a war is that some business somewhere must benefit, these are the ones.

Back in 2001, some terrorist mailed envelopes with weaponized anthrax to Sen. Tom Daschle. The cost to decontaminate the Hart office building was $42 million. Imagine now, if a pair of crazies toss a baby food jar of the same stuff in front of the Number 1 train on west side of Manhattan, and in front of the Number 4 train on the east side. The subways in New York vent to the sidewalk, so toxins would be distributed all over the city.

Thousands � maybe even millions � of people die. A lot of those people would have life insurance claims that would have to be pay off. If 50,000 people have $125K worth of insurance each, you�re talking about a $6 billion hit to the insurance industry. Sure, that�s big and scary enough, if you�re an actuary or a insurance exec. But that�s not the really scary part.

Commercial structures in Manhattan would be rendered uninhabitable and those business contained therein would be forced to flee. Rents would stop being paid. All those glorious skyscrapers could be standing empty.

In Manhattan, there is 353 million square feet of office space. At an average price of $35 per square foot (a very low estimate), that equates to $148 billion (with �B�) in rents. Now imagine all that space empty and needing de-contamination. The economic fallout would be cataclysmic. The note holders on those buildings � banks, REITs, insurance companies � would be left holding the bag and would no doubt default.

Now, if the Hart Senate Office Building cost $42 million to decontaminate, and it contains roughly 1 million square feet, how much will it cost to decontaminate Manhattan�s office space? If the same rates hold, the amount needed to pay for this is $14.8 billion (that�s with a �B�). Add that together with the several years worth of lost rents and you're talking about a hit to the economy that would make Sept 11 look like a speed bump.

And that�s just Manhattan commercial space. What about the residential hit? How long would those $8 million townhouses be worth $8 million dollars in a city as uninhabitable as Chernobyl? Factor in lost economic activity and you're talking about a 1 or 2 trillion (with a "T") dollar hit.

Look, I�m not one to second-guess the President�s motives. If he says this conflict is to liberate Iraq, get rid of Saddam and cleanse the country of WMDs, then so be it.

But don�t say it�s about Blood for Oil, because it�s not. That empty-headed manifestation of free speech used by those WSDGI is more than just wrong; it�s stupid and an insult to the intelligence of those of us who have done the math.

28 Mar 03 dpny

War �

I have to say this up front: I am amazed at the skill and precision that our combined fighting forces have exhibited during the opening of this conflict with Iraq. When you look at the massive numbers of Iraqi military casualties and contrast that with the Red Cross�s official number of civilian casualties, one can�t help but be impressed. God bless�em; they�re killing the bad guys without harming the spectators.

Now that we�ve hit a pause in the action � due to sandstorm � perhaps we should reflect back on why this action is very much different from Vietnam.

Oh, I�ve heard the litany from the usual suspects that this is exactly like Vietnam and that we�re going to get bogged down in a war of attrition with an intractable foe. The same nattering nabobs of negativism have been saying that very same thing every time America puts it�s military in harm�s way. They may have even been slightly correct in saying this about Gulf War I. Both were limited actions designed not with victory in mind, but restoration of the status quo ante bellum.

This conflict is different, and more closely resembles our actions in Europe during the middle of the last century. The as now, we are attempting to destroy a regime, killing or imprisoning all the major players and liberating a country from the clutches of a foul, dictatorial madman. It will only end with Saddam's head on a stick, not some convoluted peace treaty that lets him go. More than that, we�ve coupled this liberation / invasion with a massive humanitarian project that seeks to feed the Iraqi people at the same time. If those shameful clowns that run the Nobel Committee weren�t a bunch of socialist, America-hating Euro-weenies, they�d nominate George Bush for the Peace Prize, not that those mean all that much these days.

No, things are actually going well, despite all the doom and gloom from the BBC, CBC and Al Jeezera. Bryan Preston and Chris Regan for National Review Online put together a tick-tock that's as comprehensive as I can find anywhere on the net. Money passage:

To review the present reality: Of the 300,000 or so allied troops engaged in this conflict, to date fewer than two dozen have been killed, with another couple dozen injured and a handful taken prisoner by the enemy. U.S. casualties include one killed and another dozen injured when a fellow soldier "fragged" his own officers. The preponderance of British casualties have occurred in crashes, mechanical difficulties, and at least one friendly fire incident. The Iraqi regular forces have been thus far unable to mount any organized resistance, have lost control of most of their country and have already resorted to illegal tactics such as donning civilian clothing and faking surrenders before opening fire. Ten thousand of them, from the lowest private to a couple of generals, have already surrendered to allied forces and are reportedly providing intelligence on troop positions throughout Iraq. In all, these are not the acts of any army that expects victory, but is in fact merely trying to forestall inevitable destruction. U.S. Patriot missile batteries have thus far scored perfectly, knocking down each missile the Iraqis manage to lob at our rear positions in Kuwait. Each missile fired represents a desperate gasp from a regime slowly strangling from assault without and a lack of popular support within. Whether Saddam lives or not at the moment is incidental � his regime is dying.

Despite, what you hear on NPR, we do seem to be winning the war.

And it�s malcontents

I did happen to catch CNN�s coverage of war protest march in New York City this weekend. In general, I respect people right to say and believe foolish things. However, one �man in the street� interview really got to the bottom of why so many otherwise clearly thinking people are so violently opposed to overthrowing Saddam Hussien�s genocidal regime. The reporter, whose name I don�t remember (sorry, I�m usually better about that than most) asked a gray-haired, grandmotherly-type about her reasons for marching. She spouted off the usual left-wing pap � no blood for oil, etc � then she stated her real reason: George Bush wasn�t even �legitimately elected�.

I said this earlier: a huge percentage of the peacenik movement really just hates George Bush and still upset about Florida. These, of course, were the same people that wanted the Republicans to �move on� after the Monica-gate.

It�s sad, really. Here we are in a time of terrible tumult � Islamo-fascists attacking Americans on American soil in broad daylight and on national television � and all they care about is Al Gore losing an election on a technicality.

If this is the best the anti-war movement / Democratic party can come up with, they�ll be out of power for at least a generation.

And that�s not a bad thing either.

One good thing about the part 1....

Word has it that Tina Brown, ex-editor of Talk that abysmal, self-absorbed, celebrity-soaked journal of the Beautiful People, has had her show with CNBC delayed due to war coverage.

To quote Kilgore: someday, this war's gonna end.

27 Mar 03 dpny

I'd like to thank all of those good folks that have extended their sympathies to my family during this time. It helps.

27 mar 03 dpny

In Memoriam

Charles Wesley Pugh, 72 of Raleigh died Friday, March 14, 2003. The family will receive relatives and friends Monday, March 17th from 6:30 to 8:30 pm at North Raleigh Funeral Home.

Born in Norfolk, Virginia, Charlie served in the Air Force as an instructor in radar systems. After leaving the service he earned a degree in Electrical Engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and his masters degree from Duke University. Charlie went to work for Bell Laboratories, the research and development arm of AT&T on the Nike Hercules Guidance System and telecommunications projects. After 26 years of service he retired from AT&T and worked in various volunteer capacities including best playmate for his twin granddaughters.

Besides working with the Burlington Housing Authority, the American Red Cross, the YMCA, Charlie was one of the key lay people at the Church of the Holy Comforter in Burlington. He was a member of the Vestry and was Church Treasurer. Charlie was a valuable member of the Parish, highly trusted, thoughtful, and conscientious and was always open to discussion and helped create an open atmosphere among the leaders. He was a good friend, loyal and caring to his family and friends and will be greatly missed by all those who loved him.

Charlie leaves to cherish his memory, his wife Doris Pugh; daughter Mary Catherine Pugh Phelps and husband Thomas and son, C. David Pugh and wife Lisa Malawer; brothers, Stanley Pugh and John Pugh; sisters Marcella Snyder, Elizabeth Summerell, Jean Major; grandchildren, Andrea Phelps, Ellen Phelps, and Isabelle Pugh.

Private remembrance services for Charlie will be held by his family at a later date. In lieu of flowers memorial donations may be made to, Episcopal Farm Workers Ministry, P.O. Box 160, Newton Grove, NC 27889 or Hospice of Wake County, 1300 St. Mary�s Street, Raleigh, NC 27605. Arrangements by North Raleigh Funeral Home 919-870-5123.

Does this sound reasonable to you?

Dear Mr. President;

The Free Market Capitalism Coalition urges you to stop our country�s move towards economic isolationism. Only by liberalizing global trade and finance laws can we improve worldwide market access. Only through establishing fluid access to multi-national markets can investment flow into developing countries. And it is this market building that creates jobs and raises living standards in so-called underdeveloped countries around the world.

We all know that our national security strategy is in part based on the promolgation of increased global economic growth through free markets and free trade. Our coalition believes the United States must continue to open economic barriers to allow for a more global oriented trading community. Less open/fortunate societies than ours are in the process of climbing out of poverty by following the ideals and practices of modified free market capitalism. Their level of poverty decreases as a direct result of American influence on their business communities and government leaders. The economic freedom that results from increase commercial activity will unleash the potential of their people and assure their future prosperity. Please do not allow the retreat of American values and freedoms from the distant frontiers where democracy meets fascism and anarchy. Nations that choose to share our political and economic beliefs can share in the freedom that occurs in their societies after embracing democratic capitalism giving their people liberties and freedoms never before experienced.

America works, on any number of levels. People vote with their feet. Immigration to America is a common goal through the world. A misguided attempt at pushing an "America for Americans" doctrine will ultimately damage America and American business in some specific sector economies -- sectors like software development and medical processes. But the adverse effects of increased U.S. isolationism will created a festering breeding ground for terrorist networks and drug lords. Before long, the United States is a target for the �have nots� who view our blessed country as an evil, gluttonous empire determined to keep out those less fortunate.

American isolationism has also serious economic repercussions not only on countries trying to improve their societies but on ours as well. One example of the effects of isolationism would have is the decline of customers in leisure and business travel industries in the United States. American airlines are under great financial pressures to maintain affordable fares, while taking on substantial security expenses since 9/11. The leisure industry is taking a direct hit by airline decisions as are other industries such as cruise lines. Peripheral support industries to the leisure industry like food suppliers, travel agencies, hotels, and many others are also experiencing cutbacks in personnel. The effect of isolationism, were the Executive Branch to publicly announce and support a cultural shift in that direction, would have a devastating effect across the entire leisure and luxury travel sectors.

The Free Market Capitalism Coalition believes that a move towards isolationism would ultimately have dire consequences for the United States. Travel agencies and airlines would be nothing short of crippled. The United States is at risk of being seen as a rich, snobbish, selfish, �have� country, and our people and culture will pay this cost of retreating from the world. Trade across all societies can bring peoples together and increase mutual awareness of the differences and similarities between diverse cultures. It helps to educate less fortunate people around the world to better understand the freedoms and privileges we enjoy in America and inspires them to try and achieve the same objective through commerce, not terrorism. Likewise, Americans are further educated in the richness of the cultural diversity that exists on the planet which brings a further awareness to our people of the issues that the rest of world cares about and our society sometimes forgets, such as environmental issues and the spread of pandemic diseases.

In closing, the Free Market Capitalism Coalition would like to state that we are behind you and the government of the United States, the greatest society the world has ever seen. We believe it is through our unique constitution that our people have experienced a standard of living that will not be seen again on this earth. We also believe that through isolationism, the United States risks alienating the entire world against our society, creating an "us vs. them" cultural schism which can be seen manifesting itself in countries that do not have access to our markets today. We need to open those markets, militarily if need be, to allow commerce to reign across the globe.

Respectfully,

Ralph of the Burls

You see - I'm not sure that this is not what got us into the problem in the first place.

Jonah the genius strikes again�Maureen Dowd is losing her edge�househunting in �the Provinces�

I think Jonah�s Goldberg�s is the best and the freshest in the marketplace of ideas. Charming, witty, and unafraid of confrontation, his body of work is starting to show flashes of genius. His lasting posting is the closest thing I�ve ever found to a Rosetta Stone explaining why liberals /�our reluctant European allies� think the way they do. It is not to be missed.

Maureen Dowd has lost her edge

Maureen Dowd, the aging doyenne of the NY Times editorial board, seems to have lost her edge.

That or I�m tired of her continuous bitching about �the Bushies�. I suppose though, if you�re a one trick pony and that one trick keeps you in a nice place on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, there is an incentive to do it over and over again.

Her latest piece in America�s so-called �newspaper of record� is actually setup to deliver interesting and profound insights into George Bush fils understanding of America�s place in the world and how the ascension of American culture places it on the same short list as the Roman and Chinese Empire. She could then underscore the differences between those empires of conquest and our empire of thought and freedom.

Heavy sigh

Alas, she didn�t, deciding that the best way to conduct a reasoned argument was to lead with facts, then make a unreasonable summation coupled with an ad hominem attack. The text of the piece concerns a Pentogon study of the empires of yore � China, Rome, etc. and how they keep and spread their influence and power. Personally, I think this perfectly reasonable, even laudable, use of taxpayer money. American policy makers should study history. They should understand that the world is a very dangerous place. They � and us � would be wise to study everything that�s ever happened before and learn form it. Ms. Dowd concludes that this is another example of misguided Republicans striving to enslave the world with our petit bourgeois values and tastes (read �life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness�). Money quote:

As the brazen Bush imperialists try to install a new democracy in Iraq, they are finding the old democracy of our reluctant allies inconvenient.

I don�t think I can quite make the synaptical leap between the study of history during dangerous times and desire for empire. Indeed, it was a careful study of history that allowed American forces to quickly overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. We didn�t repeat the tactics of either The British of the Soviets, both of whom really were bent on empire. And somehow I do find it reassuring that we have yet to receive the blessing of our nationalist /socialist �allies� in old Europe.

House hunting

I�m in Carolina, hanging out with my sister and her husband, looking for a house. The New South seems to have learned that much of its� charm cam from its Old South roots. No, not Jim Crow politics or confederate flags, but grace and rooted-ness. Charleston is charming. So is Savannah. The architecture is familiar and comfortable.

Well, developers in Raleigh have finally figured that out and are building new neighborhoods that like, well, old neighborhoods. Development after development is being built to look like Craftsman bungalows or Charleston row houses.

And I am stoked. Let the hunting begin.

08 Mar 03 dpny

A comprehensive case for finishing our War with Iraq

�War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin��

SunTzu, The Art of War

It all comes down to this: do you pull the trigger or not? When everything has been said, when all the arguments made, one must sit down and actively reason whether the US should wage war with the nation of Iraq.

It�s beyond Saddam Hussein. It�s beyond UN Resolution 1441. It�s beyond any allies the US may or may not have. The point that General Sun Tzu made all those centuries ago still resonates: war is serious and should not be conducted frivolously.

There are those amongst the body politic who demand increased arm inspections as a means to prevent war. There are those amongst the body politic who state that President Bush has not made the case for war, ergo it should not be waged. There are some in the body politic that claim that this is all about oil, and that President Bush, being a former oil executive, is only concerned about looting Iraq�s natural resources. Some of his more vociferous domestic opponents state that this is just a distraction for the administration�s failed attempts to get Osama Bin Ladin (OBL) and his executive henchmen. Some overseas claim that we are either being manipulated by Israel and the �Zionist lobby�, or engaged in the colonial aggregation often associated with the European empires of two centuries ago. Some even claim that this is all personal, just a blood feud between the Arab Saddam and WASP-y, patrician Bushes of Kennebunkeport.

To that I say: �hogwash.�

Saddam Hussein is a dangerous hoodlum who has fashioned Stalinist dictatorship that has its boot on the neck of the Iraqi people. He has started wars that killed millions. He has used poison gas on his own citizens. He actively subsidizes terrorism around the world.

No serious person can deny any of that. Indeed, that�s been the case for years. So why now? Why should America risk blood and treasure to dispose of a tin pot dictator?

It all comes back to Gen. Tzu: survival or ruin.

This war is really is about survival. Not oil. Not Israel. Not distraction. Not empire.

To understand why it�s not about those things, one simply has to look at arguments.

It�s about oil

Let�s say, for the sake of argument, that President Bush decreed tomorrow that all vehicles in the US must run on ethanol or bio-diesel. That we were never going to import any oil ever again. That we were going to start a crash course designed to end petroleum use in the US forever. Where would that leave us?

Saddam would still have lots of money. He would still have weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). He would still have a proclivity to use them. And he would still hate the US.

Even if we didn�t need the oil ever again, he would still want to kill every American reading this sentence. His motive or means will not go away even if we ran our economy on hay.

It�s about Israel

Israel has won every conventional war it has ever fought and can take care of itself. Everybody thinks they have their own nukes and would use them if they were ever attacked by anybody with a WMD. The Palestinian issue is resolving itself, with the Israeli Army attacking terrorist networks with tanks and midnight raids. Indeed, I have contended for years that if the Palestinians would simply change tactics � embrace Gandhi or Martin Luther King instead of Fidel Castro or Yassir Arafat � they would already have their state.

Israel is indeed an ally in the region. No one can deny that. However, they can account for themselves quite well on any field of battle. They don�t need us to fight their battles for them.

It�s just a distraction

The capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed in Pakistan � Al Qaeda�s operations chief� utterly refutes this argument that President Bush is simply using Iraq to distract the American people for the incompetent job his administration is doing in capturing OBL and destroying his terrorist network. Having been on the FBI�s most wanted list for a decade, he has sponsored, organized and planned terrorist activity all over the world.

We got him. He�s squealing. His rank and file will be vacationing in Cuba at Guantanimo Bay soon enough.

Sorry. President Bush can walk and chew gum at the same time.

It�s about empire

Arguments can be made that American became an Imperial Power in the latter days of the 19th Century with the annexation of The Philippines and Cuba. Okay, fair enough. But they�re both independent now. The same is true for the territories we conquered in Europe and Asia during the World War (parts 1 and 2). Afghanistan is free. Kuwait is free. Panama is free. Kosovo is free. I contend that the Europeans who carp that our war with Iraq is about empire are simply projecting their sorry histories onto us.

No, Iraq will be a free and democratic state before you know it. And will have a destabilizing effect on all those mullahs and sheiks living within broadcast range.


After 9/11, the President�s critics � made up almost entirely of those who thought Al Gore should really be the president � wondered how the attack could have occurred. �How come nobody could connect the dots?�, so many passionately intoned. Hearings were demanded and held. Bureaucracies were dis- and re- assembled. The Taliban were overthrown. Al Qaeda was pursued. Things were going along swimmingly.

Then, President Bush started talking about the �axis of evil�. He mentioned Iraq by name. The critics pounced. The usual suspects chanted the usual homilies. The subject was changed at every opportunity.

They didn�t connect the dots.

They argued for more inspections. They argued that Bush was stupid. They banged their spoon on their high chairs when people criticized their criticisms. They charged �McCarthy-ism�.

But Sen. Joe McCarthy was right. There were Soviet spies in the State Department. Stalin's lackeys were in Hollywood. Sure, McCarthy's tactics were evil, falsely accusing some and insidiously implying guilt by association. But the core of his arguments were correct. The Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were guilty. So was Alger Hiss. The Soviets got the H-bomb given to them. All this has been verified through disclassified Soviet intelligence made public 10 years ago.

The usual suspects didn�t connect the dots then, either.

What 9/11 did for the Bush Administration is connect the dots. The policy of containing Saddam actually worked as long as he didn�t have a delivery vehicle for all those terrible weapons we know he has. He literally didn�t have a missile that could reach the US. That was his problem.

On 9/11, we realized that he didn�t have to develop a missile program. He could have all the missiles he wanted and book tickets for them online with a credit card.

That�s when the Bush Administration connected the last dot. His critics still have not.

This is serious. And it is about survival.

05 Mar 03 dpny

The French as Iraqi stooges�Pete Hamill finally blows a gasket�Another rat busted�Housekeeping, sort of.

Let me say this up front: I do not hate the French. On my front door is a small, enamel sign that states �attention au chien�. It means, essentially, �beware of the dog(s)�. I have not taken it down because of this recent unfortunateness in the United Nations. I have nothing against the French people and may very well start drinking their wine again.

That stated, their obstinance with regards to the United States attempt to actually enforce UN resolution 1441 has gone beyond wearing thin. Indeed, I have started to wonder while the government of Jacques Chirac would take such a principled stand. I mean, come on. Not to sound like Jonah Goldberg, but this is the French we�re talking about.

The answer is probably what I suspected but could never quite prove: money. That�s what I contend it�s always about. But I could never bring myself to believe that oil contracts or miscellaneous trade deals between Iraq and France would be so important as to force Chirac to irreparably damage French / US relations. Business is business and can be replaced or regenerated as needed.

Well, it appears that Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard (part of Rupert Murdoch�s News Corp. empire) is offering another spin that rings truer than lost trade: campaign payola. In this piece by Melana Zyla Vickers, Saddam himself is quoted as saying:

As for financiers, industrialists and above all those responsible for military industry, the question must be put to French politicians: Who did not benefit from these business contracts and relationships with Iraq? . . . With respect to the politicians, one need only refer back to the declarations of all the political parties of France, Right and Left. All were happy to brag about their friendship with Iraq and to refer to common interests. From Mr. Chirac [now the center-right president] to Mr. Chevenement [the socialist former defense minister] . . . politicians and economic leaders were in open competition to spend time with us and flatter us. We have now grasped the reality of the situation [of France's support for the 1991 Gulf War, a betrayal in Saddam's eyes]. If the trickery continues, we will be forced to unmask them, all of them, before the French public.

Well, golly; looks like we have shades of Lincoln bedroom-type shenanigans. Jonah actually wrote that Bill Clinton wasn�t really our first black or feminist president, he was our first French president right down the mistress. If any of this can be verified, methinks we�ve found the real reason that Mr. Chirac is such a big fan of letting the inspectors do their job.

Pete Hamill finally loses it

I respect Pete Hamill. A long-time denizen of The City. Mr. Hamill is an erudite craftsman who genuinely understands the human condition and the frailty of life in a major metropolis. I read a piece back in the early 1990s in New York magazine (when my friend Steve Dubner was still there before he went to the NY Times). It was an article about the homeless in New York City and it was an order of magnitude better your standard hand-wringing guilt-fest. He pointed out that a significant segment were mentally ill substance abusers who didn�t need a hand out, they needed medical treatment. A big sub-segment of those folks were US Army veterans, for whom help was immediately available. He went on to lambaste so-called �homeless advocates� who were nothing more than enablers for bad behavior. Moreover, these homeless men � and they almost always were men � were a clear and present danger to themselves and other, substance abuse issues aside. They were contracting and spreading TB. And that�s a problem.

When I read that piece, I was astonished. Here was honest journalism that was both sympathetic and tough. Perhaps most importantly though � at least for me � it was devoid of the usual cliches generated by the New York media regarding the �homeless issue� during the time of a Republican president, in this case, George H.W. Bush.

I thought it brilliant and made a note to read Mr. Hamill at every opportunity.

Well, maybe I should stop. His piece in today�s NY Daily News equates the current buildup in around Iraq to the war planning being done prior to the First World War. Leaning heavily on Barbara Tuchman�s The Guns of August, Mr. Hamill devolves into a pontificating gasbag, implying the President isn't serious and/or doesn't understand the gravity of the situation he faces and, in order to remedy his ignorance, he needs to read Ms. Tuchman�s book.

August 1914 and the war against Saddam Hussein can't be truly compared, of course, since no war is exactly like any other war. But Tuchman's great book contains a universal lesson that must never be forgotten: Wars have consequences that cannot be predicted. Right up the road lies Iraq. This should be a quick, ferocious and certain victory. But after the victory, the true war might begin all over the planet, including here in our own tough city.

I watched the President the other night as he offered his sunny vision of leading a conquered Iraq into a new age of Pericles. The performance was astonishing. The tough guy sheriff was recasting himself into that ancient figure of Republican contempt: the do-gooder.

Reality seemed to have slipped away forever, and I wished that the President would go home and start reading "The Guns of August."

You�re right, Pete. The two can not be compared. As classical historian V.D. Hanson points out, unless your really defeat the enemy, he will rise back up and come looking for revenge. President Bush 41 didn�t understand where he was standing back then when he pulled the plug on our force on the road Baghdad. Neither did the French or the Brits in 1919. Which is exactly the reason the German Army was occupying France and the Luftwaffe was raining terror on the Coventry countryside just 22 years later.

And that�s why we�re back. And that�s why weapons inspectors � supported by the French both then and now � won�t work. President Bush 43 understands this. Perhaps he�s been reading about the Punic Wars � note the plural � and not Mr. Tuchman�s wonderful tome.

Yes, this is dangerous business, Pete. And it might not be as popular as appeasement. But it must be done.

A terrorist busted

I, for one, can breathe easier knowing that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is on his way from Pakistan to a Kuwaiti jail and into the hands of American �interrogators�. For those who don�t know or haven�t been exposed to any American media of any kind during the past 24 hours, allegedly, he planned the 9/11 WTC attacks.

This is a good thing. He is a murderous SOB and should be wrapped in bacon then set alight after we squeeze him dry. And it also shows that President Bush is also pursuing terrorists in addition to dealing with Iraq.

There is, however, a disturbing element to this story for the assembled Burls: he graduated from NC A&T in Greensburger. In the 1970s. While we were living there.

Housekeeping

All right, I give up. As of today, the New York experiment is being cancelled. The house is on the market and we�re showing it today. With any luck, we should be out of here in a month or so.

So why am I leaving? Some is personal and some is professional. My wife is sick of her two-hour commute in each direction. I�m sick of the traffic and congestion. My daughter is just sick from being in daycare.

So we�re moving back to Carolina. Guess I�ll need to change my moniker.

02 March 03 dpny

Let's get to heart of the matter

Retracted.

Anybody who quotes lyrics from album liner notes as the bedrock of their geo-political philosphy is a dunce

Nothing bring out the nutcases like a good conspiracy. Roswell and JFK have generated crackpot theories for decades, some of which are actually amusing. Lately, I have gotten a lot of email regarding the the US-led coalition to disarm / decapitate Iraq. While I know I regress with this piece, I wanted to share some thoughts about one e-mail I received supporting the growing anti-war movement in our country (which is really an anti-George Bush movement in a peacenik's clothing). While normally I simply hit the delete key to clear this sort of stupidity from my desktop, I received one that was a 54K bit of vitriol, complete with quotes Frank Zappa and liner notes from a Rush album. Always the sign of a real heavyweight in action.

I couldn't resist. I had to respond. It was raining in Paris and I needed somthing to do.

Indulge me. I am listing only the major points of the screed in order to provide a frame for my responses. In all honestly, they seem to be standard Chomsky-esque boilerplate "no-War" rhetoric, often associated with know-nothing Hollywood types (think Susan Saradon or Sean Penn) or musician types (think Sheryl Crow or Dave Mathews) types that had been steeped in a foul brew of Roswell and JFK conspiracies. These points are:

A) The "truths" our government present to us are propaganda are therefor always false. The fact that propaganda is being used by them to promote a particular viewpoint necessarily means that the view being promoted cannot stand by it's own merits.

B) The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 were instigated, planned, and directed by the very people -- The Bush Administration -- who now claim to be saving us from the new enemy, namely Iraq. And they're using the same basic scheme they've routinely used in the past. Their scheme goes as follows:

Step 1: [Bush finds] a likely enemy.
Step 2: [The government] covertly or overtly sponsors, funds, and trains a "new enemy", essentially becoming their become business sponsor.
Step 3: From within his organization, Bush et al. direct this new enemy to perform the desired atrocity, or simply do it yourself and then blame him.
Step 4: The administration demonizes the new enemy with a massive propaganda campaign.
Step 5: The administration sends U.S. forces to neutralize the new enemy but stop short of completing the task, just in case they need him again later.
Step 6: The administration uses the resulting fear and anger to enable tighter control over the U.S. population.

C) Norad was ordered to stand down to let the hijackers hit the twin towers on 9/11.
D) Osama Bin Lama is really a CIA operative.
E) Attorney General John Ashcroft switched to private government planes on 9/11 to avoid public transportation.
F) Murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Danny Pearlwas not a U.S. citizen; that he was, in fact, an Israeli.
G) Bush is the anti-Christ.
H) The public are just sheep being lied to by everything in print and on T.V.

Dear nutcase dudes and dudettes: you need to get out more, and read some international newspapers. And stop getting your geo-politcal cosmology from liner notes on album covers.

While you certainly deserve an A on your mid-term for emotion, your technical writing skills merit a D. There are no credits for the information presented. Where is the bibliography? Links? I want to thank the intrepid emailer for his/her quotes, but they seem to be engineered only provoke emotion. They did not present any facts. And I'm left wondering, "this is somehpw different from the government�s right to spin it's story?"

So, to pursue an adult discussion, do me a favor, and please credit the sources:

"NORAD's decisions to take a day off because of WalMart sale in Colorado Springs";
"Ashcroft's travel on military aircraft" (but why wouldn't he - all the congressmen do);
"Osama Bin Laden (OBL) being a member of the CIA�s �Boot strap� program";
"OBL's family leaving America on 9/11 because frequent flyer miles no good on 9/12"

Also, please submit:
Bush's link with evil (all references). Use separate hard drive if necessary.
Substancial proof of Danny Pearl's citizenship. I could find no reference to buttress your point that he was really an Israeli citizen. Published sources I found list him as having been born in Los Angeles with American citizenship.

Ok, start with those, but do me another favor: do not credits from crackpot web sites; use only those that are a reputable source of verifiable information. "Colonel Smith" of the "Mountain Militia" does not count as a credible source.

And enough with the liner notes. You can't be a sophomore your entire life.

Everyone knows there is a lot wrong with the world. Nobody I know in or out of the military thinks that the election stuff in Florida was 100 percent straight up. How many elections are? Nobody I know thinks that the war is just about weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Perhaps it's also about starting to clean up that region of the world. Or consolidating Western Power. Or both. Throw in globalization as well so the rest of the world comes on line with capitalism.

Yes, that necessarily means that business interests will benefit. And yes, the people in power are usually plugged into business interests. It's always been that way, since the snake gave Eve the apple as a free sample to promote his upcoming lingerie sale. And, of course, the nature of man will never change.

But a fundamental truth of business is that investors do not like instability. So the argument that the power regime is always in it for war does not stand on it's merits. More money is made from trade than military hardware sales.

Look it up. I did.

"Exports increased to $83.2 billion in November from $82.3 billion in October. Goods were $58.0 billion in November, up from $57.4 billion in October, and services were $25.2 billion in November, up from $24.9 billion in October." Deductions from Export figures: "U.S. military sales contracts - This deduction of U.S. military sales contracts is made because the U.S. Census Bureau has included these contracts in the goods data, but BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) includes them in the service category "Transfers Under U.S. Military Sales Contracts." ("Information on Goods and Services", Foreign Trade division, U.S. Census Bureau, 2002.)

The Buddha is credited with saying, "Life is hard because it's full of nature." And Jesus said "render unto Caesar the dressing which is Newman's Own, er, I mean, Caesar�s". And I say if you can't reach it from where you're sitting, it's not worth having. We all have sayings and they�re all true � to us. Some are just more silly than others.

Maybe its true that most people just want to be led around. Remember, life is hard. They just want to earn a living and go home to their families. Not everyone wants to be a leader of a country. But can you imagine the problems associated with the infrastructure of a country with 100 million people? 200 million? 300 million? A billion? Even if one was a fascist leader, to stay in power you have to feed, and protect those people. And in our society we have an unprecedented, never before seen in the history of the world, level of comfort that extends to the majority of our 300 million citizens. So something is being done right, even if hypocrisy still exists.

Maybe we live in a sort of benevolent fascism. If one can see that most people are sheep, then one is smart enough to get with the program of the capitalistic democratic republic in which we live. We are born into a contractarian society. We had no choice. Now, which way to go: right-wing wacko or left-wing commie pinko? For writer of my 54K missive, maybe the spot in the middle � a sophomoric wacko who gets their handle on political philosophy from liner notes.