Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 25 Word

• October 25 PDF

Jeff Jacoby reports on a Federalist Society debate.

… “This notion that presidents in our system of government don’t have to carry out laws authorized by Congress is absolutely preposterous,” the speaker said. “If that were the case — if Congress’s laws are merely advisory — why would you need a veto?” A president who disapproves of a bill should say so in a veto message — that’s why the Constitution gives him veto power in the first place. Bush’s hundreds of signing statements are an “open power grab” that Americans should find intolerable. “We ought to be adamantly opposed to any claim that the president doesn’t have to abide by laws that Congress has passed and he has signed.”

That may sound like Senator Hillary Clinton, who denounces the Bush administration’s “concerted effort . . . to create a more powerful executive at the expense of both branches of government and of the American people” and promises to sharply roll back the use of signing statements if she becomes president.

But the speaker wasn’t Clinton, nor any other liberal or Democrat. It was former Georgia congressman Bob Barr, a staunch conservative best known for his leading role in the 1999 impeachment of Bill Clinton. An outspoken defender of privacy rights and other civil liberties, Barr has long decried what he calls the “frightening erosion” of constitutional protections under Bush. At a forum hosted by the Boston chapter of the Federalist Society, he was debating another staunch conservative: John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley, and a former Justice Department official whose thinking strongly influenced the administration’s claims of presidential power after Sept. 11. …

… These debates began long before Bush arrived; they’ll continue after he leaves. We should welcome them as signs not just of factiousness, but of strength: Americans argue about fundamental freedoms because Americans are fundamentally free.

Claudia Rosett picks up on the idea, retailed in Canada, the UN should move to Montreal. She likes it. We do too.

David Warren likes the confrontation of Islamo-Fascist week.

This is “Islamo-Fascist Awareness Week” in the USA. To Canadian eyes that will sound a little confrontational — we’ve always been better at walking the walk, than talking the talk. But let me assure my reader, that even if our media are not much reporting it, the thing is happening. On more than 100 university campuses across the United States, from U.C. Berkeley to George Washington in D.C., a large roster of speakers are directly confronting crowds of very loud and angry campus Leftists and Islamists, to make politically incorrect points about radical Islam, backed by a range of panel discussions, book stalls, and supporting exhibits. …

The Captain posts on the proposed mob move to whack Giuliani 20 years ago. And on the gambler stiffed by an Indian casino.

Samizdata post on the anti-war folks who make our warriors better.

Over the summer I reread one of my favourite books of the century so far, How The West Has Won: Carnage and Culture From Salamis to Vietnam by Victor Davis Hanson (which was published in October 2001). In this, Hanson makes much of the Western habit of what he calls “civilian audit” of military affairs. Armchair complaining and grilling of often quite successful generals for often rather minor failures in the course of what often eventually turn into major victories. Sidelining Patton for winning some battles but then slapping a soldier. Denouncing Douglas Haig forever for winning too nastily on the Western Front. Votes of Confidence in the Commons during the dark days of World War 2. Most recently, General Petraeus being grilled on TV. That kind of thing.

Another Samizdata post on how softly insidious is the totalitarian state.

I have argued in the past that violent repression, gulags and mass murder are not in fact the defining characteristics for a state to be ‘totalitarian’. …

… my view is that we in the west are already well on the way to a new form of post-modern totalitarian state (what Guy Herbert calls ‘soft fascism’) in which behaviour and opinions which are disapproved of by the political class are pathologised and then regulated by violence backed laws “for your own good” or “for the children” or “for the environment”.

And so we have force backed regulations setting out the minutia of a parent’s interactions with their own children, vast reams on what sort of speech or expression is and is not permitted in a workplace, rules forbidding a property owner allowing consenting adults from smoking in a place of business, what sorts of insults are permitted, rules covering almost every significant aspect of how you can or cannot build or modify your own house on your own property, moves to restrict what sort of foods can be sold, what kind of light bulbs are allowed, and the latest one, a move to require smokers to have a ‘license to smoke‘. Every aspect of self-ownership is being removed and non-compliance criminalised and/or pathologised. …

A Corner post shows how William and Mary is helping soft totalitarianism get started.

If you find The Corner hard to believe, here’s the William & Mary site. Look at the last sentence below; “Confidentiality will be honored unless reporting individual provides contact information.”

In order to promote a diverse and respectful campus community, the College considers acts of hate and bias unacceptable and adversative to our commitment to a welcoming and inclusive community. The College’s diversity statement reads “the College of William and Mary strives to be a place where people of all backgrounds feel at home, where diversity is actively embraced, and where each individual takes responsibility for upholding the dignity of all members of the community.”

The Bias Reporting System was established to assist members of the William and Mary community who have been affected by incidents involving bias related to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or other protected conditions. The system provides multiple modes of reporting to include personal contact, online form, or faxed form. Confidentiality will be honored unless reporting individual provides contact information.

There is hope. Students are anonymously operating a blog titled Free America’s Alma Mater.org.

Let’s Disband William and Mary’s new Schoolyard Tattletale System before the Lawsuits Commence and William and Mary again becomes the subject of national jokes …

Slate has interesting details from the new Howard Kurtz book.

Stunning book review from Contentions.

In God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World, Walter Russell Mead coyly claims that the originality of his interpretation of the roots of Anglo-Saxon primacy rests in its focus on the meaning, as opposed to the mere dimensions, of American power. This is too modest: Mead’s achievement is larger than that. His real accomplishment is to restore religion to its rightful place in the history of Great Britain and the United States, and their roles in the world. This no small feat. It’s hard enough to explain why Britain—a small island in the North Sea lacking all natural resources except coal, potatoes, and herring—rose to be the first of the great powers by 1815, and equally hard to explain how the United States inherited and adapted the British system in the 20th century. Factoring the influence of religion into this dynamic is vastly more difficult, but Mead does an admirable job of it.

The historic grand strategy of Great Britain and the United States, as Mead understands it, is simply told: Britain was the world’s first enduringly liberal modern society, and the first practitioner of an open and dynamic economic system that traded throughout the world, relying on its navy to defend its trade routes. This system provided Britain the resources to fight and win its wars, and the power and self-confidence to promote liberal values and institutions. In the 20th century, the United States, shaped by its British inheritance, took over the role of protector of this maritime order from the totalitarian empires and enemies of modernity that continued to threaten it, of whom al Qaeda is merely the latest example. But the rise of Britain as a liberal capitalist power is only the better known half of the story. While capitalism generates resources and tax revenues on a scale unimaginable to early modern empires, it poses a big problem: the vast expansion of state power. Once the revenues begin to flow, in other words, the challenge becomes limiting the power of the state.

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 24 Word

• October 24 PDF

Power Line introduces us to French philosopher André Glucksmann whose City Journal essay is a major part of Pickings tonight.

Dutch blogger Michael van der Galiën says Holland has received the ultimate insult – accused of cowardice by French philosophers. Beside the amusement, this is a back door way to tout André Glucksmann and to give an update on Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Pickerhead does understand French jokes may not be in good taste now, but he can’t help himself.

Things have gotten so bad in the Netherlands that even French intellectuals are now accusing us of “unacceptable cowardice” because of the way Ayaan Hirsi Ali was treated recently. Several intellectuals wrote an open letter, which was published in the French newspaper Libération. In it, Pascal Bruckner, Luc Ferry, Alain Finkielkraut, André Glucksmann and Bernard-Henri Levy don’t just accuse the Dutch of cowardly behavior, they also call on their own government to offer Ayaan Hirsi Ali the French nationality.

Here is Monsieur Glucksmann as he tries to explain his thoughts about why “Modern terrorism seeks to combine the annihilating power of Hiroshima with the nihilistic gospel of Auschwitz.”

With what measureless naivety has the twenty-first-century democratic citizen managed to be surprised when hate breaks down his door? He has—along with his father and his father’s father—witnessed, directly or indirectly, wars, murderous revolutions, and the genocides that were the last century’s specialty. How could he believe himself immune? “Not here, not me,” he told himself. But then, on September 11, 2001, Americans saw several thousand of their own assassinated, for no reason. There they were, unsuspecting, in their usual places, at work or at a café, white, black, and yellow, housewife and banker, when they suddenly realized that they were targets of an indiscriminate, merciless will to kill. …

 

 

… What threatens Iraqi society is not Vietnamization but Somalization. Recall Operation Restore Hope, in which an international force, led by Americans, disembarked in Mogadishu in 1993, seeking to ensure the survival of a population that was starving and being massacred by rival clans. After losing 19 in a horrific trap, the GIs left. The rest is well known. An angry President Clinton swore “never again,” and a year later refused to intervene in Rwanda, where 5,000 blue helmets would have been enough to interrupt the genocide that wiped out as many as 1 million Tutsi in three months.

The Somalian model has spread across the planet, from the Congo to chaotic East Timor to Afghanistan, where the Taliban have violently resurfaced, to Iraq. Populations are taken hostage, terrorized, and sacrificed, the spoils of wars by local gangsters. Under various pretexts—religion, ethnicity, makeshift racist or nationalist ideology—commandos contend for power at the point of AK-47s. They fight against unarmed populations; most of their victims are women and children. Terrorism is not the prerogative of Islamists alone: the targeting of civilians has been used by a regular army and by militias under the command of the Kremlin in Chechnya, where the capital city of Grozny was razed to the ground. Where the killers appeal to the Koran, it is still primarily Muslim passersby who suffer. Algeria, Somalia, and Darfur (at least 200,000 dead and millions of refugees in just a few years, with the Sudanese government, protected by China and Russia, acting with impunity) are live laboratories of the abomination of abominations: war against civilians. …

… Astrophysicists have found, wandering in the starry expanse, certain black holes. When faraway stars come into contact with them, the stars disappear, along with their planets, swallowed by bottomless darkness. From the beginning, human civilizations have existed alongside analogous moral abysses, which foreshadow an end of all things. According to tradition, such annihilation suggests a jealous and vengeful divinity, or malevolent demons.

In their endeavor to understand the black holes that threaten societies, the inventors of Western philosophy, comparing them to natural cataclysms, earthquakes, volcanoes, and epidemics, refused to see in them a supernatural sanction or to deny the responsibility of mortals. If God is not a cause, the darkness that threatens to overtake humanity is human, irreducible to an impersonal fate. The destructive principle inheres in us, whether we know it or not—this is the persistent message of the tragedians. Hate moves like Thucydides’s plague, not a purely physiological condition but an essentially mental disorder, which takes over bodies, minds, and society. The idea of a contagion of hatred must be taken literally: hatred spreads hatred, an outbreak that inoculates itself against all who oppose it.

Maybe one day, we will view the last century with nostalgia, even if it was dealt Auschwitz and Hiroshima. For today’s terrorism strives to mix these two ingredients into new cocktails of horror. During the cold war, the threat to man was dual: one, between two blocs, involved reciprocal annihilation; the other, terrorist, confined the savage extermination of civilian populations to the interior of each camp. Today, global terrorism eliminates geostrategic borders and traditional taboos. The last seconds of the condemned of Manhattan, of Atocha, and of the London Underground sent us two messages: “Here abandon all hope,” the Dantesque injunction carried by a bomb that wipes the slate clean; and “Here there is no reason why,” the nihilist gospel of SS officers. Hiroshima signified the technical possibility of a desert that approaches closer and closer to the absolute; Auschwitz represented the deliberate and lucid pursuit of total annihilation. The conjunction of these two forms of the will to nothingness looms in the black holes of modern hatred. …

John Stossel says the global warming debate is not over.

First he won the Oscar — then the Nobel Peace Prize. He’s being called a “prophet.”

Impressive, considering that one of former Vice President Al Gore’s chief contributions has been to call the debate over global warming “over” and to marginalize anyone who disagrees. Although he favors major government intervention to stop global warming, he says, “the climate crisis is not a political issue. It is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity”.

Give me a break.

If you must declare a debate over, then maybe it’s not. And if you have to gussy up your agenda as “our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level,” then it deserves some skeptical examination. …

The Captain has the end game in Jena, LA. Would you be surprised to learn the MSM story is mostly BS?

Over the past month, the press and a good deal of the blogosphere has thundered over the racial motivations of the town of Jena, Louisiana, after a series of incidents supposedly showed the bigotry of its people and its government. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton called Jena the new Selma of the civil-rights movement. Activists pressured presidential candidates into making appearances in Jena and statements regarding the allegedly harsher punishments given to black students for assault and battery. The nation assumed that the South still couldn’t give justice equally regardless of race.

Craig Franklin of the Christian Science Monitor says that assumption comes from a national media too lazy to do any reporting on its own. He should know; he lives in Jena and his wife teaches at the high school at the center of the controversy. The media failed to learn anything from the Duke non-rape case and swallowed myths whole rather than investigate and report facts: …

Don Boudreaux has the ultimate “dirty job” – running for office.

… You confidently insist that no issue is beyond your comprehension and no problem beyond your ability to solve. You pretend to be simultaneously a master of foreign policy, military strategy, economics, law, political horse-trading and even environmental science. If elected, you will publicly swear to uphold the Constitution and then immediately proceed to violate it in ways too numerous to count.

In short, in this job you must soil your honor and sell your soul by behaving foolishly and by saying things that you know to be false. Without question it is the dirtiest and most repellent job that anyone with a conscience can possibly try his or her hand at.

H.L. Mencken saw clearly the nature of this dirty job. About the politician, Baltimore’s Bard wrote:

He is willing to embrace any issue, however idiotic, that will get him votes, and he is willing to sacrifice any principle, however sound, that will lose them for him. I do not describe the democratic politician at his inordinate worst; I describe him as he is encountered in the full sunshine of normalcy.

To Mike Rowe I say: If you want really to get dirty, to soil yourself so deeply that soap will never wash away the grime, run successfully for political office.

That’s the ultimate dirty job.

Cafe Hayek has more of ethanol’s bad news.

The public panic caused by climate change alarmists is actually worsening our supply of natural resources, as predicted by some skeptics. This is certainly the case with bio-fuels, which have dramatically increased food prices, causing severe problems for import dependant developing countries. Now it is even threatening our water supply, as demonstrated by Cornell University professor David Pimentel.

The production of corn-based ethanol, a heavily subsidized source of bio-fuel, consumes roughly four gallons of water per gallon of fuel. However this does not include all the water needed for growing the corn in the first place. That amount adds up to the incredible figure of 1,700 gallons of water per gallon ethanol. …

Christian Science Monitor says dittos.

… the problems of mass- producing this type of ethanol are beginning to crop up. …

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 23 Word

• October 23 PDF

Debra Saunders on the Stark raving mad congressman from CA and how his remarks might play out for the Dems in ’08.

… In 2008, Democratic hopefuls are twice as likely to have been in law school than in boot camp. …

 

… Three years ago, Democrats shamelessly donned a military mantle. In a display of craven opportunism, they embraced an argument that seemed phony then, and now has vanished. They argued their candidate was better because he was a combat vet. Today, none of the Dems’ top three candidates has a military record.

Here are three words you won’t hear from the nominee at the 2008 Democratic National Convention: Reporting for duty.

WaPo editorial on Clinton fund raising.

DONORS WHOSE addresses turn out to be tenements. Dishwashers and waiters who write $1,000 checks. Immigrants who ante up because they have been instructed to by powerful neighborhood associations, or, as one said, “They informed us to go, so I went.” Others who say they never made the contributions listed in their names or who were not eligible to give because they are not legal residents of the United States. This is the disturbingly familiar picture of Hillary Rodham Clinton‘s presidential campaign presented last week in a report by the Los Angeles Times about questionable fundraising by the New York senator in New York City‘s Chinese community. …

Which leads to Jonah Goldberg’s LA Times column; Candidate Hillary: the GOP’s dream A campaign against Sen. Clinton may give Republicans the best shot at running as the party of change.

The Captain posts on another prize pick.

The Nobel committee has certainly fallen on desperate times, and especially so this year. First they award a peace prize to Al Gore for his global-warming hysterics, apparently because the science committee understood the extent of his exaggerations in An Inconvenient Truth. They awarded the literature prize to British author Doris Lessing, who disqualified herself for the peace prize by claiming that Americans were just too sensitive about having 3,000 murdered by terrorists on 9/11 …

He also posts on a couple of anniversaries, Beirut and Bork.

Rob Bluey analyzes the close congressional race in MA and shows how GOP tech wizards are catching up to the netroots. One of the wizards is David All who designed Pickerhead’s web site.

The Republican money machine seemed unstoppable just two years ago. The GOP consistently outperformed the Democratic Party, extending years of dominance in fundraising. But two years is an eternity in politics, and the situation today, particularly among presidential candidates, illustrates just how far Republicans have fallen.

There’s little doubt Republicans are paying the price for an unpopular war in Iraq, reckless spending when they controlled Congress, and embarrassing scandals that continue to tarnish their own. Conservatives have gone to great lengths to create a new brand for the party, but such endeavors won’t change minds overnight or even in this election cycle.

Then along came Jim Ogonowski, an anti-establishment and anti-Washington crusader from liberal Massachusetts. Ogonowski ran a remarkably close race (for being a Republican) in the Bay State’s 5th District, losing last week by just 6 percentage points against Democrat Niki Tsongas, the widow of former Democratic presidential candidate and Sen. Paul Tsongas. A loss is a loss, but to come that close in state without a single Republican congressman means he must have done something right. …

Hugh Hewitt posts on an exchange he had with Howard Kurtz on MSM bias and the end of network news.

Thomas Sowell with advice for the college bound.

High school seniors who want to go to a selective college in the fall of 2008 should already be making arrangements to take the tests they will need before they apply ahead of the deadlines for such schools, which are usually in January or February.

One of the consequences of taking these tests is that, if you do well, you may be deluged with literature from colleges and universities all across the country.

Some students may feel flattered that Harvard, Yale or M.I.T. seems to be dying to have them apply. But the brutal reality is that the reason for wanting so many youngsters to apply is so that they can be rejected.

Why? Because the prestige ranking of a college or university as a “selective” institution is measured by how small a percentage of its applicants are accepted. So they have to get thousands of young people to apply, so that they can be rejected. …

Neal Boortz posts on news of amazing health care fraud in FL.

Medical fraud in south Florida is rearing its ugly, expensive head … again. Let’s start with this. A Miami-area medical equipment supplier somehow managed to bill the U.S. taxpayers so often for one wheelchair that it ended up costing taxpayers $5 million.

Here’s another example. A south Florida company billed Medicare for millions of dollars worth of special asthma medication. The owner claimed it was for his local pharmacy. The only problem was the man was not a pharmacist, he was an air conditioner repairman.

It gets even better. Last year south Florida accounted for 80 percent of the drugs billed for Medicare beneficiaries with HIV/AIDS. That figure again? Eighty percent. That’s 80 percent of the total money spent on HIV drugs across the entire country. And yet south Florida only has one in ten of eligible HIV/AIDS patients. …

Volokh post on ethanol foolishness.

Dilbert’s here.

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 22 Word

• October 22 PDF

John Fund on Bobby Jindal’s win in Louisiana.

Bobby Jindal can’t hold down a job: That’s the joke circulating around Louisiana today about the election of Mr. Jindal, a son of immigrants from India, as governor. Mr. Jindal, a 36-year-old Republican congressman from the New Orleans suburbs, won 54% of the vote in Saturday’s election, avoiding the need for a runoff next month.

When he takes office in January he will be the nation’s youngest governor. But he has already held a glittering array of other positions of responsibility in his short career. As an undergraduate he worked as an intern for Rep. Jim McCrery, now the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. Then he became a Rhodes Scholar, got a master’s degree, and did a stint at McKinsey & Co. Gov. Mike Foster appointed him head of the state’s $4 billion health-care system at age 24. He went on to serve as director of a national commission on Medicare at 26, became president of the University of Louisiana system at 27, and a U.S. assistant secretary of health and human services at 29.

Four years ago, at age 32 ,he narrowly lost a race for governor to Democrat Kathleen Blanco, who dismissed his calls for reform of the state’s creaking bureaucracy as unnecessary. The next year Mr. Jindal won his congressional seat, but he never really stopped campaigning for governor. In August 2005 Hurricane Katrina roared through New Orleans, and Gov. Blanco’s response was so inadequate that she was effectively forced to retire. …

Michael Barone says 2008 is going to be different.

Things are not working out as Democratic congressional leaders expected. For the first eight months of this year, they struggled to find some way to shut down the American military effort in Iraq.

They took it for granted that we were stuck in a quagmire in Iraq, with continuous high casualties and very little to show for them. They pressed hard to get the Republican votes they needed to block a filibuster in the Senate and were cheered when some Republicans, like John Warner, seemed to lean their way. They worked hard over the August recess to pressure Republican House members to break ranks and vote with them.

But the Republicans mostly held fast. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell skillfully parried their thrusts in the Senate. House Minority Leader John Boehner persuaded most House Republicans to hang on. Then, over the summer, the news out of Iraq started to get better. …

Power Line with a couple of good posts.

Claudia Rosett comments on Kofi’s new job.

Anne Bayefsky tells us what UN membership is worth.

… The UN, we are told, is an essential institution because of its unique inclusivity. The argument goes that the goals and values of democracies on the world scene are dependent on their doing business with dictators as equals. One state, one vote. Regardless of the numbers of real people being subdued in various ways back home. Regardless of the financial contribution made by each member state to the world organization. Regardless of the extent to which the founding principles and purposes of the UN are flaunted by the member state every day of the week. …

Ralph Peters speculates about the Israeli raid in Syria.

ON Sept. 6, Israel struck a remote target in eastern Syria. The story didn’t really break for weeks, and details are still emerging – but the consensus view is that Israeli aircraft attacked a secret nuclear facility.

There’s much more to it than that. The echoes of that strike resound far beyond the Middle East.

Tel Aviv isn’t showing any leg when it comes to exactly who did what to whom. Airstrikes may have been synchronized with commando action on the ground. We don’t know, and, for now, secrets are being kept.

The circumstantial evidence is strong, though, that the terror-affiliated regime in Damascus had embarked on a nuclear-weapons program – with the help of the North Koreans (who, simultaneously, have been teasing us with suggestions that they’ll dismantle their own nuke effort if we pay them lavish tribute).

My own suspicion is that rent-an-expert Pakistanis were involved, too – with or without the blessing of Islamabad’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, an organization with often contradictory and always dubious loyalties. …

Jonathan Gurwitz has more on Pelosi as Sec. of State.

The last time House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did her best impersonation of a secretary of state, her amateur performance was merely reckless. This time it is dangerous.

Pelosi’s April visit to Syria should have demonstrated a fundamental about diplomacy — words matter.

Pelosi created an international tempest by claiming to bear a message for Syrian dictator Bashar Assad from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, one stating his country was prepared to engage in peace talks with its longtime enemy without preconditions. That would have marked a significant departure from six decades of Israeli practice.

Olmert did not make such a departure, which forced the Israeli Foreign Ministry to issue a clarification that contradicted Pelosi’s supposed communique. …

… Congress should go on record about the atrocities that claimed 1.5 million Armenian lives. Historical amnesia about the systematic slaughter of Armenians has encouraged many of the genocidal movements that followed. But after nine decades and with a war in Iraq, now is not the time to put U.S.-Turkish relations to a test.

Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, George Shultz, James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell sent Pelosi a letter last month warning her the resolution would endanger U.S. national security interests. A real secretary of state would already know that.

Roger Simon with germane comments on new Redford flick.

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 21 Word

• October 21 PDF

Charles Krauthammer with must-read comments on Pelosi’s Armenian gambit.

“Friends don’t let friends commit crimes against humanity,” explained Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which approved the Armenian genocide resolution. This must rank among the most stupid statements ever uttered by a member of Congress, admittedly a very high bar.

Does Smith know anything about the history of the Armenian genocide? Of the role played by Henry Morgenthau? As U.S. ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Morgenthau tried desperately to intervene on behalf of the Armenians. It was his consular officials deep within Turkey who (together with missionaries) brought out news of the genocide. And it was Morgenthau who helped tell the world about it in his writings. Near East Relief, the U.S. charity strongly backed by President Woodrow Wilson and the Congress, raised and distributed an astonishing $117 million in food, clothing and other vital assistance that, wrote historian Howard Sachar, “quite literally kept an entire nation alive.”…

… So why has Pelosi been so committed to bringing this resolution to the floor? (At least until a revolt within her party and the prospect of defeat caused her to waver.) Because she is deeply unserious about foreign policy. This little stunt gets added to the ledger: first, her visit to Syria, which did nothing but give legitimacy to Bashar al-Assad, who continues to engage in the systematic murder of pro-Western Lebanese members of parliament; then, her letter to Costa Rica‘s ambassador, just nine days before a national referendum, aiding and abetting opponents of a very important free-trade agreement with the United States.

Is the Armenian resolution her way of unconsciously sabotaging the U.S. war effort, after she had failed to stop it by more direct means? I leave that question to psychiatry. Instead, I fall back on Krauthammer’s razor (with apologies to Occam): In explaining any puzzling Washington phenomenon, always choose stupidity over conspiracy, incompetence over cunning. Anything else gives them too much credit.

Gerard Baker in London Times has fun with a column saying the US is the greatest place in the world to be anti-American.

… It has always amused me that the same people who denounce America as a seething cesspit of blind obscurantist bigotry can’t see the irony that America itself produces its own best critics. When there’s a scab to be picked on the American body politic, no one does it with more loving attention, more rigorous focus on the detail, than Americans themselves.

It has always been this way. The fiercest and most effective opponents of US foreign policy in the 1960s were not the students in Paris or the Politburo in North Vietnam. They were Jane Fonda, Bobby Kennedy and Marvin Gaye. …

… Al Gore wants the US to give up its economic autonomy and submit to rule by binding international obligations to curb its carbon emissions. Some of the Democratic candidates for the presidency want to tie down the American Gulliver under a web of global treaties. The British Government, if recent speeches by ministers are to be believed, is now apparently seriously committed to the idea that only the UN has the legitimacy to determine how nations should behave. In other words, that a system that gives vetoes to China and Russia and honours the human rights contributions of countries such as Syria or North Korea should be accorded a full role in the promotion of the dignity of mankind.

There’s a larger irony in all this. Even as the US demonstrates the openness of its own society, its unrivalled capacity for self-examination and self-correction, a free system based on the absolute authority of the rule of law, it is told it must submit itself to the views of Moscow, Beijing, and Brussels.

Fortunately, while the American system may be forgivingly tolerant of people with wild and dangerous ideas, it doesn’t generally let them run the country.

Mark Steyn writes on the Dems “children.”

 

… So what is the best thing America could do “for the children”? Well, it could try not to make the same mistake as most of the rest of the Western world and avoid bequeathing the next generation a system of unsustainable entitlements that turns the entire nation into a giant Ponzi scheme. Most of us understand, for example, that Social Security needs to be “fixed” – or we’ll have to raise taxes, or the retirement age, or cut benefits, etc. But, just to get the entitlements debate in perspective, projected public pensions liabilities in the United States are expected to rise by 2040 to about 6.8 percent of our gross domestic product. In Greece, the equivalent figure is 25 percent – that’s not a matter of raising taxes or tweaking retirement age; that’s total societal collapse.

So what? shrug the voters. Not my problem. I paid my taxes, I want my benefits.

In France, President Sarkozy is proposing a very modest step – that those who retire before the age of 65 should not receive free health care – and the French are up in arms about it. He’s being angrily denounced by 53-year-old retirees, a demographic hitherto unknown to functioning societies. You spend your first 25 years being educated, you work for two or three decades, and then you spend a third of a century living off a lavish pension, with the state picking up every health care expense. No society can make that math add up.

And so, in a democratic system today’s electors vote to keep the government gravy coming and leave it to tomorrow for “the children” to worry about. That’s the real “war on children” – and every time you add a new entitlement to the budget you make it less and less likely they’ll win it. …

Power Line with congrats for Bobby Jindal.

The Captain weighs in with good Iraq news.

Bill Kristol thinks the Dems may pay dearly for their rush to defeat.

… last month, over on the Senate side, she couldn’t resist impugning the integrity of General David Petraeus as he testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Clinton said Petraeus’s testimony required a “willing suspension of disbelief.” That is, contrary to all evidence, Clinton accused the commanding general of U.S. troops in Iraq of misleading the American people.

All of this followed by several months the defining statement of the 110th Congress: Harry Reid’s assertion, this past April 19, “This war is lost.” History may well record that statement as the epitaph for the 110th Congress, and the party that led it. The Democrats engaged in endless efforts to make sure the war really was lost. They failed. Now it looks as if the war, despite the Democratic Congress’s best efforts, may well be won. It’s the congressional Democrats who are the losers. And so could be the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee. Are the American people likely to elect the candidate of a party that has tried its best to lose a winnable war?

Ron Cass, former Law Dean at BU, thinks Berger’s access to the Hillary team is significant.

… During Bill Clinton’s administration, there was no shortage of indications that perhaps the Clintons, husband and wife, were a bit casual about legal niceties. Although the accusations fixated many and resulted in convictions for more than a few Clinton associates, in the end, though he was disbarred for five years, Bill Clinton got something of a break because he was personally charming and his accusers seemed less so. Public reaction was that you might not want him around your daughter, but you’d be happy to go have a drink with Bill.

Hillary, whose stiff demeanor won’t garner the same slack, doesn’t just remind us of prior scandals. Sandy Berger didn’t lie about sex or do something ordinary that isn’t strictly in keeping with law – like speeding on a road where citizens regard the posted limits as advisory rather than mandatory. Sandy Berger committed a serious crime, intentionally, and lied about it, intentionally, and put his nation at risk. Hillary isn’t bothered by any of that. Whatever she says about the rule of law – which limits official power to safeguard all of us – she evidently doesn’t believe it was intended to place limits on her.

Picking Sandy Berger tells us something important about Hillary’s character. We should listen now – while it can do some good.

Michael Malone, of ABC News, continues the ongoing saga of the collapse of the NY Times.

Boom! And down goes the biggest newspaper name of all.

As you may have read, yesterday brokerage giant Morgan Stanley dumped its entire stake — $183 million worth — in the New York Times, in which it was the second largest shareholder. Not surprisingly, Times stock immediately slumped, bottoming at a nearly 3 percent drop to $18.28 — the lowest it has been in a decade.

The actual damage is probably even larger than that. The Morgan Stanley sell-off has been expected for some time now. Ever since April, after Hassam Elmasry, managing director of Morgan’s Investment Management Group failed in his attempt to challenge the Sulzberger family’s iron grip on the Times, the market has been expecting Morgan to pull out — and it is probably no coincidence that the stock has been in downward slide ever since. …

WSJ tells us what it’s like to drive a combine.

Slate – How come Patagonia gets all the monster dinosaurs?

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 18 Word

• October 18 PDF

John Fund says maybe the Dems will drop the Armenian bill. John also comments on good GOP showing in Mass.

… Another GOP House member noted that then-House Speaker Denny Hastert “did the right thing” in 2000 when he pulled the resolution from the floor despite promises he had made to the Armenian community that it would come to a vote. …

 

(Hastert pulled the bill in 2000 upon a Bill Clinton request. Bush made the same request of Pelosi Tuesday and she refused. An interesting and telling juxtaposition, especially since in 2000 we weren’t even at war with tens of thousands of our troops at risk.) – Pckrhd

John Stossel will be on ABC’s 20/20 tomorrow with a segment on global warming.

Since Mark Steyn is on the front lines, he can describe our country as in the midst of a “cold civil war.”

… A year before this next election in the U.S., the common space required for civil debate and civilized disagreement has shriveled to a very thin sliver of ground. Politics requires a minimum of shared assumptions. To compete you have to be playing the same game: you can’t thwack the ball back and forth if one of you thinks he’s playing baseball and the other fellow thinks he’s playing badminton. Likewise, if you want to discuss the best way forward in the war on terror, you can’t do that if the guy you’re talking to doesn’t believe there is a war on terror, only a racket cooked up by the Bushitler and the rest of the Halliburton stooges as a pretext to tear up the constitution.

Americans do not agree on the basic meaning of the last seven years. If you drive around an Ivy League college town — home to the nation’s best and brightest, allegedly — you notice a wide range of bumper stickers, from the anticipatory (“01/20/09″ — the day of liberation from the Bush tyranny) to the profane (“Buck Fush”) to the myopically self-indulgent (“Regime Change Begins At Home”) to the exhibitionist paranoid (“9/11 Was An Inside Job”). Let’s assume, as polls suggest, that next year’s presidential election is pretty open: might be a Democrat, might be a Republican. Suppose it’s another 50/50 election with a narrow GOP victory dependent on the electoral college votes of one closely divided state. It’s not hard to foresee those stickered Dems concluding that the system has now been entirely delegitimized. …

Daniel Henninger’s Thursday column does a good job summarizing Gen. Sanchez’s Jeremiad. Pickerhead’s favorites are those directed at the media.

The media. “It seems that as long as you get a front-page story there is little or no regard for the ‘collateral damage’ you will cause. Personal reputations have no value and you report with total impunity and are rarely held accountable for unethical conduct. . . . You assume that you are correct and on the moral high ground.”

“The speculative and often uninformed initial reporting that characterizes our media appears to be rapidly becoming the standard of the industry.” “Tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats.” And: “The death knell of your ethics has been enabled by your parent organizations who have chosen to align themselves with political agendas. What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.”

Christopher Hitchens makes the case for the Anglosphere in City Journal. He starts with an Arthur Conan Doyle visit to the US in the 1890′s.

Doyle’s visit coincided with the height of this anti-British feeling, and at a dinner in his honor in Detroit he had this to say:

You Americans have lived up to now within your own palings, and know nothing of the real world outside. But now your land is filled up, and you will be compelled to mix more with the other nations. When you do so you will find that there is only one which can at all understand your ways and your aspirations, or will have the least sympathy. That is the mother country which you are now so fond of insulting. She is an Empire, and you will soon be an Empire also, and only then will you understand each other, and you will realize that you have only one real friend in the world.

After Detroit, Doyle spent Thanksgiving with Kipling and his American wife, Carrie, in Brattleboro, Vermont. It is of unquantifiable elements such as this that the Anglo-American story, or the English-speaking story, is composed.

Jonathan Gurwitz writes a good column on the Dem attack on Limbaugh.

Neal Boortz notices a campus protest you’d like.

Times, UK reports possible home price collapse in Britain.

James Taranto notes problems for Iraqi undertakers.

Corner posts on new blog by editors of NY Times. Good start for the humor section.

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 17 Word

• October 17 PDF

Mark Steyn was in The Australian commenting on the ubiquitousness of Gore and his horror flick.

… A school kid in Ontario was complaining the other day that, whatever subject you do, you have to sit through Gore’s movie: It turns up in biology class, in geography, in physics, in history, in English.

Whatever you’re studying, it’s all you need to know. It fulfils the same role in the schoolhouses of the guilt-ridden developed world that the Koran does in Pakistani madrassas. Gore’s rise is as remorseless as those sea levels. I assumed Gore’s clammy embrace would do for the environmental movement what his belated endorsement had done for Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential candidacy: kill it stone dead. But governor Dean was constrained by actual humdrum prosaic vote tallies in Iowa and New Hampshire. The ecochondriacs, by contrast, seem happiest when they’re most unmoored from reality.

That’s where Gore comes in. No matter how you raise the stakes (“It might take another 30 Kyotos”, says Jerry Mahlman of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research), Saint Al of the Ecopalypse can raise them higher. Climate change, he says, is the most important moral, ethical, spiritual and political issue humankind has ever faced. Ever. And not just humankind, but alienkind, too. “We are,” warns Gore, “altering the balance of energy between our planet and the rest of the universe”.

Wow. It’s not just the Maldive Islands, but the balance of energy between Earth and the rest of the universe. …

Power Line posts.

Corner post says Belgium might break up.

Thomas Sowell on crime and politics.

Student speaks common sense and the school wants a psychological evaluation. Sounds like the Soviet Union to me.

ST. PAUL, Minn., October 10, 2007—Hamline University has suspended a student after he sent an e-mail suggesting that the Virginia Tech massacre might have been stopped if students had been allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. Student Troy Scheffler is now required to undergo a mandatory “mental health evaluation” before being allowed to return to school. Scheffler, who was suspended without due process just two days after sending the e-mail, has turned to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help.

Yahoo News says folks in England have resorted to pulling their own teeth. Does Michael Moore know?

Falling numbers of state dentists in England has led to some people taking extreme measures, including extracting their own teeth, according to a new study released Monday.

Others have used superglue to stick crowns back on, rather than stumping up for private treatment, said the study. One person spoke of carrying out 14 separate extractions on himself with pliers.

More typically, a lack of publicly-funded dentists means that growing numbers go private: 78 percent of private patients said they were there because they could not find a National Health Service (NHS) dentist, and only 15 percent because of better treatment. …

IBD editorial on socialized medicine.

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 16 Word

• October 16 PDF

UVA poly sci prof thinks the Dems have taken over the moniker previously reserved for the GOP: that of the stupid party.

Twice during the past half century, the Democratic party has faced a challenge from its left wing. In the late 1960s, it was the mass movement of the New Left that rose up to defy the party’s liberal-progressive core. Following a contest of ideas and of wills, the liberal center collapsed and briefly yielded control to its radical critics. The struggle today is strikingly different in tone, with the party’s mainstream being bullied by a network of techno-thugs, spearheaded by MoveOn.org. Nothing remotely resembling an idea or a sustained argument has surfaced in this conflict, and there is no danger that one ever will.

 

…

 

Today, the Democratic party mainstream has its values, its instincts, and, as usual, more than its share of 10-point programs. It even has its “isms,” represented by its leading troika: the pragmatism of Hillary Clinton, the idealism of Barack Obama, and the populism of John Edwards. Yet its intellectual reservoir has shown itself to be lacking in depth and confidence. Today’s Democratic mainstream is no more willing or able to stand up to the party’s present leftist insurgency than the older mainstream was to stand up to the New Left. The tenor of the current left is best captured by something Lionel Trilling said in 1949 about conservatives: They do not “express themselves in ideas but only in action or in irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas.”

 

…

 

What emerges from Bai’s study of the coalition is that the tone of MoveOn’s recent New York Times ad assailing General Petraeus as “General Betray Us,” far from being exceptional, is perfectly typical of the discourse preached and practiced by this so-called progressive coalition. The ad stood out because it exposed to the world at large the ugly style the new radicals have developed for use among themselves–and because it forced the main Democratic presidential candidates, who declined to disavow it, to show publicly their fealty to the movement.

The Democratic party, its prowess renewed by a taste of success in 2006, is riding the crest of a political wave. It is the stupid party triumphant. What serious Democrats must now consider is whether to accept this state of affairs–or begin to think deeply enough to find a principled ground for rejecting a faction in their midst that is not only stupid but dangerous as well.

Thomas Sowell calls a spade a spade.

… Too many Democrats in Congress have gotten into the habit of treating the Iraq war as President Bush’s war — and therefore fair game for political tactics making it harder for him to conduct that war.

In a rare but revealing slip, Democratic Congressman James Clyburn said that an American victory in Iraq “would be a real big problem for us” in the 2008 elections.

Unwilling to take responsibility for ending the war by cutting off the money to fight it, as many of their supporters want them to, Congressional Democrats have instead tried to sabotage the prospects of victory by seeking to micro-manage the deployment of troops, delaying the passing of appropriations — and now this genocide resolution that is the latest, and perhaps lowest, of these tactics.

Jed Babbin with more on the Turk/Armenian maneuvering that perfectly illustrates how many Dems have lost their minds.

… Speaker Pelosi is apparently so intent on forcing an end to American involvement in Iraq that she is willing to interfere in our tenuous friendship with Turkey. When she does, it will be an historic event: the House of Representatives will be responsible for alienating a key ally in time of war and possibly interdicting supplies to US troops.

Richard Cohen, who must be one of the most decent people in DC, gives needed perspective on Turkey.

Jim Taranto with a new look to an old candidate.

The Captain and Real Clear Politics say Harry Reid might get what he deserves.

Mark Steyn thinks we need a coherent ideological framework for our culture to prevail in our war on ……. whatever.

… In Britain in the 1960s, the political class declared that the country “needed” mass immigration. When the less-enlightened lower orders in northern England fretted that they would lose their towns to the “Pakis”, they were dismissed as paranoid racists. The experts were right in a narrow, economic sense: The immigrants became mill workers and bus drivers. But the paranoid racists were right, too: The mills closed anyway, and mosques sprouted in their place; and Oldham and Dewesbury adopted the arranged cousin-marriage traditions of Mirpur in Pakistan; and Yorkshire can now boast among its native sons the July 7th London Tube bombers. The experts thought economics trumped all; the knuckle-dragging masses had a more basic unease, convinced that it’s culture that’s determinative. …

Ben Stein has misc. advice.

ABOUT a week ago, I was swimming in my pool when I had serious difficulty breathing. “Uh-oh,” I said to myself, “now I am about to die.” My wife was upstairs reading, way out of earshot and, anyway, if I were about to have a lethal heart attack, I wouldn’t be able to scream.

It turned out to be a nasty but short-lived bronchitis, and as I was lying in bed recovering, I thought, “I will die someday, and before I do, I would like to share with you the best possible thoughts I can, in gratitude for the many insightful letters I have received over the years from my readers.” …

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 15 Word

• October 15 PDF

Ralph Peters call the Dems on one of their more disgusting stunts.

… This resolution isn’t about justice for the Armenians. Not this time. It’s a stunningly devious attempt to impede our war effort in Iraq and force premature troop withdrawals.

The Dems calculate that, without those flights and convoys, we won’t be able to keep our troops adequately supplied. Key intelligence and strike missions would disappear.

The Pentagon might be able to improvise other options. But the loss of the base and those routes would definitely hurt our troops. Severely. And we’d be more reliant than ever on a single, vulnerable lifeline running from Kuwait. …

Gary Becker has a go at finding an answer to the never ending question of why intellectuals dislike market solutions.

… In his 1950 book, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, the great economist, Joseph Schumpeter, discussed exactly this question when asking why intellectuals were so opposed to capitalism during his time? His answer mainly was that businessmen do better under capitalism, whereas intellectuals believe they would have a more influential position under socialism and communism. In essence, Schumpeter’s explanation is based on intellectuals’ feeling envious of the success of others under capitalism combined with their desire to be more important.

I do believe that Schumpeter put his finger on one of the important factors behind the skepticism of intellectuals toward markets, and their continuing support of what governments do. Neither the unsuccessful performance of the US government first in Vietnam and now in Iraq, which they so strongly condemn, nor even the colossal failures of socialism and communism during the past half century, succeeded in weakening the faith of intellectuals in governmental solutions to problems rather than private market solutions. …

The Captain has a post that is apropos to the previous item about anti-capitalistic mentalities.

George Will takes a look at the requirements for today’s students of social work — and discovers a political commissariat worthy of the Soviet Union. Universities have required pledges of loyalty to liberal political thought as a requisite for success in their social-work programs, failing students who object to being told what to think (via CapQ reader Sandeep Dath):

In 1997, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) adopted a surreptitious political agenda in the form of a new code of ethics, enjoining social workers to advocate for social justice “from local to global levels.” A widely used textbook — “Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skill” — declares that promoting “social and economic justice” is especially imperative as a response to “the conservative trends of the past three decades.” Clearly, in the social work profession’s catechism, whatever social and economic justice are, they are the opposite of conservatism. …

Everyday Economist has a good quote for the day.

Yuval Levin and Peter Wehner with interesting NY Sun OpEd.

Conservatives today are in a funk. The strains of governing, the challenges of war, and the frustration of an unsuccessful mid-term election have contributed to unease and unhappiness. But deeper than these issues is an intellectual fatigue and uncertainty about where the attention of the conservative movement now should be directed.

What domestic issues can unite and motivate conservatives to great political exertions, and can win the allegiance of the public?

In this respect, the right is partially a victim of its own successes. If 25 years ago you had asked an American conservative to name the preeminent domestic policy challenges of the day, you probably would have gotten back, along with a general worry about cultural decline, some combination of welfare, taxes, and crime.

Few conservatives today would name any of these three as the foremost problems, and even on the cultural front they could point to some advances. This is due, in large part, to a series of conservative successes that have transformed American politics and made conservative theories of economics, law enforcement, and welfare the accepted wisdom. Success has not been complete in any of these areas, of course, but the struggle over first principles, over which way to go in general, has been won.

Today the left — which for decades fought vigorously on all three fronts — offers scant opposition on any of them. No leading Democrats are arguing that we undo conservative achievements on welfare and crime. And even on taxes, which liberals want to increase, no Democrats are arguing that we return to the days when the top rate of taxation was 70%.

Bill Kristol with a similar message.

Peter Bronson of Cinn. Enquirer says giving Gore peace prize like literature awards for comics.

Here’s an inconvenient truth: Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize thanks to a movie that needs more warning labels than a carton of unfiltered Camels.

This is puzzling. There are soldiers in Iraq who do more for peace on their day off than Gore does in a year of save-the-planet rock concerts. But I guess they gave him the Peace Prize because they didn’t have one for Politically Correct Mendacity. His Oscar-winning movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” should be listed as Science Fiction. …

William Gray, a serious meteorologist gives an important speech in NC and we have to read about in an Australian paper.

ONE of the world’s foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize “ridiculous” and the product of “people who don’t understand how the atmosphere works”.

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.

His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.

“We’re brainwashing our children,” said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. “They’re going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It’s ridiculous.” …

Alright. We’ve had a lot of serious stuff, how ’bout Paul Greenberg with Mudfight in the Media. In the tone of – a plague on both your houses, Paul covers Wesley Clark’s smear of Rush.

Some of us can vaguely remember a time when Wesley Clark was going to be the next Eisenhower – a general above the fray, a former supreme commander of NATO who had met the great challenges of his time, someone who would Bring Us Together, lift the tone of national politics, a champion of unity above the usual divisive politics, The Nation’s Hope, and all the rest of the nominating speech.

But that was long ago in another country, and, besides, that Wesley Clark is no more – if he was ever real. His appeal as a presidential candidate peaked the moment he announced back in 2003, if not before, and it steadily deteriorated with every roundhouse swing he took and missed. Sad. …

… Now he’s down there among the Michael Moore/Bill O’Reilly bottom-feeders. …

Rob Bluey with a great piece on the strength of the economy. News the media ignores.

The U.S. budget deficit fell to the lowest level in five years last week, but three of America’s leading newspapers — the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times — couldn’t find the space to mention the dramatic drop.

Journalists who have spent years trashing President Bush’s tax cuts appeared to suddenly lose interest when the budget picture brightened. That’s not surprising, however, considering that mainstream reporters frequently ignore upbeat economic news.

For 49 straight months, dating back to August 2003, the U.S. economy has added jobs. More than 8 million, in fact. Yet the only time economic news seems to hit the front page is when there’s something bad to report. No wonder Bush gets little credit.

A study by the Business and Media Institute last month revealed the “past four years of media coverage on jobs have been marred by pessimistic predictions, omissions, lack of economic context and focus on job losses instead of gains.” One of the biggest offenders was Katie Couric of the “CBS Evening News,” but she’s hardly alone. …

Download Full Content – Printable Pickings

• October 14 Word

• October 14 PDF

Many of our favorites have columns and posts on the peace prize.

Claudia Rosett is brilliant.

So, beyond the Nobel Prize, what is it that Yasser Arafat, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, the United Nations, Mohamed El Baradei and Al Gore all have in common?

The flip answer is that they have all in their time pushed out enough hot air to melt the polar ice caps on Mars, and if anyone thinks that’s an exaggeration about Mars, check out this 2003 report from NASA. (Yes, it seems that even on a planet where homo sapiens has never exhaled at all, let alone fired up an SUV or hopped a longhaul airline flight, ice caps can suffer a volatile existence).

More seriously, here on planet earth, what those on the list above all have in common is that they have all in pursuit of their own ambitions pushed agendas that corrode the real basis for building a better life for all on this planet — which, in a nutshell, is freedom.

Free societies may produce more CO2 (whatever that actually adds up to — or not — in the context of a world climate that was changing long before we got here, and will go on changing long after we are gone). But that’s because they also produce more, per capita, of just about everything good — including ideas, inventions, contraptions and once-undreamt-of ways not only of sustaining human life, but of making it healthier, longer, easier and better. That happens when individuals have the liberty to make their own choices and tradeoffs.

That is not the world envisioned by the list of Nobel laureates above. …

Bjorn Lomborg

WSJ Editors

Power Line

When did the Nobel Peace Prize go off the tracks? Today’s award to Al Gore and the IPCC “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change” fits in with a subset of cosmopolitan frauds, fakers, murderers, thieves, and no-accounts going back about twenty years …

Jim Taranto comments.

… Gore became only the second former U.S. vice president to win the Nobel Peace Prize. The first was Theodore Roosevelt, 101 years ago. (A sitting veep, Charles Dawes, also won in 1926.) A comparison between Roosevelt’s prize and Gore’s shows how far the Nobel Peace Prize has strayed from its original purpose: Roosevelt won the prize for negotiating a peace treaty between Russia and Japan. Gore won it for something that has nothing to do with peace. …

The Captain

… Who else could have won the Nobel prize, if the committee wanted to promote peace and freedom rather than political allies? Well, perhaps they may have considered the hundreds, if not thousands of monks in Burma who just sacrificed their lives in the pursuit of non-violent regime change. One or more of the people involved in the six-nation talks that has avoided war over North Korea’s nuclear-weapons programs would have also seemed a more germane choice.

Those choices would have actually focused on real efforts to bring peace and freedom to millions of people. That’s what I thought the Nobel Peace Prize meant to honor. Instead, they chose to honor a hysteric with a polemic on meteorology. And why? Do you suppose the Nobel committee wants Al Gore to try a different job in the near future, and hopes to boost his chances to get it?

Club for Growth with Milton Freidman quote.

Quotes you’ll love in a Michael Ledeen Corner post.

WSJ editors note Ohio teachers’ unions quietly working to kill charter schools.

The concept of charter schools is popular enough that even most liberals won’t attack them openly. Yet the national political assault continues behind-the-scenes, most recently in Ohio, where unions have now been caught giving orders to Attorney General Marc Dann, who has duly saluted.

Last week the Columbus Dispatch published emails showing that Mr. Dann and the Ohio Education Association are in cahoots to close down certain charter schools in the state. Mr. Dann was elected last November in a Democratic sweep that included Governor Ted Strickland and was helped by Big Labor. As a token of his appreciation, Mr. Strickland earlier this year proposed placing a moratorium on new charter schools and restrictions on private-school vouchers, only to be rebuffed by the Legislature. Now it’s Mr. Dann’s turn to send a thank-you. …

Charles Krauthammer thinks of Hillary.

… The Post correctly called Hillary’s retreat from free trade ” opportunism under pressure,” the pressure being the rampant and popular protectionism of her presidential rivals, particularly in protectionist Iowa. But while “opportunism under pressure” suggests ( pace Hemingway) cowardice, the better description of Clintonism is slipperiness. Adaptability. Cynicism, if you like.

Note her clever use of terms. Reassessing NAFTA sounds great to protectionists, but it is perfectly ambiguous. It could mean abolition or radical curtailment. It could also mean establishing a study commission whose recommendations might not reach President Hillary Clinton’s desk until too late in her second term.

The Post editorial noted “a perverse kind of good news” in Hillary’s free-trade revisionism: “There’s little chance that her position reflects any deeply held principle.” And there lies the beauty not just of Clinton on free trade but of the Clinton candidacy itself: She has no principles. Her liberalism is redeemed by her ambition; her ideology subordinate to her political needs.

I could never vote for her, but I (and others of my ideological ilk) could live with her — precisely because she is so liberated from principle. Her liberalism, like her husband’s — flexible, disciplined, calculated, triangulated — always leaves open the possibility that she would do the right thing for the blessedly wrong (i.e., self-interested, ambition-serving, politically expedient) reason. …

Power Line posts on the Dems’ spokesboy.

The infantilization of American politics is nearly complete. Exhibit A is the Democrats’ use of a 12 year-old to give the party’s radio address. Exhibit B is much of what E.J. Dionne writes.

These exhibits come together in Dionne’s latest column. It’s called “Meanies and Hypocrites,” which could be the title of roughly 80 percent of his columns. The meanies and hypocrites are always Republicans and conservatives who disagree with Dionne’s views. Today, they are conservatives bloggers, including the Power Line crew.

We stand accused of “assaulting” the family of the 12 year-old boy the Dems selected to give their radio address. The boy is Graeme Frost, who urged President Bush not to veto the expansion of the SCHIP program, which subsidizes health care to children in low income families. …

Carpe Diem with a post Mikey Moore should note – cancer survival rates tops in US.

National Review editors against ethanol.

It’s a depressing ritual. Every four years, as Iowans prepare to cast the first votes in the presidential-primary season, candidates descend on the corn-covered state and discover the miraculous properties of ethanol. The latest convert is Fred Thompson, who voted against ethanol subsidies when he was a U.S. senator but now says that ethanol is “a matter . . . of national security.” What he means is that he supports increasing federal assistance for ethanol production, on the grounds that this will reduce American dependence on oil from the Middle East. But, like most arguments for ethanol subsidies, this one is spurious. …

VDH Corner post on Carter.

The inconsideration of Jimmy Carter never ceases to amaze. Apparently, he is convinced that his Christian piety provides a pass for an ungenerous disposition, that comes across as self-centered and -absorbed—whether campaigning for a Nobel Prize by publicly attacking his president at a time of war, or smearing democratic Israel, or snide comments about his successors. But that being said, I’m surprised at his latest quip: …

Marty Peretz says, “What another Carter book?”

Clearly Jimmy Carter writes more books than he reads.