Failure in the Middle East?

Failure? - I don't think so. For all the lib and MSM whining about policy "failure" in Iraq, it sure looks like that old democracy stuff is bustin' out all over the place! Note the Lebanese government quitting today and the Egyptian president's decision to let people actually vote for the first time since the early 80's (and none of this vote yes for me or no for me stuff, either).

The success of Democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq's recent elections has emboldened the oppressed throughout the Middle East to stand up and be counted. The next shoe to drop will be Iran, where there is an active and vital opposition. Our long time allies the Saudis are also feeling the heat on this issue.

The most intriguing thing in all this is that no one on the left seems to be happy about all this freedom spreading everywhere. Apparently Islamo-fascism is more to their liking than all this messy liberty. Maybe they think that Arabs and Muslims are too primitive or too stupid to vote and participate - or maybe they just don't think they should. They are definitely not speaking in support of freedom to prove otherwise.

Well let's be fair, maybe they like freedom a lot, just not enough to abandon the partisan line about Bush being bad, he lied, Republicans are evil, blah blah blah.

But is that any better? I thought the libs were all idealists. I thought the press was out to "make a difference". Apparently they are out to "elect Democrats" and the truth be damned.

As long as the dominos keep falling in the direction of liberty, the left is going to have to face up to the contradiction of the Anti-Bush-at-all-costs position and recognize that something is being accomplished. Free places that Muslims can live and work without being stomped on by the thug of the month are going to attract other non-crazy Muslims. As China has demonstrated, more freedom also causes economic activity, so the standard of living in the free Muslim world will also be higher than in the nutty oppresive regimes.

Do you think that Muslims living with no money in a horrible shanty won't look across the border and wonder "Why not me?"

Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Egypt have already moved towards liberty, with others to follow. "Change the face of the Middle East" doesn't seem too lofty now, does it?

RMR

the Working-Class and the Democrats

ISO: Working-Class Democrats (washingtonpost.com)

This article makes a weak point about wages rising after the recovery (notice that they admit it's in it's eleventh quarter now, after the election is over). While mentioning that wages rose more quickly in other recoveries, they fail to mention inflation as a factor in the increase in wages. I'm not economist, but with inflation a non-factor in the recession at the end of the Clinton administration (hat tip to Greenspan), there was no inflationary pressure for jobs to rise, as there was in the early eighties recovery for example. I may be wrong on this, but I think these figures come from the antiquated model that also misses a lot of job creation by not considering entrepreneurs, whose income growth is probably not measure either.

So anyway, let's note that we have moved from "There's no recovery!" to the "Jobless recovery" to now the, and I quote, "raise-less recovery". Talk about the glass being half-empty.

RMR

Quality education strikes again

New York Post Online Edition: news

Any doubt what this guy is teaching the little kiddies? You can read more in the article, but basically a sixth grade class was given an assignment to write to a soldier about to deploy to Iraq and they sent him things like:

One girl wrote that she believes Jacobs is "being forced to kill innocent people" and challenged him to name an Iraqi terrorist, concluding, "I know I can't."

Another girl wrote, "I strongly feel this war is pointless," while a classmate predicted that because Bush was re-elected, "only 50 or 100 [soldiers] will survive."

A boy accused soldiers of "destroying holy places like mosques."

You can disagree with the war if you want, but can't we teach the youngin's some actual facts? If the girl can't name an Iraqi terrorist, that means that the school has failed her, not that there aren't any - or is she admitting that the insurgents are from outside of Iraq? Somehow I doubt anyone mentioned that one to her. Do you really think they all just came up with this stuff on their own? I'm sure some of them heard it in their Blue State homes, but some heard it from their teacher.

What happened to the role of school to teach responsible citizenship? You send letters of encouragement to soldiers, whether you agree with the war or not - letters of complaint should go to the White House or your congressperson who sent them there. This "blame the baby-killers" garbage is just a hold-over from the anti-war movement of the 60's - and they were wrong to blame the soldiers then, too.

A red state refugee in the class wrote: "I find that many extreme liberals are disrespectful to you."

Maybe there is hope after all.

RMR

Take the CATO challenge

Curious what your payout would be for Soc. Security under current law and under at least one reform proposal? You can try the CATO institute's calculator here.

RMR

The Templeton Curve and Social Security

Just in case it's confusing to you, the first picture is the hellish hole the Federal budget is headed for if we do nothing to social security, and the second is the ever increasing surpluses offered by private accounts. You can read more about it here.

For all the whining about "it's not a crisis" and "what about the transition costs?", it's pretty clear that 2 trillion in transition costs in order to save 10 trillion in structural costs is a pretty good deal.

If only the government was run like a business, the discussion would be over.

RMR

CNN News Executive Eason Jordan Quits

AP Wire | 02/11/2005 | CNN News Executive Eason Jordan Quits

This just in...Jordan is out at CNN.

RMR

The Loyal Opposition

Stonewalling at CNN - The Washington Times: Editorials/OP-ED - February 11, 2005

There is an interesting point to be made beyond the original one about CNN being a bunch of lying hypocritical frauds (NEWS FLASH).

A congressman at the event heard Mr. Jordan's slander of the American soldier and immediately took him to task for it. No one else at the event did so.

Secondly, a senator has also said "It seems to me that [Mr. Jordan] ought to be the first one to say, 'Let's get the tape out,' so we can put an end to these rumors if in fact his interpretation of what he was trying to say was accurate."

My point is that the Congressman was Barney Frank and the Senator was Chris Dodd. Here is a case of Democrats looking at the facts and doing the right thing and not simply attack the president or the military. This is a model for how to be an opposition party. Frank didn't take a focus group before standing up to Jordan's slander, he just did the right thing. Dodd probably did take a focus group, but he followed Frank's lead.

Democrats can oppose the President and stand for their positions in a way that is constructive if they look to what's best for the country first.

So...(I can't believe I'm saying this)...Barney Frank and Chris Dodd...SAAAAAAAAAlute!

RMR

Rewriting History (Again)

Yahoo! News - Senate Democrats Vow to Defend Their Leader:

Well, the rewrite has begun - read this from the above article:

"'Some of us stood up for Tom Daschle; more of us should have,' Assistant Senate Minority Leader Dick Durbin told reporters as he recalled attack ads against Daschle. 'We should have spoken out earlier. We should have been clearer,' said the Illinois Democrat. 'It's an outrage what they did to Tom Daschle.' "

So...Daschle lost because of Republican attack ads, not because he was out of step with his Red State constituents and running against a popular political figure. Next they will claim the RNC "attacked his patriotism" like the old saw about Max Cleland, which is also a big fat lie.

The Dems are done unless they get out of their dream world and face reality - it's not that the voters are stupid, guys. It's that they don't like you.

RMR

Social Security Personal Accounts and Democrats

Cesar Conda on Social Security Personal Accounts and Democrats on NRO Financial

This article details alot of the Barbara Streisand coming out of the Democrats about private accounts being risky, despite that fact that they all have stock accounts themselves. The fact is that the dems just want to obstruct and scare, not make social security better and more solvent. They can't say that accounts are risky and then support the Government retirement plan at the same time - they are basically the same plan.

RMR

George W. Bush and the Budget

Larry Kudlow on George W. Bush and the Budget on NRO Financial

Read the above article to sort out the MSM's cluelessness on the new budget. Here are some important facts from the article:

Non-security spending actually falls by .7 percent in this budget. Democrats are screaming about these "slashing cuts" but .7 is hardly a slash, especially in "inflation adjusted terms",

Federal spending is 19.5 percent of GDP, historically low for us and well below the deficits in Japan and Europe - so much for the big spender president myth.

Tax collections are on the rise with lower tax rates. That's right, despite Kerry's whining about the tax cuts causing the deficits, collections have gone up by 15 percent in the last twelve months as the economy has grown out of the Clinton recession. Non-withheld individual collections, like capital gains, have also gone up 14 percent, despite rate cuts. It's called the Laffer Curve - look it up if you don't understand how this works.

All of this is classic supply side economics - proving that conservatism works every time.

Provided that the sheep in the Senate don't mess it all up.

RMR

Victor Davis Hanson on the Left

Victor Davis Hanson on the Left on National Review Online

Take the time to read this article. It is fantastic.

RMR

Yahoo! News - Republicans Question Social Security Plan

Yahoo! News - Republicans Question Social Security Plan

OK, raise your hand if you couldn't guess which of the RINOs they quoted in the article.

Fortunately, we have 55 votes now, with 51 being conservatives.

RMR

Chronically Biased - Hines is wrong AGAIN?

Once again, the Houston Chronicle editorial page misses the most important characteristic of a journalist: the ability to read. Here's the article in question:

HoustonChronicle.com - Hines: Bush describes the 'crisis' but does not close big gap

Well, maybe Hines can read and he's just dishonest - you make the call.

In his article, Hines asserts that Social Security is not a crisis "according to recent polling". Here's the full quote:

Instantly I said I should be feeling better about "personal" accounts or "private" accounts or whatever you want to call the president's plan to address a Social Security "crisis" that many experts — and a majority of Americans, according to recent polling — do not believe exists.

Smart readers will recognize that the phrase "experts" means "liberal commentators". As for the polling, interesting that he doesn't quote a poll! Well, he quotes polls from the late 90's, but not recent post-State of the Union CNN polling that goes against his argument. According to this poll, 66% of Americans agree with the President's plan - which could lead one to assume that there is a crisis or at least something wrong. A sizable majority also think he's leading us in the right direction, too. Perhaps that right direction includes the right direction on this issue?

He also claims that the President doesn't address the shortfall issue. Here's where the can't read/big fat liar question comes into play. The president addressed the issue fairly clearly in his speech, saying that several options were on the table, from limiting benefits to indexing benefits to prices rather than wages to increasing the retirement age, among others. You can read it for yourself here, as could Mr. Hines (if you think he can read). Dubya is saying that he and congress need to work together to find the right solution to an obvious problem. Isn't that what guys like Hines are always saying he should do? If he had come in with "here's exactly how we are going to do it" they would all say he wasn't working with Congress and acting like a dictator. It's not like he didn't offer anything at all, which is what Hines is implying. He also ruled out some options like raising payroll taxes.

I think I'm going to go with - BIG FAT LIAR.

Whiny liberals need to come up with an actual agenda instead of saying Social Security isn't a problem (which goes against all their claims that we should "Save Social Security First!" in the 90's).

Don't hold your breath.

RMR

The New Republic Online on the DNC Chair fight

The New Republic Online: The Outsiders

No real comment on this, but this article is a fascinating look into the quest for a new DNC chair. Well, my comment is that they are dead ducks if Dean wins.

RMR

PS Do I get any credit for actually reading the New Republic?

Dubya swings for the fences...and delivers

What can I say? The State of the Union (SOTU) last night was simply the best speech that Bush has ever delivered - and I never thought he would do better than this year's convention speech. He swung for the fences on big themes and ideas and didn't get bogged down with the minutiae of a laundry list of "small ball" programs. You can read the speech's complete text here.

A few observations: I thought that the Social Security stuff was just fantastic. He laid it all out with straightforward numbers and arguments, and the Dems just looked like little children with all of their weird booing and applause (I loved the moment when the one nutball just started clapping really loud all by himself - was he on something?). I look forward to the coming debate on this to see if the Democrats come up with something other than "NOOOOO!" or "You hate old people!" for a policy position. Agree or not, Bush is definitely in charge of the agenda - Social Security IS the issue now, whether Harry and Nancy like it or not.

Speaking of Harry and Nancy, wow was that a terrible response. Despite all the whining about "Where's the plan?" - did they listen to the SOTU? - there was no offering of policy or their vision of the country - only obstructionism and more obstructionism. Harry Reid looked like some sort of Bizzarro Mr. Rogers - the folksy chuckling got old really fast, it wasn't spontaneous or natural at all. Nancy Pelosi looked like some sort of plastic person (oh wait, she is a plastic person). Did she blink at all? The dems need to write the speech and then audition the best person to read it for them and not just keep putting these weirdos up there. It was nice not to listen to Daschle's weird children's-book-on-tape whisper, however. The full text of the response is here if you are having trouble sleeping.

Finally, I really loved the moment where the veteran's mother and the Iraqi hugged. You could sense the real emotion in the hall and see it on the President's face. You know the moment really connected when Chris Matthews thinks it's fake! Maybe he just said that so that more than half a million people would hear it when it was rebroadcast on conservative talk.

Apparently, I wasn't the only one who liked it. According to CNN polling, the speech was a big hit, receiving 86% approval from those polled. It also looked like Bush's take on the speech's big two issues, Social Security and Iraq, changed the minds of some when the numbers are compared with pre-speech polling.

Let's see what the red state democratic senators do on this after Bush visits their states this week. We might see some of that Social Security money after all!

RMR

Democrats demonstrate yet more impotence

L.A. Daily News - News

As you will read in the above article, the Dems have decided not to filibuster the nomination of the new attorney general. Well, thaaaank you. They still plan to whine about it, though. Keep it up guys - maybe we can get 60 votes in the Senate! Let's all hold hands and pray they make Dean the chairman. Then, we can all wave as the whole bunch floats over the waterfall.

RMR

CNN's top journalist says that US Military targets journalists in Iraq

If you needed any more evidence about how far off the deep end CNN has gone check this quote out from Forumblog.org , a blog for those at the World Economic Summit in Davos:

"During one of the discussions about the number of journalists killed in the Iraq War, Eason Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by US troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others. "

Jordan is CNN's top man, the chief news executive. I love how the President of Harvard can't state the simple fact that men score higher on math tests than women, but CNN's top guy can accuse the US military of intentionally targeting journalists with absolutely no consequence. Where's the coverage? Imagine if Bill O'Reilly had said it - it would be the lead story in every outlet in America.

Jordan can't claim "objectivity" on this either. The desire to not take sides on the Iraq war doesn't wash when the network takes sides on just about everything else.

RMR

Yahoo! News - Latest 'Star Trek' Series to End in May

Yahoo! News - Latest 'Star Trek' Series to End in May

NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

As a fan of the series, I am saddened by this turn of events. Enterprise is good TV.

RMR

Maybe it's OUR fault...

Rocky Mountain News: Show Churchill the Door

As you can read in the above article and in numerous other occurences, the first thing the liberal blame-America-first crowd does when we are attacked is to ask the question - What have we done to bring this on ourselves? What is wrong with America?

As I was driving in to work today (a very conservative thing to do), I was struck by how those in the media refuse to ask this question whenever people have a problem with...THEM. You know, like, "Our ratings are in the toilet and Fox is kicking our rear. Maybe it's OUR fault. What are we doing to alienate the audience? What about us is failing to reach the American people?"

Unfortunately liberals in the press only see the need for introspection in the commander in chief, not the editor in chief. But you have to wonder what their problem is when Rush playing one clip from Hardball on his RADIO show gets 10 times the audience than the entire original broadcast does (it's true, look it up!). You have to wonder when every top ten news show is on Fox except for Larry King (who was popular before CNN was even on, not to mention Fox) and the Daily Show (which is mostly entertainment, but which also has learned this lesson and is not like anything else on TV relating to the news).

The liberal answer is to call americans unsophisticated rubes who don't know good television when they see it. Unfortunately for them, most of the audience is watching something else when they are saying it.

RMR