Carpe Bonum

Carpe Bonum has moved!

2005-03-16T09:24:00.000-08:00

The Carpe Bonum blog has moved to a new site: http://carpebonum.net/. Click on over and join us!

If you are reading via an RSS reader, point your feed to http://feeds.feedburner.com/CarpeBonum to keep up to date!

See you on the other side!

Carpe Bonum site update

2005-03-13T21:20:00.000-08:00

Loyal Carpe Bonum readers:

I wanted to let you all know there will be significant changes to the Carpe Bonum blog in the next couple of days. I am moving the blog to a Movable Type engine hosted in my house.

Here are the implications:

Readers who arrive via HCBA or Homespun blogrolls: No change. I will get those links updated when the new site goes live.

Readers who arrive via the Feedburner feed: No change. The same feed URL will point to the new site with no changes required on your part.

Readers who arrive via the Blogger atom.xml feed will need to update the feed address to the Feedburner feed. I'll post the Feedburner link when I announce the cutover. It is also set up to be autodiscovered.

Readers who arrive via their own bookmarks, past links from other blogs, or individual blogrolls on other blogs will need to update their links. I will make every effort to individually contact bloggers who have blogrolled Carpe Bonum and let them know about the change. I will also place a link to the new site prominently on the Blogger site.

Archives: The Blogger site will remain up indefinitely, so all the old links will still point to the original content. I am also planning to import all the Blogger entries into the MT site. So all the old content will be searchable from the new main page. (This is the major task remaining before the cutover.)

Blogger site during the transition: The process to export the Blogger entries requires a radically different main template. Readers may see this template for a time while I am exporting. I will restore the original template when I am done.

Statistics: I have a server side statistics engine on the new site (AWStats). But the new site will also continue to hit SiteMeter and StatCounter like the Blogger site does.

New site performance: Here's the rub. The new site is hosted on an ancient 400 MHz AMD K2 with 192 MB RAM and a 30 GB disk running Linux Fedora Core 3 behind a residential cable modem. There are two issues: the response time of the server itself and the upload bandwidth through the cable modem. On the server side, I am finding the response time to be pretty good (~1 sec page loads over the LAN with the client cache cleared) as long as nothing else is going on in the server. On the bandwidth side, I can upload about 400 kbits/sec. The main page right now is about 20k bytes plus another 30k bytes in locally hosted images, which will take about one second to upload through the cable modem. So I think the system is pretty well balanced. That is, increasing either performance factor would not increase overall performance because the system would then be limited by the other. So we're going to go with it like that and see how it works. As long as I am averaging less than 10 pageloads per minute, I think it will be no problem. That was about the load during the busiest hours on Instalanche day. Even if that load is exceeded by a factor of ten, I think the only consequence would be increased response times.

Stability: It's only been about a week since I put the Linux box, so the changes have been coming fast and furious. The changes have been mainly lots of software installs, Apache reconfigurations and restarts, and self-attacks using the Nessus security suite. But at this point it has been four days since the last restart, and I don't anticipate any major system software changes.

Reliability: Three major issues here: First the hardware itself. The server is an ancient box which could die at any minute. Next is the fact that the power and reset buttons are within reach of my two year old. No further explanation is necessary, I trust. Finally, Roadrunner does go down from time to time. The last outage was about nine minutes, and the outages come every few months. If we figure 36 minutes of downtime per year due to Roadrunner dropping out and, say, two one-hour outages due to the box being reset, that's 156 outage minutes per year. Divided by 525,960 minutes per year, that gives us an availability rate in the neighborhood of 99.97%. Telecom providers demand five nines availability. I think I can live with three to four nines.

Security: Well, there are only a few open ports through the firewall to the Linux box, and I attack myself with Nessus. So hopefully I'll avoid serious problems. I already am seeing attempts to use my sendmail as a relay (those spamming bastards).

Contingencies: If something ugly happens like the box melting down, I can always point the site URL and the Feedburner feed back to Blogger and use it as a backup. If something great happens, like I start to get more than 10 pageloads per minute on a regular basis, I'll export MT database to external hosting service.

So, uh, that's what I've been spending my excess brainpower on. Hope it doesn't blow up in my face!

Loony Left: Wrong Universe

2005-03-12T09:49:00.000-08:00

Earlier I posted a theory that loony leftists must be insane to believe some of the things they say they believe. The cross-posting on Blogcritics generated lots of interesting but inconclusive discussion. Now I have a new theory. Considering all their incredible wrong-is-right conclusions, is it possible the loony left is stuck in the "Mirror, Mirror" universe of Star Trek?

Look at the preview of "Mirror, Mirror" and tell me that Kirk, Sulu and others from the parallel universe aren't eerily similar to the caricatures of Bush Administration figures as portrayed by the marching moonbats of the loony left.

Here's more evidence.

Normal Spock:

Evil Spock:

Real Bush Cheney:

Moonbat Bush Cheney:

Barking Moonbats, come back to our universe! It's nicer over here!

UPDATE: Welcome WizBang Carnival of the Trackbacks readers!

Blogger oddness

2005-03-10T18:41:00.000-08:00

(Inside blogger baseball, sorry.)

Anybody notice any funny business with Blogger lately? Posting has been pretty sluggish. I've got something in the works to eliminate the problem permanently. Regular readers (both of us), stand by for more info soon.

The Three-Minute Abortion Debate

2005-03-10T17:39:00.000-08:00

Concise, to the point and doesn't rely on religious teachings (hat tip The Physicist's Perspective via Hammertime) The Three-Minute Abortion Debate:

"What?! You have no idea of how an unwanted pregnancy can ruin a young woman's life!"

We don't have unwanted pregnancies in this country. We have inconvenient pregnancies. If we had unwanted pregnancies, we wouldn't have people waiting years for a chance to adopt a brain-damaged crack baby or spending small fortunes to adopt children from Romanian orphanages. Where are the overflowing American orphanages? Where are the mobs of feral street urchins? They don't exist, because unwanted pregnancies don't really exist.

Be sure to click through so you don't miss the excellent zinger at the end.

One of these days I'm going to do a post on the curious rape/incest exemption many abortion foes are willing to concede. But not today.

So, how's it going in Afganistan?

2005-03-08T12:53:00.000-08:00

About a month ago, Aviation Week passed on a few juicy tidbits from Col. Cardon Crawford, director of operations for the combined forces command Afghanistan. I don't remember seeing these in the paleo-press or on the blogs, not even in Arthur Chrenkoff's Good News From Afganistan coverage.

From Neutralized Warlords (link for subscribers only):

The conflict in Afghanistan is changing. Warlords are being co-opted or removed, cross-border traffic limited and cooperation with the Pakistan military improved to the point that they are now spotting for artillery bombardments fired from U.S. weapons in Afghanistan at insurgents in Pakistan.

On the other hand, a Pakistani General tells Al Jazeera it never happened (hat tip Rantburg):

"This is baseless and ridiculous, it has got no truth," Pakistani army spokesman Major General Shaukat Sultan said on Wednesday in response to allegations by Colonel Cardon Crawford, director of operations for the U.S. Military command in Afghanistan.

Sultan also said that Pakistani troops were cooperating with U.S. forces based in the other side of the porous border but "it is a cooperation in terms of intelligence sharing."

"It is not in terms of inviting their (coalition) fire onto our territory," Sultan said.

The fact that the denial appears on Al Jazeera does nothing to enhance its credibility, but there it is.

Another tidbit from the AvWeek blurb:

The role of U.S. troops has now largely shifted to training the ANA and providing it with the logistics needed to move quickly around the country.

Sounds like a prototype for what US forces are planning to do in Iraq in OIF-3.

The end of blogging as we know it?

2005-03-08T01:48:00.000-08:00

What an interesting confluence of events we have had in the last few days. First, a Federal Election Commissioner blows the whistle on impending regulation of blog postings as in-kind campaign contributions. And now a blogger has gotten a day pass, attended a press conference and actually liveblogged from the White House.

I agree with Instapundit reader Tom Maguire, who gets it perfectly right:

On a more serious note, Tom Maguire emails to say that the real lesson here is "Take that, FEC!" If bloggers are getting credentialed as press, the argument to treat "real" press differently from bloggers collapses.

Granny Insanity sees it as a sign that, "the democracy train is still tugging along." And Secure Liberty sees it as fairly easy to do, as long as the blogger doesn't have a day job.

Now if I were one of those Karl-Rove-controls-everything-and- everyone theorists, I'd say it was all a perfect set up to slap the FEC in the face while further eroding the ground under the mainstream media's feet.

Whether the White House or the FEC wins out, it’s clear we are at a turning point for media in this country and maybe the world.

Oh, and how did I notice the linked postings? I saw them on CNN Television. Truly, blogging has changed forever!

POSTSCRIPT: Steve H. over at The Command Post is decidedly unimpressed, Fake Blogger Admitted to White House Press Corps:

The "blog" is FishbowlDC, a site decorated with all the little corporate features sites like Yahoo have. A contact email address which doesn't go to the "blogger." A disclaimer. A copyright notice. A site map.

The "blog" has no comments, and there are no trackbacks.

Idiots. Real bloggers will never get any recognition as long as establishment hacks continue their incestuous practice of calling corporate sites "blogs."

Calling this Graff person a blogger is like calling the pimply kid who brings Brit Hume doughnuts a broadcaster.

A blogger pays his own bills. A blogger has comments, if at all possible. A blogger does his own writing or chooses a few friends to help. A blogger has trackbacks. A blogger links to other REAL bloggers, not the mainstream dorks Graff links to.

Zowie!

I hate to disagree with a tongue that sharp, but I do. The precedent that has been set is there regardless of whether Graff is a "real" blogger. And I see no recognition problem when all the headlines say "Blogger," not, "Establishment Hack."

Cheer up, Steve!

POST-POSTSCRIPT: The Political Teen has video of Graff on MSNBC. (Hat tip, Michelle Malkin)

Laughed so hard I cried 2

2005-03-06T02:25:00.000-08:00

There is a very important lesson here, so read carefully: Don't mess with Bible-toting old biddies from Texas. Just don't.

(Hat tip, The Nerd Group via lgf)

NOTE: The original file was a 4 MB .wav file. I converted it to a 2 MB 92 kbps .mp3 and put it on my Linux box. My cable modem uploads at about 40 kB/sec, so it should take around a minute to download the file. If you'd rather, just grab the original.

FEC, protect us!

2005-03-05T10:51:00.000-08:00

I, for one, admire and appreciate the FEC taking on this new challenge to protect all us easily-confused citizens from them wily old bloggers. I'll be danged if I couldn't use some oversight myself!

So here is what I propose: Let's set up a trackback bot. Anytime somebody posts something dangerous (i.e. political, contains original thinking, etc.), send the bot a trackback. The bot will instantly generate a message to the FEC:

To: speechenforcement@fec.gov
From: Extremely Concerned Blogger <$$AuthorEmail$$>
Date: $$CurrentDateTime$$
Subject: Please protect my country from this EXTREMELY DANGEROUS SPEECH: "$$PostSubject$$"

My Dear FEC,

Thank you SO SO SO SO much for being right there on the front lines, protecting us VULNERABLE CITIZZENS [sic] from dangerous unregulated speech!

To assist you in this CRITICAL MISSION, it is my duty to report to you that I, myself, have just made a posting on my blog, $$BlogName$$. It is located right out there on the INTERNET where ANYONE CAN SEE IT. See for yourself right here: $$PostURL$$.

Why, this posting has all kinds of ...THOUGHTS... in it, like this:

$$PostExcerpt$$

I must also inform you, Dear Commission, that this posting was NOT AUTHORIZED OR SCREENED BY ANYONE, including:

* My Congressperson
* Either of my Senators
* The President, or his Chief of Staff
* Howard Dean
* The Chief of Police
* The boys down at the Local 142
* The New York Times
* Not a single Justice of the Supreme Court, not even that Souter guy
* Heck, I can barely even get my wife to read these things

And I didn't prescreen this content with YOU, MY DEAR COMISSION.

So PLEASE STOP ME before I speak again!

Sincerely,

$$AuthorName$$
$$AuthorEmail$$
$$AuthorPostalAddress$$
$$Author"Diversity"Code$$
$$AuthorDriversLicenseNumber$$
$$AuthorSocialSecurityNumber$$
$$AuthorCreditRating$$
$$AuthorEmploymentHistory$$
$$AuthorHealthHistory$$
$$AuthorAnyOtherInfoWeMightBeAbleToUse$$

See where I'm going with this, folks?

For serious coverage of the issue, check out Cyber Conservative, who's doing a bangup job.

Oh yeah, almost forgot: Hey Arizona, please pick someone other than McCain on next go around. (Now where do I send that trackback...)

Uh-Oh

2005-02-26T13:23:00.000-08:00

Maybe Carpe Bonum shouldn't pick at Condi so much. She might make me hold an open election for Supreme Leader of Carpe Bonafamily...

(Hat tip, Instapundit)

Who is Lynn Swann?

2005-02-26T01:26:00.000-08:00

(Image via Bay Area Sports Hall of Fame)

Lynn Swann is considering a run for Pennsylvania Governor. He has a "Draft Swann for Governor" committee. PoliPundit Jayson, Captain Ed, Betsy, Professor Bainbridge, and Todd Zywicki have all blogged about it.

As regular readers of Carpe Bonum (both of us) know, I am not a big fan of electoral neophytes aiming for major office, but maybe Swann has enough star power to pull it off. At least he's not running for President! (Sorry, Condi, I still love you, but...)

We all know Lynn Swann the Pittsburgh Steeler hall of famer. But who is he outside of football? Let's find out.

Mr. Swan is alive. (Hey, first things first!)

At present, Lynn Swann is the chairman of the President's Council on Physical Fitness. His official bio opens with:

Lynn C. Swann, Chairman, of Sewickley, Pennsylvania - What happens to the youngest of three boys, whose name is Lynn, when his mother enrolls him in dance school as an eight year old child? What will people say?

I like this guy already! The bio highlights Mr. Swann's football and broadcasting careers, community involvement and service with the Big Brothers and Big Sisters of America. And it says he collects fine wines. Professor Bainbridge, a kindred spirit! The bio on the campaign page covers similar ground but without the self-deprecation.

He was fully involved in the Bush campaign last year. Examples:

The anti-Fox News Channel blog News Hounds reports Swann gave a pro-President Bush interview on Fox News last summer.
Mr. Swann was a principal in an organization called African Americans for Bush. (Can't find their web page any more, but there is plenty of residual information on the web discussing Swann's involvement.)
Swann did an online chat on behalf of the Bush campaign in early September. The campaign web pages are disappearing quickly but I was able to find a partial transcript in Google's cache. Here are the excerpted questions and responses from Swann:
Valerie Torkelson from Westfield NJ wrote: What has the response to "African Americans for Bush" been? Do you feel like you are making any progress in the African American community to rally any support for President Bush?

Lynn Swann answered: The response has been good and solid. I am always somewhat amused by the fact that some people would ask, "Why as an African American I am a Republican." In many cases, my response is, "Why not a Republican." Why is is such a grand assumption that African Americans should be Democrats when historically the Republican Party has been a leader on issues important to African Americans.

Neil Hutchins from Albuquerque NM wrote: Hello Mr. Swann How long have you known the president? and what was it about him that you knew you could support him.

Lynn Swann answered: Neil, I met the President when he was Governor of Texas. What I liked about this President and this man was that he acted on what he believed. When he talks about being healthier and more physically active in an effort to save America some of the $250 billion dollars we spend on obesity and its related illnesses and diseases that are preventable, he backs it up by being physically active himself. The President ran a 3-mile race in which he ran sub-seven minute miles at the age of 55.

Mr. Swann and his wife have given $10,300 in political contributions since 1987, mostly to Republicans like John Heinz, Arlen Specter, George W. Bush, and Pete Coors. But in 1996 and 1997 he gave $2000 to John Kerry?!?! I wonder what that was about!

The Draft Swann "Why Lynn" page stakes out a few positions:

Lower Taxes & Limited Government
Pro-Life, although this article by Peter L. Decouresy in the Harrisburg Patriot-News makes it sound like Swann is considering a straddle.
Pro-Sportsman
Pro-Family

Not everyone loves Lynn Swann. Last month, corporate scold Center for Science in the Public Interest called for Swann to be fired. His crime? "The former Pittsburgh Steelers football player received payment to appear at a public relations event for a vending-machine trade association."

On racism, Mr. Swann made the following comment in a 1999 Time Magazine online chat:

Heichi asks: Lynn, have you ever received any racial abuse whilst playing?

Lynn Swann: Not while playing. I think that most minorities have experienced some form of racial abuse. And I am certain many young people and some adults have been abused and not even been aware that it was going on. The important thing, I think, is that you have to continue to break down a variety of barriers. Professional, social, economic, and political barriers.

The chat was in honor of Black History Month that year, and Swann wrapped up with this comment:

Lynn Swann: This being Black History Month, I would like to ask people to celebrate the similarities and not focus on the differences between people of color and not of color. Take the time to discover how African-Americans have had a great impact on this country. In science, education, literature, art, and politics.

He makes $20,000 to $30,000 per appearance on the lecture curcuit! No, wait. He makes $30,000 to $50,000!

On the nanny state, Mr. Swann made this comment in an online chat from the White House:

Question from Smokey: What do you think of California's tax on junk food? Do you think that good health can be encouraged with economics or can it not happen unless people have the willpower to stick to a program?

Lynn Swann: I think it's important that people develop their own lifestyle and their own habits. This has to be a personal choice. This is not something that can be legislated. We're trying to encourage people to lead a healthier and physically active lifestyle. We're not trying to mandate it. Certainly people have different schedules and there are certain things they can and cannot do. We encourage them to do what they can do, but we're certainly not in a position to try and dictate, mandate, or tax them on their eating habits.

But in the same chat he made this vicious attack on bloggers:

The computer is a wonderful tool, but it should not be a way of life for everybody where you sit in front of the computer and you do nothing else.

Just kidding -- that was totally out of context. (Eat your heart out, Maureen Dowd!)

And Mr. Swan may pick up votes from some unlikely places. For example the Philadelphia Daily News reports that there is some rancor in Philadelphia's African American Community over the appointment of a traffic court administrative judge.

The State Supreme Court this week named Bernice DeAngelis as administrative judge at Traffic Court, giving her control of patronage and angering black Democrats.
...
"The last thing we need is a revolt," Campbell [head of the African-American ward leaders] said, "but I've had some trial lawyers talk to me who are looking at raising money for [Lynn] Swann."

Good luck, Mr. Swan. You will definitely make an interesting candidate.

UPDATES:
2/26/05 09:40 PST: Welcome Betsy's Page readers. Enjoy the information!
2/26/05 09:40 PST: Turns out, Mr. Swann has a personal web page, last updated March 2003. (Hat tip, Patriot-News Know@Noon)
2/27/05 18:35 PST: Welcome Professor Bainbridge readers. Enjoy!
2/27/05 19:14 PST: Welcome Volokh Conspiracy readers, too. (I missed you guys yesterday. Sorry!)

Winter '05 in San Diego

2005-02-24T01:07:00.000-08:00

Nice weather we've been having here in sunny San Diego.

Imagine if you will...

Scene: A cafe in which one may order up the weather. One table is occupied by a group of Vikings wearing horned helmets. Whenever the word "rain" is repeated, they begin singing and/or chanting. A man and his wife enter. The man is played by Eric Idle, the wife is played by Graham Chapman (in drag), and the waitress is played by Terry Jones, also in drag.
Man:You sit here, dear.
Wife:All right.
Man:Morning!
Waitress:Morning!
Man: Well, what've you got?
Waitress: Well, there's cold and clouds; cold wind and clouds; cold and rain; cold clouds and rain; cold clouds wind and rain; rain clouds wind and rain; rain cold rain rain clouds and rain; rain wind rain rain clouds rain thunder and rain;
Vikings: Rain rain rain rain...
Waitress: ...rain rain rain cold and rain; rain rain rain rain rain rain mud slides rain rain rain...
Vikings: Rain! Lovely rain! Lovely rain!
Waitress: ...or a lovely, spring-like day with the sun shining, birds singing and children playing while the sweet aroma of freshly cut grass gently wafts into your nostrils, like Opening Day of Baseball season with cold and rain.
Wife: Have you got anything without rain?
Waitress: Well, there's rain cold wind and rain, that's not got much rain in it.
Wife: I don't want ANY rain!
Man: Why can't she have cold clouds rain and wind?
Wife: THAT'S got rain in it!
Man: Hasn't got as much rain in it as rain cold wind and rain, has it?
Vikings: Rain rain rain rain... (Crescendo through next few lines...)
Wife: Could you do the cold clouds rain and wind without the rain then?
Waitress: Urgghh!
Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like rain!
Vikings: Lovely rain! Wonderful rain!
Waitress: Shut up!
Vikings: Lovely rain! Wonderful rain!
Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have cold clouds rain and wind without the rain.
Wife: I don't like rain!
Man:Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your rain. I love it. I'm having rain rain rain rain rain rain rain mud slides rain rain rain and rain!
Vikings:Rain rain rain rain. Lovely rain! Wonderful rain!
Waitress:Shut up!! Mud slides are off.
Man:Well could I have her rain instead of the mud slides then?
Waitress:You mean rain rain rain rain rain rain... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)
Vikings:(Singing elaborately...) Rain rain rain rain. Lovely rain! Wonderful rain! Rain ra-a-a-a-a-ain rain ra-a-a-a-a-ain rain. Lovely rain! Lovely rain! Lovely rain! Lovely rain! Lovely rain! Rain rain rain rain!

Apologies to Monty Python.

Blackbird Diplomacy

2005-02-23T00:42:00.000-08:00

The January 24, 2005 issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology has an interesting story from a former SR-71 pilot. In the Fall of 1984, the Soviets were delivering advanced weapons to the communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. A series of unusual SR-71 flights was used to change their minds.

The article is part of Aviation Week's wonderful Contrails series, an "initiative to capture the untold stories that collectively make up the rich lore of aviation and space." Check it out if you get a chance.

The link is for paid subscribers only:

Blackbird Diplomacy by Major General Robert F. Behler, USAF (Retired)

Though few taxpayers knew what we were doing, SR-71 missions near belligerent communist countries were influencing U.S. foreign policy. Today, that meant contributing to the demilitarization of Nicaragua, while allowing the Soviet Union to save face. Nobody wanted a repeat of the Cuban missile crisis in Central America.
...
Instead of arriving in the area of interest around noon, when sun-angles were optimum for a photo mission, we arrived just after sunrise, providing an unmistakable wakeup call for the Sandinistas. Even originating at altitudes above 80,000 ft., the shock wave from our SR-71 created window-rattling, double-crack sonic booms on the ground. Message: The U.S. is watching, and we know what that Bulgarian ship at Corinto is carrying [destabilizing MiG-21s].
...
The world may never know if the Bukuriani arrived in the Nicaraguan port of Corinto actually carrying crated MiG-21 fighters. In private, State Dept. officials said their objective had been to give the Soviets an opportunity to remove the jets without admitting the fighters had even been there in the first place. They believed that strategy was the best way to end the incident peacefully.

Blackbird diplomacy had worked.

Thanks for your service, General Behler.

CNN's Inside Politics: Good TiVo Fun

2005-02-22T23:27:00.000-08:00

After Jacki Schechner and Abbi Tatton mentioned Carpe Bonum on their Inside Politics blog segment yesterday, I thought it would only be fair to get them on the TiVo and check them out in video form (rather than just reading transcripts).

I got a chance to watch today's show, and I thought their report did a good job of informing a typical CNN viewer what was going on in the blogosphere. Atrios and Kos got too much air time for my taste, but they were clearly identified as lefty blogs.

Confederate Yankee's continuing Hinchey coverage got a nice mention.

I like the way they actually display the blogs they are discussing and let viewers see for themselves.

And it was interesting how Judy Woodruff turned the the Hinchey stuff from yesterday's blogger segment into a live interview with Hinchey today.

Inside Politics has earned the distinction of being the just the fourth news show to be a regular in Carpe Bonum's TiVo (in addition to Brit Hume, Meet the Press and Shepard Smith). Congratulations!

UPDATE: Carpe Bonawife says I shouldn't admit Shepard Smith is in the TiVo. "He looks too old now, not like during the war." Mmm kay. Sorry, Shep, you're out!

Hinchey strategy enhanced: The Big Bluff

2005-02-22T22:51:00.000-08:00

Rep. Maurice "It originated with Karl Rove" Hinchey has enhanced his media strategy, adding to it The Big Bluff. In an interview with Judy Woodruff on CNN's Inside Politics today Rep. Hinchey said:

Unfortunately, the Congress is not doing its job. There are -- this is something that ought to be investigated by the Congress of the United States. But this Congress is not doing its job. It's not standing up for the American people the way it should. And, as a consequence, there is a certain amount of frustration out there and that frustration was voiced by the people who attended the meeting that I held last Saturday.

Excellent!

Imagine the howls of rage if the Republican-dominated Congress started investigating news outlets for running politically-motivated hit pieces: McCarthyism! Intimidation! Chilling effect!

No, Congress can't go anywhere near this and Rep. Hinchey knows it.

Let's face it, you don't survive thirteen years in Congress and eighteen years in the New York State Assembly before that unless you are one savvy dude.

Well done Rep. Hinchey.

(Of course, we may get that open investigation into the fake memos if the CBS Three go ahead with their lawsuit. Here's hoping...)

Hinchey strategy: Retreat and Moonbattery

2005-02-21T23:20:00.000-08:00

It appears Rep. Maurice "It originated with Karl Rove" Hinchey has chosen his strategy: Retreat and Moonbattery.

It comes in the form of this Ryan Deuel piece in the Binghamton (NY) Press and Sun Bulletin: Hinchey: Rove may be behind fake documents (hat tip, Confederate Yankee).

First and foremost, Rep. Hinchey admits the recording is authentic. This will go a long way in allowing the story to hit major media as an actual story rather than a meta-story about what blogs are talking about.

Hinchey reaffirmed what he said Saturday in Ithaca during a community forum on Social Security. An audio clip of Hinchey's comments has been circulating across the Internet.
...
Hinchey said the audio clip on the Internet is accurate.

Next, the retreat-but-revel-in-my-own-moonbattery strategy. Watch for it, it's subtle but unmistakable:

"I have no proof," Hinchey said Monday night. "But if the documents originated at the White House, then it would fit the pattern of the White House manipulating the media. And if it did originate in the White House, then it must have come from the most brilliant, most Machiavellian of all of them, Karl Rove."
...
"It's my theory," he said, "that it could very well have been the White House that supplied those fake documents."

Talk about brilliant!

Moonbats hear "White House manipulation," "Machiavellian Karl Rove," and "White House supplied those documents." They swoon and sigh and break out their checkbooks. But slander lawyers hear, "I have no proof," and "It's my theory," so they sadly pack up their briefcases and go home.

Hinchey story on CNN: "Blog storm" predicted, Carpe Bonum credited for "delving deeper"

2005-02-21T15:54:00.000-08:00

Blog reporter Jacki Schechner, and political producer Abbi Tatton covered the Hinchey story today on the blogger segment of CNN's Inside Politics. They predicted a "blog storm" and credited Carpe Bonum for "delving deeper" into the issue.

From the transcript:

TATTON: They're making fun. They're making amusing comments about it, but they're also delving deeper into it. We went to the site Carpe Bonum (ph). This now has a profile, who is Maurice Hinchey? They're looking at his background, his district, different things like that. Is this a blog storm in the making? Who knows?

SCHECHNER: I say we go on record and we predict that this is going to be a blog storm.

TATTON: It's going to get bigger. The start at the beginning of the day. And more and more conservative blogs are linking to it, so it looks like it's going be out there for a few days.

SCHECHNER: I think the anticipation is they're going to dig deeper into Hinchey at this point and try to find out what he's all about and why he's coming out, avoiding Rove.

TATTON: And whether they want him to apologize or what they want him to do.

SCHECHNER: Well, the other thing on Carpe Bonum that we thought was interesting is they think the presence of the tapes will help and not hurt in the aftermath of this and they anticipate a quick retraction and apology.

(Emphasis mine, natch.)

UPDATE: Post edited for length and to add focus.

Hinchey update

2005-02-21T14:52:00.000-08:00

A Daily Kos commenter says CNN's Inside Politics is covering the Hinchey story (via lgf). No transcript yet.

No coverage yet from local papers, per Confederate Yankee (also via lgf).

UPDATE: Pooklekufur says:

5:38 pm: Charles is being interviewed on MSNBC at this moment. CNN has just shown a screenshot of Littlegreenfootballs.

I assume the time is Eastern since his Blogger profile says he is in New York.

UPDATE 2: Michelle Malkin is on the story with quotes from MSNBC broadcast:

Ron Reagan promos the story, calling it the "latest storm on the internet." MSNBC plays the audio recording of Hinchey's remarks.

Reagan gives credence to Hinchey's remarks, in half-jest. Crowley: "What was this guy thinking about?!...How about CBS screwed up bigtime, Ron?"

Charles Johnson's photo shown on screen, along with screenshots of LGF.

"I think it's blatant fear-baiting really," Johnson notes. Any reasonable person who sat down and tried to create Hinchey's scenario would get a "migraine headache."

Reagan: "Is this big in the blogosphere?" Duh. Johnson notes his traffic is two to three times his normal rate and mentions links from Lucianne.com, Freerepublic.com, and NRO.

The story has made it to MSM a lot faster than I thought it would. It seems they are learning!

UPDATE 3: Charles reports on his media contacts (MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News).

UPDATE 4: The CNN transcript is up, and mentions Carpe Bonum prominently. See above for more.

UPDATE 5: The Connected Coast to Coast web page on MSNBC links to LGF, but the link is to the main page, not a specific entry which is discussing Hinchey directly. CNN gets the nod for better coverage on this one, for sure.

Meanwhile, the Hinchey outburst is the first item in the Grapevine segment on Fox's Special Report with Brit Hume (about 31 minutes into the broadcast). The audio is not played, but three screens of text from the transcript are displayed. Nice.

UPDATE 6: Here is a very interesting linker to Carpe Bonum on the Hinchey story. I wonder what they are saying!

This time someone really figures it out!

2005-02-21T08:40:00.000-08:00

Unlike Robb Allen, who theorized in his Bonfire of the Vanities post that Carpe Bonum might mean, "Damn this post sucks," Matt on Nerf Coated World hits the nail on the head:

H/T: Carpe Bonum (seize the good?)

You got it Mark!

(I still crack up over that, "Damn this post sucks!" line...)

Who is Maurice Hinchey?

2005-02-21T02:08:00.000-08:00

(Photo from democrats.house.gov)

Here is some background on Rep. Maurice "It originated with Karl Rove" Hinchey.

He represents New York's 22nd district. Note the gerrymander required to include Ithaca.

(Map from Hinchey district page)

Rep. Hinchey's US House of Representatives home page is here. His official bio brags about some pork, some holding of Greenspan's feet to the fire, some enviro stuff and some Nixon bashing. One distinguished note is his service in and honorable discharge from the US Navy. Rep. Hinchey's Democratic Underground bio page is rather bland, and his bio on the Daily Kos seems to be an exact copy of the one on DU.

Hey, he's got a multimedia page! I'll send him a pointer to the audio and see if he'll post it!

Rep. Hinchey raised $715k last cycle. His biggest donors came from Cornell University, unions, trial lawyers, and a couple of aerospace giants, Lockeed Martin and BAE Systems. (Huh? Is that because he is on the Appropriations Committee? But he's not on the Defense Subcommittee. Strange.)

He appears to be a pro-"choice" "Catholic." And he gets a 100% score from the Planned Parenthood PAC.

Americans for Better Immigration gives Rep. Hinchey an overall grade of D for his recent immigration- and border security-related votes.

The (Hudson Valley and Catskills) Times Herald-Record says Rep. Hinchey is "big on gun rights," but he gets a C from the NRA (better than Sen. Shumer's F, I guess!). The Times Herald-Record did a candidate interview with Rep. Hinchey last cycle. Check it out for his views on some other issues.

The man travels! He's number four among all US Senators and Representatives!

I hope this helps you get to know Rep. Hinchey a little better.

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit and Little Green Footballs readers. For your further reading pleasure use this index to read a superb series of postings telling a Silver Star-winning tank commander's story of the battle for Fallujah.

UPDATE 2: Welcome Michelle Malkin readers. Perhaps you would also enjoy a little Carpe Bonum Condi chatter.

UPDATE 3: Welcome Mudville Gazette readers. If the Armor Geddon Fallujah series doesn't float your boat, try WMD hunt fizzles -- War on Terror strategy sound.

Hinchey bombshell on Little Green Footballs

2005-02-20T17:26:00.000-08:00

Little Green Footballs has an audio recording of Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) at a community forum in Ithaca, NY. To a clapping and cheering audience, Hinchey makes a wild accusation that Karl Rove planted the fake memos with CBS (at least he admits they are fake!):

Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY): People have been - people in the media have been intimidated. The media has changed in the last four years. People have changed in the last four years. They've had a very very direct, aggressive attack on the, on the media, and the way it's handled. Probably the most flagrant example of that is the way they set up Dan Rather. Now, I mean, I have my own beliefs about how that happened: it originated with Karl Rove, in my belief, in the White House. They set that up with those false papers. Why did they do it? They knew that Bush was a draft dodger. They knew that he had run away from his responsibilties in the Air National Guard in Texas, gone out of the state intentionally for a long period of time. They knew that he had no defense for that period in his life. And so what they did was, expecting that that was going to come up, they accentuated it: they produced papers that made it look even worse. And they - and they distributed those out to elements of the media.

...

Audience Member: Don’t you think it’s irresponsible to make charges like that?

Congressman Hinchey: No I don’t. I think it’s very important to make charges like that. I think it’s very important to combat this kind of activity in every way that you can. And I’m willing — and most people are not — to step forward in situations like this and take risks.

Audience: [Clapping and cheering.]

My prediction:

Unlike Eason Jordan's case, the recording is clear and available, so there will be no chance to lie about what Hinchey said. Once the audio makes the mainstream media, I believe there will be a quick retraction and apology, and there will be zero lasting consequences. Alternately, Hinchey will revel in his moonbattiness, his constituents will love it, and he will be set for life.

Either way, I think the presence of the recording will help, not hurt Hinchey.

Too bad for Jordan his video didn't get out.

UPDATE: Dr. Sanity is on the case:

This is the Left's new version of Descartes' "I think, therefore I am". In their view, "I feel it, therefore it is", seems to sum up their entire philosophy of life, as well as the nuances of their "thinking". Evidence or facts are entirely unnecessary.

UPDATE 2: Welcome InstaPundit and WizBang readers. For a little more Carpe Bonum drivel which you might find entertaining, check out They are insane.

UPDATE 3: Power Line is on the story also:

It's easy to write off this kind of thing as limited to the moonbat wing of the Democratic Party, but here's the thing: when is the last time you heard any Democrat criticize this kind of nonsense, or try to distance himself from it?

UPDATE 4: See also this link-laden Hinchey backgrounder: Who is Maurice Hinchey?

UPDATE 5: Myopic Deal has a nice roundup of blogospheric Hinchey buzz.

"European Superstate:" Still no threat

2005-02-20T14:27:00.000-08:00

I've wanted to post again about the "European Superstate." In particular, what to make of the bizarre 500-page "Constitution" that is making the referendum rounds?

By all accounts, the proposed EU Constitution is a bureaucratic, socialistic, politically correct mess. Charles Moore writes (hat tip, Signifying Nothing):

Rather than confining itself to the division of powers by which a country should be governed – head of state, parliament, judiciary, what's local and what's national – it lays out scores of pages telling people how to run their lives. It supports positive discrimination, outlaws the death penalty in all circumstances, commits itself to high public spending, compulsory consultation with trade unions about changes at work, "the exchange of youth workers", "fat-free breakfasts", "distance education" and "the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen" (I made one of these up). And it imposes all these on nations that have their own governments and electorates.

I stand by my earlier opinion that the only threat a potential "European Superstate" would pose to the US is in how it would stifle its own entrepreneurial spirit and economic growth, thus reducing the market for US goods and services.

Little-noticed class action reform

2005-02-19T10:55:00.000-08:00

Here's AP's take on class action reform:

Even though businesses failed to get the measure to apply to suits already in the courts, the legislation was a victory for companies that have complained for decades that they have been dragged into far-flung local courts and subjected to massive, unwarranted jury awards.

Consumer groups contend that federal courts are much less sympathetic to — or even less likely to hear — class-action suits, which are a crucial tool against well-financed industries like tobacco, oil, pharmaceutical and others. As a result, Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron called it "legislation that makes it easier for corporations to evade responsibility for making right their wrongs."

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America seems to have noticed at least:

This brazen and shameless attack on Americans' legal rights was well-funded by the insurance, drug and other industries. Indeed, the U.S. Chamber of Congress openly acknowledged this week that it spent more than $53 million in 2004 alone on efforts to lobby this bill and others that undermine the legal rights of American families.

And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce celebrates:

“The speed with which this bill passed both houses of Congress this session is a testament to the glaring need for class action reform,” continued Donohue. “This is a landmark victory in our fight to restore fairness and balance to our courts.”

But there is still precious little commentary on this, especially from the Left. Nothing from Kos (focused mostly on Gannon), Atrios (Gannon and lots of other miscellania), Drum (nothing of consequence lately except a post or two on Social Security) or Marshall (Social Security and Gannon).

Hello? Something big just happened guys! Wake up!

UPDATE: Looks like I'm just late to the party. Commenter Steve L from Secure Liberty blog noted the story when the Senate passed the bill, including reaction from Kevin Drum. I'd heard about the Senate action on the radio, but didn't have time to peruse the blogs that day. How embarassing!

Condi in '08? Matthew May says yes!

2005-02-18T20:14:00.000-08:00

Matthew May has a nice counterpoint to Condi for President critics like Carpe Bonum here: The Bandwagon (hat tip, Decision '08)

As conservatives, supporting a candidate for the presidency who is not a career politician would do much to further the argument mere electoral success is not a barometer of exemplary executive leadership potential for the future. Sec. Rice can be that symbol, and she can continue to represent her nation – a nation that needs her – in the highest counsels of our government. Her life, her education, and her experience are uniquely American and she is represents the best ideals of the Republican Party and the United States of America.

If Condoleezza Rice is not qualified for the presidency, who is?

Well, doesn't that make me feel small.

Still, my concern is not that she is unqualified to serve, but that she hasn't developed the skill of campaigining and winning votes, and that we don't even know if she has the talent for it.

I'm willing to be proven wrong.

(But how to prove it before Campaign '08 begins? Catch-22!)

Daily Show's advice to bloggers

2005-02-18T19:04:00.000-08:00

Ted Hitler, panda-eating Colombian drug mule: "First rule of journalism is don't talk about journalism. ...Nobody likes a snitch."

Hat tip Daniel Drezner via The Moderate Liberal.

They are insane

2005-02-18T16:28:00.000-08:00

Dr. Sanity reminded me of a homily given by Father Bill (God rest his soul) years ago. Father Bill was discussing his work with drug addicts and alcoholics. His basic point was that you have to remember that no matter how rational they seem, no matter how well they can repeat the reasons they shouldn't use, they will do it anyway. Because with respect to their addiction, they are insane.

Father Bill then extended this concept to moral questions like abortion. He viewed many abortion proponents as incapable of rational discourse on the topic. No matter what facts are brought to bear, nothing will make them change their mind.

When I get into a debate on such a topic, I think of that homily. If it becomes clear that facts and logic are irrelevant to the other person, I gracefully exit the discussion because I know it is pointless.

In her "How Do You Solve A Problem Like Lynne Stewart?" Dr. Sanity explains the concept as a trained Psychiatrist. (Lynne Stewart is an attorney who has just been convicted of giving material support to terrorists, in this case her client the blind sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. See Andrew C. McCarthy for more.)

As in a case of hysteria, or a conversion disorder--where the symptoms are not intentionally produced but are the result of unintentional motives--the Lynne Stewarts of the Left are not deliberately being obtuse. They aren't even deliberately evil. They truly don't see anything wrong with being a nice person and kindly grandmother and simultaneously thinking that a terrorist attack in Indonesia where children might be killed is a wonderful thing. This kind of cognitive dissonance is the result of a psychological defense mechanism called "repression". Repression is necessary in the expression of a conversion disorder where some physical symptom (blindness, paralysis, pain) becomes the focal point; so that the individual is able to avoid the unacceptable thought or feeling. For that to occur, the unacceptable thought or feeling must be ruthlessly stashed away from awareness, or repressed.

But symbolic physical symptoms like blindness are not the only way that repression can be manifested. Another, and much more frequent psychological strategy to rid one's self of the unacceptable thought or feeling is to display a contradictory and often unbelievable (to an outside observer, anyway) dissassociation, or disconnect, between a person's thoughts and feelings on the one hand; and behavior on another.

This is why so often the Lynne Stewarts present an unsolvable puzzle to an outside observer. How can they argue for Peace and behave violently? How can they demand Free Speech but simultaneously suppress it in others? How can they be for Diversity and squelch any dissenting opinions? How can they claim to be for freedom and democracy, and make common cause with those who would destroy it? The catalog of paradoxes goes on and on.

So even though they can give every sign of understanding and agreeing with all the reasons not to drink, alcoholics are repressing the fact that they simply love to drink. Anti-war "peace" marches represent repression of the fact that some leftists just don't want others to be free. And "choice-" and "liberation-" spouting abortion proponents are repressing the simple truth that they just don't want more babies to be born.

It's nice to get a more clinical view of what is going on with these people. Thanks, Dr. S!

(Father Bill also had a great homily debunking the warm fuzzy image of the nativity. In truth, Christ was born into squalor. Now why would He do that? But that's another posting...)

Class-action lawyers take one in the gut

2005-02-17T22:34:00.000-08:00

This seems like excellent news: Congress OKs Law on Class-Action Suits:

Congress sent President Bush legislation Thursday aimed at discouraging multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuits by having federal judges take them away from state courts, a victory for conservatives who hope it will lead to other lawsuit limits.
...
Under the legislation, class-action suits seeking $5 million or more would be heard in state court only if the primary defendant and more than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state. But if fewer than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the primary defendant, and more than $5 million is at stake, the case would go to federal court.

Here's a couple of whiner quotes for your enjoyment:

The legislation is "a payback to big business at the expense of consumers," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
...
"It's the final payback to the tobacco industry, to the asbestos industry, to the oil industry, to the chemical industry at the expense of ordinary families who need to be able go to court to protect their loved ones when their health has been compromised," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.

And yet, there seems to be very little blogger buzz about it, and no real squealing from the Democrats (notwithstanding the whining quoted here).

Very strange.

I guess one of two things must be true:

The legislation doesn't hurt the lawsuit industry that much.
President Bush has so much excess political power (at least on this issue) that it's not even worth it for the Democrats to fight.

I wonder which one it is.

UPDATE: Thomas Lifson, PoliPundit and Pardon My English (via Decision '08) notice!

Someday...

2005-02-17T08:51:00.000-08:00

Someday, I hope to earn these titles:

Condi in '08? I love her, but no.

2005-02-15T20:17:00.000-08:00

There is some buzz about Condoleeza Rice as a Presidential candidate in 2008 in this article from Dick Morris and even in my own house. I greatly admire Dr. Rice's abilities and her public service, and I would almost certainly vote for her if she were nominated. But because she has never proven herself by actually winning election to any office, I don't think her running for President in 2008 would be a good idea.

Steven M. Warshawsky lists a lot of reasons for her not to run on the American Thinker: Beware the Condi bandwagon (Hat tip, Michelle Malkin).

To me, the biggest concern is her lack of experience and unproven ability to actually get elected to something. There have been several recent cases of people running for public office for the first time and choosing a major office like Governor or US Senator. Examples are people like Michael Huffington who ran for US Senate in California and Bobby Jindal who ran for Governor of Louisiana. In both of these cases and many more, the candidate had no experience being a candidate in a major campaign and had never proven their ability to actually get people to vote for them.

(As an aside, Jindal has made an excellent recovery from his Governorship loss, winning a US House seat in the last cycle and is getting off to a great start there.)

As much as I like to bash politicians of all stripes, I'm also aware that it takes real talent and skill to get people to vote for you. It goes beyond simply taking positions most people agree with. Vote-getting talent is independent of other innate characteristics like intelligence, wisdom and character. The skill requires training and practice. A lot of us Vast Right Wing Conspirators were frustrated by Bill Clinton's enormous talent and skills in this area. Ronald Reagan had a similar effect on the Left.

So my rule is: Get elected to something else first, before running for something as big as Governor or US Senator. And forget about running for President as a first time candidate.

Of course there counterexamples to this rule such as Ronald Reagan's California Governorship, Hillary Clinton's US Senate seat, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dwight Eisenhower. Each of these had exceptional circumstances which I don't see in Rice's case.

Condi is a great person. I loved what she did as National Security Advisor and what she is doing as Secretary of State. I'll back her 100% if she is nominated. But my hope is she will not run for President unless she proves she can get elected to some other office first.

Ahmad's professor responds

2005-02-14T22:23:00.000-08:00

Remember Ahmad Al-Qloushi? He's the Kuwaiti student at Foothills College who said his professor told him to seek counseling for his pro-America views. Carpe Bonum blogged about it here: Welcome to America, Ahmad Al-Qloushi.

Well, Professor Woolcock has turned up in a comment on the Jawa Report blog (as of now, it's the fourth to last comment in the thread, very near the bottom):

I deny unequivocally all the allegations Mr. al-Qloushi has attributed to me regarding my suggestion to him that it might be helpful for him to discuss his long-standing concerns with a college counselor, as I have described here. All the other allegations made are false and have no basis whatsoever in fact.

Professor Joseph A. Woolcock

Woolcock tells his side of the story in the comment. But Frank Villon on the Now You Know blog isn't impressed:

Woolcock claims that his suggestion that the student seek therapy was taken out of context:
Based on the nature of the concerns and the feelings of high anxiety which he [the student] expressed, I encouraged him to visit one of the college counselors. I neither forced nor ordered Mr. al-Qloushi to see a counselor . . .
Frankly, mister Woolcock's statement is disingenuous. The student never claimed that he was "forced" or "ordered." That is a deliberate straw man set up by Woolcock. The student simply stated that Woolcock had suggested that he seek therapy. Of the two disparate versions of the story, I know which one rings more true to my ear. I'll give you a hint; it isn't the one who's trying to pull the Wool over my . . . ahem, eyes. And to the one who is trying to pull the Wool over our, er, uh eyes, I suggest he see a counselor. But I'm not forcing or ordering him.

While Ahmad's essay may have gotten poor marks in a fair evaluation, I'm with Frank. Woolcock's actions and statements smell.

Check the data and decide for yourself.

Thanks to reader Paul for the tip.

Not too late for a Valentine's gift!

2005-02-14T15:25:00.000-08:00

Forwarded by reader Brian:

A husband walks into Frederick's of Hollywood to purchase some sheer lingerie for his wife. He is shown several possibilities that range from $250 to $500 in price. The more sheer, the higher the price.

He opts for the most sheer item, pays the $500 and takes the lingerie home. He presents it to his wife and asks her to go upstairs, put it on and model it for him.

Upstairs, the wife thinks,... "I have an idea. It's so sheer that it might as well be nothing. I won't put it on, I'll do the modeling naked, return it tomorrow and keep the $500 refund for myself."

So she appears naked on the balcony and strikes a pose.

The husband says, "Good Lord! You'd think that for $500, they'd at least iron it!"

He never heard the shot.

Funeral Services are pending.

It's been around the block a few times, but it's still pretty funny!

Fighting sprit and the draft

2005-02-13T21:00:00.000-08:00

How should a peaceful society approach fighting a just war? Should we fight with gusto, relishing every victory and eager for more, or should we approach it grimly, with reluctance, and mourn every loss, innocent, friendly and enemy?

The answer is: both.

In the policy-making plane, when we are deliberating what to do, how to pay for it, etc., we absolutely need to be sober and grim about the momentous choice of going to war. But in the operational plane, the people, resources and activities involved in actually conducting the war, unwavering commitment is critical to good performance. It is the operational plane I will discuss in this post, and show that neither recent efforts to muzzle a politically incorrect General nor the idea of reinstating the draft are useful to enhancing the war effort.

The people actually fighting the war need an enormous amount of support, because their job is unlike anything we civilians will ever experience. Joe Galloway reprints a letter from an Army lieutenant fighting in Iraq in He Has Seen the Elephant (Hat tip, Daily Demarche):

"I've said it a thousand times - 'God, I hate this country.' I've heard it a million times more - 'This place sucks.' In quieter moments, I've heard more profound things: 'Sir, this is a thousand times worse than I ever thought it would be.' Or, 'My wife and Sgt. B's wife were good friends - I hope she's taking it well.'

"They say they're scared, and say they won't do this or that, but when it comes time to do it they can't let their buddies down, can't let their friends go outside the wire without them, because they know it isn't right for the team to go into the ballgame at any less than 100 percent.

Our troops need rock solid support, both for them individually and for their mission. They also need intelligent, competent and enthusiastic leadership. Anything less erodes morale, delays victory and gets people killed.

But it is easy to mistake unwavering support and enthusiastic leadership for bloodlust.

Carpe Bonum commenter Mark, proprietor of The Moderate Liberal blog, calls me out on a comment I made regarding Marine Corps Lieutenant General James Mattis:

Mattis: "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

CB: "Thank God we have people like General Mattis to do it."

Jesus: " But I say to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well." "...I say to you, love your enemy..."

Now, I'm nowhere nearly as liberal as Jesus and think in the real world we really do need to resist the evil doer. But do we really need to enjoy it?

A discussion of whether the Iraq war is just belongs in the policy-making plane, so I'm not going to get into it here. And if you don't believe Iraq is a just war, I'm sure I lost you on the first sentence of this post anyway. So, assuming we are fighting a just war in Iraq, do we need to enjoy it? Answer: no, but we need to maintain and maximize our troops fighting spirit any chance we get.

Based on comments from people who know him, such as this article in the Spectator, I am comfortable in the belief that General Mattis is not a sadist. No, what he is demonstrating is fighting spirit. It might be indistinguishable from enjoyment to an outsider, but it is different.

Which brings us to the draft. The Homespun Bloggers Homespun Symposium XII question is, "Do we have the right to insist and expect that the war against terror will not require a draft?"

The answer from a civil liberties point of view is no. In general, I see no right to avoid service when the country is in danger and the Congress has authorized a draft. But from a taxpayer value and government performance point of view, the answer is yes. As taxpayers, we have every right to insist and expect that with the money we are spending, the quality of the volunteers in the service, and the technology we are using, our government should be able to come up with a way to win the war without compulsory service.

Besides, adding conscripts to the force would severely reduce its efficiency, which was exactly Charlie Rangel's intention when he introduced his bill to reinstate the draft. It is possible to instill fighting spirit in conscripts -- Americans have done it numerous times. But it is much easier if we start with volunteers. It would also be much less efficient to try to get conscripts up to speed on the high technology we use. Rangel's bill was aptly defeated; even Rangel voted against it!

It is true that we are running a very high operational tempo with the force structure we have. The solution is not to reinstate the draft, but to use the people we have in uniform more efficiently or authorize the services to recruit more. The limiting factor is not the number of people willing to join the service, but the number of people the services have budget for. On the efficiency front, both the Marine Corps and Army are reorganizing to make more people available for ground combat while not increasing overall numbers.

In the operational plane, from service members in combat through Pentagon leadership to contractors supplying goods and serivces for the war effort, maintaining committment, fighting spirit and morale is key to victory. Enforcing political correctness on fighting generals and filling the ranks with conscripts would both detract from the effort.

George W. Bush, Mountain Biker

2005-02-13T16:56:00.000-08:00

I love this, Presidential hobby with a thrill:

Cancel the cozy days at Camp David. Put away the underused running shoes. When it comes to weekend enjoyment, all George W. Bush seems to need is some winding trails and a helmet.

And his mountain bike.
...

Besides burning calories at a 1,000-per-hour clip, cycling gives Bush an emotional rush that sometimes surpasses the one he got from running.

"He's obsessed with it," McKinnon said. "He now likes to do nothing but work out on his bike, and he does it with a frenzy that is reserved for people like Lance Armstrong."

Bush's face lights up at the mention of biking, a heart-thumping release from the stress of his job.
...

"There's an inherent danger in the mountain bike every time you get on it. It's one of those things where you have to concentrate on doing that at the moment - you can't be thinking about Middle East peace or the future of Social Security. In that sense, it's probably relaxing," said Lewis L. Gould, a retired University of Texas historian.

That appears to be the case for Bush, who isn't chatty during bike rides, save for what McKinnon calls "hoo-hahing" and "testosterone sort of towel-snapping remarks."

"He loves to do this because it gives him mental focus," McKinnon said, adding that "the more stressful things are ... the more he works out."

This article does a remarkable job of capturing the essence of mountain biking for fitness: the mental focus, stress release, danger, how it leaves the mind clear for the next work day, and how it can seem like an obsession.

The author of the article is a Baltimore Sun reporter named Julie Hirschfeld Davis. Based on a quick Google search, she seems to have good access to the White House. But I saw nothing in her background about mountain biking other than this one article.

To have written such an incisive article, she must be either a closet mountain biker, or a very talented reporter.

I wish I were on my bike right now!

(Hat tip, Mid-Atlantic Off Road Enthusiasts mailing list via International Mountain Biking Association mailing list member Dave Scull.)

Ash Wednesday with the kids

2005-02-11T00:34:00.000-08:00

One of the most moving moments in the Roman Catholic liturgical year is receiving ashes on Ash Wednesday and being admonished, "Remember you are dust and to dust you will return." Even though it is no surprise to hear, it is still bracing. It's a moment to bring back into focus what is truly important.

This year I took my two oldest kids (ages 11 and 8) to Ash Wednesday Mass. They wanted to know if there was a special name for every day of the week, like Fat Tuesday, Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, etc. So the mood was light-hearted.

After we got our ashes and while we were waiting for everyone else to finish, I took the opportunity to explain what the admonition means. I hadn't really talked to them about it very much before. It was eye-opening for them -- I doubt they have given much thought to such things.

But for me, the conversation was disturbing. It's one thing to hear about myself returning to dust, but it's not so pleasant to think of my kids doing the same.

So, what's been going on?

2005-02-08T22:34:00.000-08:00

It's been pretty dang slow blogging over here on Carpe Bonum for the last couple of weeks. Sorry about that, dear readers, but the real world intruded there for a little while. So what's been going on?

How about some hate filled stupidity from a lefty professor? I saw this dude on a cable news show. It looked like he was throughly enjoying the attention. Too bad.

There was the awesome and inspiring election in Iraq. Be sure to click through the link for tons of underreported good news from Iraq, not just the election. And also see this great photo essay from AlphaPatriot.

And we had a great State of the Union address. But someone named Janeane Garofalo wasn't impressed. (I can't quite place her either -- I think she's some kind of radio person...)

A kerfuffle erupted over CNN executive Eason Jordan's accusation that American soldiers are intentionally targeting and killing reporters in Iraq. Remember Jordan? He's the one who admitted that his network CNN for years covered up news of Saddam's atrocities in order to maintain access to the country. There's even a new blog devoted to the topic, Easongate.com (hat tip Powerpundit).

Neil Prakash and Chris Boggiano posted two new episodes in the superb Fallujah series on the Armor Geddon blog. (Complete series index updated.)

And then there was the bizarre flamefest over a "stolen" Instalanche by a 13 year old blogger. Harsh, dude. (Hat tip, Joe Gandelman, posting on Dean's world.)

Finally, I've got to mention General Mattis. The press is trying to give him the business over some things he said, such as:

"Actually it's quite fun to fight 'em, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling," said Mattis.

"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil," Mattis said during a panel discussion. "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

(Hat tip, Chester via Chrenkoff)

Here's Carpe Bonum's take: Raving homicidal brainwashed lunatics who dream of heavenly rewards for comitting atrocities such as shooting fleeing children, flying planes into buildings or blowing up bars full of drunken toursits need to be killed. Thank God we have people like General Mattis to do it. Semper fi.

Armor Geddon's Fallujah series index

2005-02-06T14:56:00.000-08:00

Silver Star winner Neil Prakash is posting a superb series telling his story of the battle of Fallujah. Here is a complete index.

Many thanks to Neil and his men for their service.

(BTW, warning, language.)

UPDATE: Fixed broken link on "10 November: For S__ts and Giggles."
UPDATE 2: Added "Mewborn, Crank It Up" link.
UPDATE 3: Added "CB: 8 November" link.
UPDATE 4: Added "12 November: Caught In The Kill Zone" link.
UPDATE 5: Fixed "CB: 8 November" link.

Carpe Bonum lives!

2005-02-01T23:19:00.000-08:00

Thank you to the many hundreds of you loyal Carpe Bonum readers who have emailed, desperate to know where Carpe Bonum has gone. Fear not, we are still alive and well, but have gotten real busy in the real world. Expect more pithy postings on Carpe Bonum in the near future.

In the meantime, go check out Neil Prakash's account of election day in Iraq here: SPC ROBY: 1, IED: 1

The spring just laid there in the dirt just a few feet from me. I looked down at my left shoulder and grabbed the digital camera that was lanyarded to my D-ring on my body armor. I pressed my face against the window of my door to get a better look.

BOOOOOOOOM

Also, check out this jaw dropping article from columnist Mark Brown (hat tip, reader Carolyn): What if Bush has been right about Iraq all along?

Maybe the United States really can establish a peaceable democratic government in Iraq, and if so, that would be worth something.

Gee, Mark, ya think?

Iraqi election coverage

2005-01-30T07:17:00.000-08:00

Here's a quick snapshot of the coverage around 7 AM here on the Left Coast:

CNN: Flag draped coffins and father of KIA saying it was all about the WMD.
Fox: Thousands from Abu Ghraib region walked 13 miles to vote.
MSNBC: Detroit polling place on south side of city even though most Iraqi expats live in the north.
CNN: Balad-bound British C-130 crashes
Today (NBC): Beginning of a long process, another election next year
CNN: 3 dead in Hillah bus explosion. Continuing violence. Historic election.
Fox: One polling station in Baghdad steady flow started at 9 AM. Turnout estimated at 72%. Voters wanted to vote to defeat terrorists. Strong turnout in some areas of Mosul
CNN (Anderson Cooper from Baghdad): Historic day in Iraq. No one complaining about hour wait to vote. "Heard that over and over again." "Truly an extraordinary day." "Yes there were attacks...but the story today is people turning out in great numbers." Ink on fingers "a symbol of pride."
CNN (Suzanne Malveaux): Bush believes this is a great day for democracy. Low expectations. Rice hitting the airwaves. Preemptive strike: Dr. Rice believed mechanisms will be in place to include Sunnis.
MSNBC (Talking head general): Violence far lower than expected. Today an overall success. Successful at putting Iraqi face on poll security, but no mistaking a lot of American military presence.
ABC: TV Church service
CBS: Blues Clues

I think Cooper missed the memo!

Young Republican interview

2005-01-28T00:04:00.000-08:00

Many of you, dear readers, are interested in politics, else you wouldn't read Carpe Bonum. I thought you might like to get some inside scoop on what it is like to do politics for a living in Washington, DC.

Mr. P is a political appointee in a Bush Administration Cabinet department. He works on important policy matters and frequently meets with the Secretary. He was kind enough to answer a few questions for Carpe Bonum.

Tell us a little about yourself: age, marital status, where you live, etc.

I am 27 years old and live with my girlfriend in Alexandria, VA.

What do you do for entertainment?

On most evenings my entertainment is limited to the queue of programs in TiVo®, particularly CSI, NYPD, Lost, Law & Order, West Wing, Joan of Arcadia, and Good Eats. I also make time for reading, live theatre, concerts (Recently: Muse), movies, and fine dining.

Aren't you a little young to be a Republican?

Not really. Age is not as big a determinant as other factors, and 45% of 18-29 year old voters voted to reelect President Bush. I fit the demographic pattern for males, Caucasians, my income bracket, people who work full-time jobs, and political conservatives. The most important factor that is rarely tracked by statisticians is upbringing.

Why are you a conservative? How did your political views develop?

I am not sure exactly how or when my political views developed. I was first aware of my political identity when I joined a debate society in high school and the other students labeled me a conservative Republican. Mom and Dad rarely expressed their partisan affiliation but we did discuss contemporary issues, such as taxation, national defense, and affirmative action. Conservative ideas have always made most sense to me.

What was your college education like?

My college education was not typical. I began as an acting student at the University of Illinois, but graduated with a BA in Political Science from the University of San Diego after nearly seven years of study. I stayed busy during college. I interned with San Diego Congressman Brian Bilbray, studied at Oxford University for two terms, studied in Mexico to observe the presidential election won by Vicente Fox, and worked full-time at a restaurant.

How did you get involved in the Bush Administration?

Landing my job in the Bush Administration was serendipitous.

I decided that it would be fun to spend my winter break volunteering for the 2001 Presidential Inaugural Committee (PIC) in Washington, DC, so I began calling their offices as soon as the election was concluded. After a number of attempts, I reached a woman who advised me to show up at the headquarters the day after Christmas at 7:30 am to help manage the volunteer office. I immediately bought a plane ticket and headed east.

As Deputy Volunteer Coordinator, I staffed PIC offices over the next three weeks. The head of President-elect Bush’s motorcade arrived in my office 10 days before the inauguration demanding volunteers because two had not shown up. By then, all of the PIC offices were fully staffed and I had sent all of our excess volunteers home, so I decided to fill one of the motorcade slots myself. I spent the next 10 days driving Bush’s senior staff van to meetings and inaugural events around town.

After the inauguration, I returned to San Diego and prepared to graduate but within a couple days the head of the motorcade called me and invited me back to Washington, DC, to interview in the administration.

Ever met any famous political figures? What are they like?

I have met many famous political figures. When first meeting political figures they are almost always charming; politicians succeed by making good first impressions. For instance, I had a fairly long conversation with Senator Kennedy at an event. He knew that I worked in the Bush administration and so he studiously avoided politics. He was engaged, insightful and funny. Except in rare moments, most horror stories concerning political figures come from people who know them well. Many politicians are abusive to their staffs.

I find the behavior of famous political figures’ staffs to be more variable and much more interesting. The worst I have ever experienced was Senator Clinton’s staff. I cannot share the details but I had to work closely with her staff at an event and I found several of them to be hostile, rude, abusive and manipulative.

Who is the most influential person no one has ever heard of?

I will answer a slightly different question: “Who is the most influential person no one outside ‘the Beltway’ has ever heard of?”

John D. Graham is the Administrator of the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). According to the OIRA website, Dr. Graham’s responsibilities include “coordination of regulatory review, paperwork reduction, statistical policy and information policy in the Federal government.” This may not sound like much but it means that Dr. Graham must approve every regulation that is implemented by the federal government. He has tremendous power to sculpt regulatory policy and control the burdens that the government imposes upon the American public.

I find that he is well-known in Washington, DC, but virtually unknown around the country.

Don't you agree it's a bit unmanly to like cats?

I think it is unmanly to ask leading questions. But to answer the question, it is manly, and quintessentially American, to maximize the utility of all things in nature including household pets. I may prefer dogs, but I have learned to appreciate the unique companionship of cats.

Yeowch. Good one, P! I'm going to need a Band-Aid for those claw marks on my cheek...

Thanks for your answers, and your public service.

Laughed so hard I cried

2005-01-27T02:01:00.000-08:00

Some Blimps Are Better Off Dead:

The blimp, which was up until this moment a fun toy, here embarked on a career of evil. Using the artificial convection of my central heating, the blimp stealthily departed my office. It moved silently through the living and drifted to the staircase.

I need a tissue.

Hat tip, Catscape.

Is my dog a Whig or a Green?

2005-01-27T00:49:00.000-08:00

Thanks to the Homespun Bloggers, I have to wonder, is my dog a Whig or a Green?

On the one hand, he can be a bit rebellious like a Whig, but in the end he knuckles under to his King. (Guess who that is...that's right)

On the other hand he loves nature, the outdoors and furry little animals. Plus, he has absolutely no concept of economics. So he is a lot like a Green. But he catches and eats his furry little friends, and he likes people a lot more than any Green ever would.

So I must conclude he is a Republican.

RIP Challenger crew

2005-01-26T22:57:00.000-08:00

Dr. Sanity reminds us that Friday January 28, 2005 is the ninteenth anniversary of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. She was the Crew Surgeon for Mission 51-L, and writes about that day in Challenger - A Flight Surgeon Remembers:

In Launch Control, there was a great deal of buzz about the temperature. The countdown was proceeding, but there had been ice spotted on the external tank, and crews were sent out to check it out. All of us there (I was at the Surgeon's console, which monitored crew health, and directed emergency medical operations in the case of a catastrophic event on the launchpad, or for an RTLS (return to launch site) abort. We joked and talked among ourselves, commenting on the crew talking (we were one of the few consoles that monitored the crew chitchat in the Shuttle before launch).
...
My awe was short-lived as we noticed an anomoly. Something seemed to have gone wrong with the SRBs (solid rocket boosters) and they detached from the ET (external tank) too soon. There seemed to be a big explosion, but none of us were certain what might have happened. I swung into action, because it seemed that we must be in an RTLS situation. I made a few commands to my emergency team, who were outside in ambulances, as I continued to watch the growing cloud of the explosion, waiting for the Challenger to appear from behind it heading back to the landing site, not far away. I waited and waited. The orbiter did not appear. I felt a momentary confusion, and then I think all the blood must have rushed out of my head as I realized what it meant. I knew they must have been killed. All of them. I had to hold onto the console for support. All I could think of was oh my God, oh my God.
...
It has been 19 years since that cold morning changed me forever. When Columbia disintegrated on reentry, killing all the crew in 2003, many of my old friends called me to tell me that I had predicted that NASA would have another preventable tragedy. I would like to think that we learned something from the space missions we have lost--Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia -- but I fear that NASA has learned little.

Click through and read the whole thing. It is well-written and tragic.

On January 28, 1986, I was a college Sophomore on a cooperative education assignment at IBM Federal Systems Division in Manassas, Virginia. When I got the job, I was awed to be working for such a prestigious company. For most of my college career I alternated six months at IBM and six months at school.

Many of the engineers I worked with had come from another IBM location (I think it was Bethesda, Maryland). In Bethesda, they had worked on software for the AP-101 onboard mission computer for the Space Shuttle. As you can imagine, software development for the Space Shuttle was and is very serious business, and that group was a key player in the devleopment of Carnegie-Mellon's Software Capability Maturity Model. As news of the disaster spread, shock settled over the office. Many of my colleagues at the time spent years working on AP-101 software and had friends in the space program. The horrifying question was, "Did our code kill the crew?"

In time we learned the disaster had nothing to do with the AP-101, and we settled back into our normal office routine.

I haven't thought about that day in a while. Thanks, Dr. Sanity, for the reminder.

Rest in peace Francis "Dick" Scobee, Michael J. Smith, Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, Gregory Jarvis, Judith Resnik, and Christa Corrigan McAuliffe.

Carpe Bonum in Carnival of the Vanities

2005-01-26T19:56:00.000-08:00

Carpe Bonum's "Journalism is no longer a profession" appears in this week's Carnival of the Vanities, hosted by the Raving Athiest. You know, one of the great things about America is how we tolerate others even if they have differing beliefs. And how.

Thanks to the Raver for the link.

A good reason to watch 24

2005-01-25T13:53:00.000-08:00

See this post from Michelle Malkin for a good reason to watch 24 on Fox. (Hat tip: AlphaPatriot)

Do not click through!

2005-01-25T09:13:00.000-08:00

This time I really mean it. Do not click through this link. (Hat tip: Sharp as a Marble, damn him)

Someone figures it out!

2005-01-25T09:00:00.000-08:00

In his Bonfire of the Vanities post this week, Robb Allen reveals the meaning of "Carpe Bonum:"

Carpe Bonum (Latin for "Damn this post sucks!") tries to coin a new word. Utter failure ensues.

Click through and check out Robb's Sharp as a Marble blog. It's funny and has a great design.

Left advocates for totalitarianism and terrorism

2005-01-25T03:02:00.000-08:00

BlogCritic commenter Alienboy quotes for us a quintessential example of Media Induced Ignorance (comment number 19 in the linked post). It is a Gary Younge piece in the virulently anti-American Guardian, and is available here.

In Younge's universe, terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay are "innocent people." Castro dominated totalitarian Cuba "lives in a stable mixture of the imperfect and the impressive." And, as counted by the "independent" Iraq Body Count, murders committed by terrorists in Iraq are America's fault.

Yes, as Younge points out, there is still some realpolitik going on in Uzbekistan and many other places. So what? We can't do everything in all places at the same time. And if we tried, the Guardian would surely vilify us even more. Freedom for everyone is the goal, but it will take time.

There was a time when the Left believed in such things. But due to their unrecognizably distorted view of the world, they advocate for totalitarianism and terrorism instead.

Carpe Bonum a BlogCritic

2005-01-25T02:54:00.000-08:00

Without comment on the reasons they may have had for making such a dubious choice, Carpe Bonum hereby announces our inclusion as a BlogCritics author. BlogCritics is, "A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics and technology - updated continuously." Check them out.

And take a look at the comment thread of our first post. That's a lot of action!

Thanks to master BlogCritic Eric Olsen for the opportunity.

Carson retrospective on Leno

2005-01-25T02:10:00.000-08:00

Jay Leno did a very nice Johnny Carson retrospective Monday night. He had Ed McMahon, Don Rickles, Bob Newhart, Drew Carey and K.D. Lang on the show. And he showed lots of great clips.

Carson must have been pretty important, because they actually bumped Paris Hilton for the retrospective. (That's irony, people.)

If you've got it sitting in your TiVo, watch it.

RIP, Johnny.

Reagan, Russia, Bush and Iran

2005-01-25T01:27:00.000-08:00

There is a thrilling parallel between Iran in the 2000's and Russia in the 1980's.

In 1982, President Reagan made a stirring speech about freedom and democracy to the British Parliament:

What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term -- the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.

The next year he dared to refer to the Soviet Union as an "evil empire:"

So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride -- the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

No one in the West knew it at the time, but news of Reagan's resolve electrified dissidents in the Gulag. Natan Sharansky described the effect in an interview in the Weekly Standard (hat tip: Powerline):

Were there any particular Reagan moments that you can recall being sources of strength or encouragement to you and your colleagues?

I have to laugh. People who take freedom for granted, Ronald Reagan for granted, always ask such questions. Of course! It was the great brilliant moment when we learned that Ronald Reagan had proclaimed the Soviet Union an Evil Empire before the entire world. There was a long list of all the Western leaders who had lined up to condemn the evil Reagan for daring to call the great Soviet Union an evil empire right next to the front-page story about this dangerous, terrible man who wanted to take the world back to the dark days of the Cold War. This was the moment. It was the brightest, most glorious day. Finally a spade had been called a spade. Finally, Orwell's Newspeak was dead.

Last week in his inaugural address, President Bush laid out the American vision for securing our own liberty by expanding liberty in the world:

Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world:

All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.

Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country.

Thanks to the Internet, we don't need to wait decades to find out the effect of the President's speech on dissidents in Iran. The prodigiously named Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran reports (via Andrew Sullivan via Pejmanesque via Instapundit):

The speech and its package of hope have been, since late yesterday night and this morning, the main topics of most Iranians' conversations during their familial and friendly gatherings, in the collective taxis and buses, as well as, among groups of young Iranians who gather outside the cities on the Fridays.

Many were seen showing the " V " sign or their raised fists. Talks were focused on steps that need to be taken in order to use the first time ever favorable International condition.

Many Iranians, who were looking for the World's super power firm moral support and financial aid to credible secularist opposition groups, are now becoming sure that Mr. Bush's agenda is indeed to help them to gain Freedom, Secularity and Democracy.

Since the 9/11 attacks, we've set Afganistan and Iraq on the path to freedom and we strongly supported the successful Democracy movement in Ukraine.

As long as we stay strong in the President's resolve that, "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands," the Iranian students' excitement and hope will not be in vain. And decades from now it will be these dissidents of the 2000's who look back fondly on another American President's brilliant moment of strength and encouragement.

UPDATE: John Dunshee also notes the Reagan parallel.

Don't do it

2005-01-24T21:56:00.000-08:00

Don't click through the link in this post on Dr. Sanity. You've been warned.

Watcher's Council qualification post

2005-01-23T22:47:00.000-08:00

As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting Carpe Bonum's post Journalism no longer a profession for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.

Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.

The Council has spoken

2005-01-23T14:27:00.000-08:00

In a refreshing moment of blogospheric lucidity, Carpe Bonum's WMD hunt fizzles post has tied for last place in the most recent Watcher's Council vote. Winning posts were the excellent WMD and Death By Chocolate Cake by Dr. Sanity and Welcome Neighbor! by Varifrank.

It was truly an honor to be nominated, and a relief to see that the blogosphere is not completely insane all of the time.

Excellent Iraqi PSA

2005-01-23T08:16:00.000-08:00

Someone's doing something right in the Iraqi Information Ministry. Check out this election public service announcement and tell me it doesn't make the hair on your arms stand up. (Hat tip: The Adventures of Chester via The Fourth Rail via Dr. Sanity)

Journalism no longer a profession

2005-01-23T01:05:00.000-08:00

One of the most vexing questions from one of my Philosophy professors was, "Why behave morally?" Simple answers like, "So I can go to Heaven," or "Because God wants me to," were respected, but we were challenged to find a purely secular justification. I never did.

Hmm.

But a much simpler question is, "Why follow my profession's code of ethics?" The answer is: so you are trusted to serve your customers and they continue to patronize you. Members of the mainstream media, by rampantly disregarding their own code of ethics, are killing journalism as a profession.

Wheras morality involves general, universal principles of right and wrong, codes of ethics offer specific behaviorial guidance to specific groups, usually professions. It seems like everybody has a code of ethics: librarians, psychologists, realtors, social workers, you name it.

A profession's code of ethics tells the world what to expect from its members. Among other things, codes are crafted to align the profession's members' interests with its customers'. For exmple, the American Medical Association's Principles of Medical Ethics include:

I. A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.
...
IV. A physician shall respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and shall safeguard patient confidences and privacy within the constraints of the law.

Pretty good stuff. If I am reasonably confident that the AMA enforces this code, I can be pretty comfortable going to a doctor. If not, maybe I won't.

Even journalists have a code of ethics. The Society of Professional Jounalists Code of Ethics seems pretty reasonable. But it contains some absolute howlers to those of us who have been following media bias for any length of time. For example, the code says "Journalists should:"

Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.

I guess the journalists cheering Norman Mailer's anti-Bush smears at Harvard's 2004 Nieman Conference on Narrative Journalism missed that one (hat tip, A Sailor in the Desert).

Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
Admit mistakes and correct them promptly

It seems Dan Rather has some serious 'splaining to do.

Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.

Obviously, these were completely ignored in ABC's disgusting search for and use of a service member's funeral as a counterpoint to President Bush's inaugural.

So what is the consequence of a profession not enforcing its own code of ethics?

Imagine doctors rampantly and blatantly breaking the AMA's code of ethics. Imagine patients receiving shoddy treatment, poor medical care, being treated with contempt and their medical information being publicly distributed. And imagine that not only are the doctors involved not punished, but they are cheered and awarded honors. In this scenario, instead of being respected as competent caregivers, doctors would be seen as arrogant, untrustworthy quacks. Few people would go to them. And medicine, no longer a profession, would wither and die.

The latest Gallup Poll shows that less than a quarter of the population rates journalists "very high" or "high" on honesty and ethical standards (hat tip, Brij Singh). That doesn't bode well for the future of the profesion of journalism. But since they refuse to enforce their own code of ethics, journalists have only themselves to blame.

(There is more information on the ABC incident at Captain's Quarters and Mudville Gazette)

It was all about the WMD stockpile?

2005-01-21T14:31:00.000-08:00

The smirking continues about our not finding a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Attempting to psychoanalyze Bush voters, Atrios says:

We went to war with Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. In the aftermath of 9/11 a lot of otherwise semi-sensible people were too easily led down the path of supporting the endeavor. When weapons were not found, ex post it became a humanitarian mission about spreading freeance.

As I documented earlier, the administration was clear that there were many reasons for removing Saddam by force in addition to an Iraqi WMD stockpile.

Now, let's take a look at why Congress authorized force. The resolution passed by both houses was H. J. Res. 114, Joint Resolution To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. The resolution contains 23 "Wheras" paragraphs. In a Congressional resolution, the "Wheras" paragraphs supply historical background and reasoning behind the resolution. In HJ Res 114, the "Wheras" paragraphs break down as follows (sum exceeds 23 since some paragraphs have multiple categories):

12 General information or history (Kuwait invasion/liberation, 9/11 attacks, etc.)
6 Previous acts of Congress (most double categorized as historical)
5 Findings of Iraq's support for or harboring of terrorists
3 Findings of Iraqi violations of cease fire agreements or UN Security Council Resolutions, many of which were concerned with humanitarian issues
3 Findings of Iraqi WMD use or capability (but not currently existing stockpiles of WMDs), all of which were combined with concerns about Iraq's connection to terrorists
1 Mention of direct Iraqi attacks on American and Coalition forces enforcing UN-mandated no-fly zones
1 Finding that Iraq posessed a stockpile of WMDs

Yes, the stockpile justification got the most airtime in the media, especially when the stockpile didn't turn up right away after the war. But it was hardly the only reason. And humanitarian concerns were hardly added "ex post."

Some of our friends on the left are fond of calling themselves members of the "reality-based community" (a snark at President Bush's Faith-Based Community Initiatives). But one wonders how they can be "reality-based" when they are so unfamiliar with the record?

(To find lots more information about the resolution, go to the Library of Congress Thomas Search page, select the Summary and Bill Number radio buttons, type "hj res 114 eh" in the search box, select 107th Congress and click Search.)

Bush promotes corruption, tramples states' rights, oh my!

2005-01-21T08:50:00.000-08:00

It has been brought to Carpe Bonum's attention that in an incident involving New Jersey highway funds, the President is violating our moral and political principles. Apparently he has come down on the side of political corruption and against states' rights. Is it necessary for us to start an impeachment movement? Let's take a look.

Is making political contributions inherently corrupting?

A kerfuffle is brewing over a new contracting rule in New Jersey. In a purported effort to reduce New Jersey's "pay-to-play" system, disgraced Governor Jim McGreevey issued an executive order preventing the award of contracts above $17,500 to any firm that had contributed more than $300 to county or state parties or Gubnatorial candidates within the previous 18 months. McGreevey's executive order apparently runs afoul of federal contracting rules, so the Federal Highway Administration has cut off highway funds to New Jersey.

The New Jersey League of Municipalities has published a Q&A on the rule here.

Blogger Nathan Newman summarizes the situation thusly: Bush Admin Promotes Corruption in NJ. How subtle.

For sake of argument, let's say McGreevey's rule has the purest intent. If not for the intervention of the evil Bush Administration, would it solve any corruption problems in New Jersey? If our 30-plus year post-Watergate history of campaign finance reform is any guide, we must be highly doubtful. Isn't it more likely this rule will merely push the contributions under the table, or induce contributors to use "independent" groups to launder their contributions?

We agree that campaign money can be a corrupting influence. But instead of driving contributions underground, we favor lifting all restrictions on campaign contributions, but adding the requirement of full and immediate disclosure. If a politician's actions stray from his consitiuents' interests in favor of his contributors', the voters will know about it and respond. Politicians will regulate themselves, not accepting contributions that give the appearance of corruption, lest their political opponents use the contributions as fodder in the next campaign.

But we wonder about the McGreevey's and Newman's intent. Perhaps the intent is pure, but what if the real intent is to tilt the political playing field? Let's do a thought exercise a la the Moderate Liberal's "What If Clinton Did This" meme. Where is the executive order preventing unions from working jobs if they make political contributions? Where is the executive order preventing environmental groups from sitting on boards and comissions if they make political contributions? Would McGreevey and Newman support those?

We agree that corrupt politicians should be held accountable. But we do not support a cynical one-sided parting shot from a partisan governor being chased out of office due to his own corruption.

Is Bush's Federal Highway Administration trampling states' rights?

Newman also suggests the FHA action is a states-rights issue. Shouldn't a good conservative break with the President for violating this principle? We at Carpe Bonum clearly see that decentralized authority works better than centralized. The lower the decision making is pushed, the more effective it will be. Thus states and localities should be free to make their own contracting rules as they see fit.

But that is not the system we have for federal highway funding. There are myriad rules associated with this funding. An administration does not have leeway to simply ignore the rules it does not agree with. So we support changing the system. Let's switch to a block grant system, where good results are rewarded with more grants, and federal rule makers do not micromanage how the funds are spent.

The same principle applies to many areas of federal funding: education, public safety, business development, etc. As a states' rights advocate, does Newman support converting federal funding from micromanagement to block grants?

Yes, we should see the New Jersey situation as indicative of serious problems. Let's solve them with campaign finance disclosure and block grants.

And there is no need at this time to to impeach the President. What a relief.

UPDATE: Also noted by Kos.

Wise Frenchman sighted!

2005-01-20T16:01:00.000-08:00

Diploblogger NewSisyphus reports encountering a French crepe-maker who seems to have avoided Media Induced Ignorance:

We idly chatted in FSI French for a bit, when, looking a bit nervous, he suddenly asked, "You are Americans?"

We steeled ourselves for the onslaught that would come. At the very least we would get a sad-toned explanation about how lamentable it was that our good friends the Americans had lost their collective minds; at worst, we would be called war-mongers and baby-killers. All we wanted was crepes.

"Yes," we said proudly. We don't have time for those lame-asses (or I suppose I should say "lame-arses") who play the Pretend to Be Canadian Game abroad. If we were going to get it, we were going to get it, but we weren't about to hide who we were, sullen crepe makers be damned.

"Well," he said in heavily-accented basic English,"I thought so. I want to tell you something, but the words I do not know too good, so please excuse if I say it wrong."

"No, it's fine. We understand you well. Go ahead."

"Well, it's just....I want to tell you...." He looked around furtively, quickly.

"What?"

Click through for the money quote, and a charming story of a too-short visit to Paris.

Carpe Bonum in the Bonfire again

2005-01-20T11:04:00.000-08:00

This week's Bonfire of the Vanities is up on the sortapundit blog. In a brief moment of blogospheric lucidity, Carpe Bonum's attempt to be an amateur university essay grader is ruthlessly exposed.

Thanks to Keith for the link.

Predictions for Iraqi elections

2005-01-20T01:43:00.000-08:00

This week's Homespun Bloggers Symposium question is:

What are your predictions for the elections in Iraq? Will there be violence? What will the government look like? Will it be legitimate, liberal, and capable of accomplishing anything? And what effect will the election have on the U.S.?

Here is Carpe Bonum's response.

There will continue to be more bombings and other violence, including on election day itself. This will be reported prominently by the media. For example: Series of Bombings Rock Baghdad, Killing at Least 12.

The clamor to delay the elections will grow. Nevertheless, preparations will continue steadily. Where this is reported at all, the spin will be on how difficult it all is, as in this gem from the New York Times:

From training as many as 200,000 poll workers to tabulating the choices of about 14 million eligible voters, the logistical challenges of organizing fair elections in an unstable country that has not voted freely since the 1950's have been lost in the wash of violence and political strife. Election workers are days away from putting this gigantic machine to the test in one of the most forbidding challenges to democratic ingenuity.

Wow. Sounds hard.

Go to this post on Iraq the Model and click through to see pictures of campaign posters plastered around Baghdad. Definitely click image number one in which you can see a couple of posters where the candidate is using an American flag as a symbol! These will never, ever be printed by mainstream media.

Some areas actually will not vote due to instability. This will be reported as the complete failure of democracy in Iraq.

Iraqis will be enthusiastic about voting but resigned to the risk inherent in doing so. As in Afganistan, many Iraqis will prepare themselves for death before they go to the polls. This bravery will not be reported.

There will be some voting problems: missing ballot boxes, people not able to vote, fraud (sound familiar?). This will be reported as the complete failure of democracy in Iraq.

Most seats in the National Assembly and local provincial councils will in fact be filled. But this will be reported as the result of a tainted, American-run election. Media elites will wonder aloud if the results are legitimate.

The Assembly and councils will be sworn-in and seated, a landmark event in Arab history. People whose only source of news is the mainstream media will barely notice.

The Assembly will elect Allawi President and set to work on a constitution. It will be several years before we know what kind of government will emerge. Every setback, miscue and scandal will be reported as, you guessed it, the complete failure of democracy in Iraq.

In the US, the effect will be subtle. Those of us who get our news despite the mainstream media (not from the mainstream media) will see and be gratified by the fitful progress of democracy in Iraq. And the media's failure to report important facts about democracy in Iraq will further erode its credibility.

Militarily, there will be little near term effect in terms of reducing troop count in theater. Any improvements in security or handovers of responsibility to Iraqi units will be offset by the need to build reserves for action against Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia. (But that's another post.)

Be sure to read the other responses from Therapy Sessions, Dagney's Rant, Bunker Mulligan and Considerettes.

AerophotoEV-DOmoblogging 2

2005-01-19T16:50:00.000-08:00

AerophotoEV-DOmoblogging 2!

UPDATE: Here's a translation: A photograph from inside an airplane uploaded to a blog over a mobile 1x EV-DO network, aerophotoEV-DOmoblogging. Simple!

AerophotoEV-DOmoblogging

2005-01-19T16:49:00.000-08:00

AerophotoEV-DOmoblogging!

New York Times smears Iraq the Model bloggers

2005-01-19T08:31:00.000-08:00

Sarah Boxer has written a loathsome piece in the New York Times about blogging Iraqi brothers, Omar, Mohammed, and Ali. Arthur Chrenkoff has a nice roundup of the blogospheric reaction (hat tip Instapundit).

Be sure to check out the blogs in question, Iraq the Model and Free Iraqi.

Awesome!

2005-01-18T15:16:00.000-08:00

If you have the means, I highly recommend a visit to the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center. It's full of big, small, beautiful, ugly, restored and tattered airplanes.

Highlights:

Glistening chrome colored art-deco Boeing 307 Stratoliner (just behind the Concorde in the linked photo)
The Dash 80, Boeing's 707 prototype (the yellow and red airplane behind the Concorde)
Bob Hoover's little green twin he used to fly deadstick demonstrations with (seen just in front of the Concorde's left wing)
The Enola Gay
The Gossamer Albatross
The Space Shuttle Enterprise
An impressive array of spacecraft, missiles, rocket engines, jet engines and piston engines
An IMAX theater
Several simulator rides
Much much more

Go. See it all.

Carpe Bonum now a Homespun Blog

2005-01-17T11:34:00.000-08:00

In another stunning lapse of blogospheric judgement, Carpe Bonum has been accepted as a Homespun Blogger. Carpe Bonum appreciates being included, but wonders what form of madness has gripped the blogosphere. We are sure nothing good will come of it.

Click here to see what the Homespun Blogs are all about.

Safire: The Depressed Press

2005-01-17T11:06:00.000-08:00

William Safire has an interesting piece today, The Depressed Press:

America's quality media are now wading through the Slough of Despond. Our self-flagellation, handwringing and narcissism threaten our mission to act as counterweight to government power.

Hear the wailing: The bloggers are coming! The Bible-thumpers are cursing our secular inhumanism! The plumber judges are plugging our leaks! The Yahoo president ducks our questions and giggles at our gaffes! News is slyly slanted as bias rears its head!

Cheer up. Despite the recent lapses at CBS and previous mishaps at The Times and USA Today, here's why mainstream journalism has a future.

Read the whole thing. (Hat tip, reader Steven)

Watcher of Weasels qualification post

2005-01-17T04:56:00.000-08:00

As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around...

Per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting Carpe Bonum post WMD hunt fizzles -- War on Terror strategy sound for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.

Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.

Chrenkoff's Good News From Iraq, Part 19 posted

2005-01-16T21:54:00.000-08:00

Arthur Chrenkoff's 19th fortnightly edition of good news from Iraq is up. Route around the biased nabobs of the mainstream media. Click through and read it.

Welcome to America, Ahmad Al-Qloushi

2005-01-16T13:13:00.000-08:00

One of the most delightful things about living in the United States is meeting immigrants who love this country. It opens my eyes like like nothing else to some of the things that are easy to take for granted.

One day a colleague and I were discussing the disgusting revenge-motivated murder of a Sikh shortly after 9/11. He of course agreed the murder was despicable. But he commented that the United States was the most tolerant country he had ever lived in, as compared to the sectarian violence he had seen elsewhere. It was a nice comment.

Today I read the story of Ahmad Al-Qloushi, a 17 year old Kuwaiti student at Foothills College in Los Altos, CA. Here is what he thinks about the United States:

I love this country for the freedom it provides and for rescuing Kuwait’s liberty in the first Gulf War. 12 Years later, America once again has selflessly protected my country and my people by removing Saddam Hussein.

That kind of stuff warms my heart.

All is not well for Ahmad, though. As reported by the Washington Times, it seems he is having trouble with his “Introduction to American Government and Politics" professor, Joseph A. Woolcock:

A 17-year-old Kuwaiti student whose uncles were kidnapped and tortured by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's invaders more than a decade ago said his California college political science professor failed him for praising the United States in a final-exam essay last month.

Ahmad says,

Professor Woolcock verbally attacked me and my essay. He told me, “Your views are irrational.” He called me naïve for believing in the greatness of this country, and told me "America is not God's gift to the world." Then he upped the stakes and said "You need regular psychotherapy."

Now of course, as Paul at Wizbang points out, all we have to go on at this point is Ahmad's word. Woolcock has not told his side of the story. Indeed, maybe it was just a lousy essay and deserved a failing grade.

Well I found the essay online and read it myself. Here's a sample:

[T]he great men of America like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson...paved the way for what America is today the country of opportunity and freedom. These men were men of nationalism and men who took great pride in formulating what is today the greatest country in the world and thank god that it is so. Because of America the world is free. America vanquished Nazi Germany. America helped establish the great nation of Israel a democratic society in a troubled region. America freed Japan and South Korea. America freed Kuwait and now is currently in a fight to free Iraq and its 25,000,000 residents and vanquish the tyranny and monstrosity of Saddam Hussein. The US constitution and the Founding Fathers helped build the foundation to which all this was established.

Great stuff, if I say so myself. If I were grading the essay, I would pick a few nits, such as the unnecessary use of all caps for emphasis, and a couple of sentence structure problems. But it certainly does not rate a failing grade.

Read it and decide for yourself.

And Ahmad, please accept my welcome to America. The academic America-haters around you are an influential but tiny minority. Don't let them grind you down.

UPDATE: On the other hand, Steven Taylor at Poliblog, a real life Political Science professor and no Moonbat, gives Ahmad's essay a D. I still like it, but what do I know?

UPDATE 2, February 17: More than a month after this item was originally posted, I am now seeing lots of search engine hits on this page. Interesting, I wonder why this is. If you got here via search engine, drop me a line and let me know the reason for the interest. You might also want to link to a more recent posting on Carpe Bonum that links to Woolcock's response.

What's it like over there

2005-01-15T18:02:00.000-08:00

Jesse at Doubly Sure wonders what it's really like over there in Iraq and quotes some gloomy snippets. It's a good epistemological question to wonder what sources we can rely on to form our world view. For an extensive review of the influence of the media, see Lieutenant Colonel Tim Ryan's essay as published by Blackfive.

Why America is safe now?

2005-01-15T13:25:00.000-08:00

Ali the Free Iraqi has a fascinating post today entitled Why America is safe now.

Ali's theory is that another attack on US soil would give the US political cover to expand the War on Terror to other countries besides Iraq and Afganistan. Thus the dictatorships that are supporting Bin Laden will not support such an attack. If true, this would be a kind of second order deterrent effect. And it would utterly vindicate President Bush's admonition that it is better for us to fight the terrorists with Soldiers and Marines in Iraq than fight them with firefighters and police officers at home.

Ali wonders if the US is planning to continue to slug away at the terrorists in Iraq, an option he sees as bad for Iraq in that it keeps the war on Iraqi soil. Or will we move on to another Middle Eastern country which the terrorists are using as a base. DEBKAFile reports that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage delivered, among other things, a stark warning to Syria to keep its new Kornet AT-14 anti-tank missiles out of Iraq because the US commander in Iraq is authorized to act against Syria as he sees fit (hat tip, Dr. Sanity).

Ali's perspective as an Iraqi "not living before the 9th of April" is very interesting. Click through and give his post a read.

Show your integrity

2005-01-15T11:59:00.000-08:00

You may have noticed the "This blog is Payola-free" button on the sidebar. It is a clever snark at Kos and other bloggers and commentators who are taking cash for promoting others' views. Captain's Quarters posts a nice roundup of the scandals today.

You're not going to see any of that here on Carpe Bonum. No.

(I am not jealous.)

(Wire transfer info available upon request.)

Kudos to Greg at Catscape for the button.

Carpe Bonum accepted into High Country Bloggers' Alliance

2005-01-15T11:21:00.000-08:00

There's no accounting for taste, and this proves it. In what will surely come to be seen as a hasty and ill-considered decision, the High Country Bloggers' Alliance has accepted Carpe Bonum into the fold. See the HCBA blogroll in the sidebar and click through to enrichen your blogreading experience.

Thanks to Greg of Wide Right Turns (a.k.a. Catscape) for instigating.

Armor Geddon Battle of Fallujah series continues

2005-01-15T09:26:00.000-08:00

Neil Prakash's superb series telling his story of the battle of Fallujah has been updated once again. Here is a complete index.

Many thanks to Neil and his men for their service.

(BTW, warning, language.)

UPDATE: Added "11 November: Tank Mines"
UPDATE 2: Fixed broken link on "10 November: For S__ts and Giggles"
UPDATE 3: Added "Mewborn, Crank It Up" link.
UPDATE 4: Added "CB: 8 November" link.
UPDATE 5: Added "12 November: Caught In The Kill Zone" link.
UPDATE 6: Fixed "CB: 8 November" link.

Again with the sticker, then we're moving on

2005-01-14T22:42:00.000-08:00

Interestingly, Mark the Moderate Liberal and I agree on many things about the sticker kerfuffle, such as:

The sticker is factually correct, though a bit odd for singling out only one theory when its statements apply to all areas of science
Science consists of theories of varying credibility
No scientific theory can be considered absolute fact
Science requires critical thinking
It is OK to teach about the religious controversy over evolution (to which I would add Galileo's little tryst with the Inquisition)
It is OK to teach about religion in public school
It is not OK to insert church doctrine into science class (see advice to Creationists)

Where we diverge is where Mark equates the sticker with inserting religious doctrine into science class. There is no religious doctrine on the sticker. It may have been motivated by religious concerns, but this does not make the sticker any less accurate. Sure, when someone you don't trust presents you with a seemingly simple idea, you are wise to scrutinize it carefully lest you be deceived.

Indeed, what was the Cobb County School Board's intent? Here is what they said September 26, 2002:

We expect teachers to continue to teach the theory of evolution. We do not expect teachers to teach creationism. Our intention is to promote a broad-based science curriculum which will acknowledge that there are differences of opinion about the origin of life, and to encourage students and others to be tolerant and respectful of those who may have different beliefs. Religion has no place in science instruction, but science instruction need not offend those who hold religious beliefs of whatever type.

And here is a part of the District's Administrative Rule IDBD, which covers theories of origin:

2. Teachers are expected to set limits on discussion of theories of origin in order to respectfully focus discussion on scientific subject matter; at the same time, it is recognized that scientific instruction may create conflict or questions for some students with regard to belief systems. Discussion should be moderated to promote a sense of scientific inquiry and understanding of scientific methods, and to distinguish between scientific and philosophical or religious issues. It may be appropriate to acknowledge that science itself has limits, and is not intended to explain everything, and that scientific theories of origin and religious belief are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

I defy anyone to find anything wrong with the District's intent or policy. It is explicitly not an attempt to insert religious doctrine into science class.

No, the lawsuit was a wrongheaded attempt by the ACLU to crush dissent, to silence those who only wanted to be respectful of students' beliefs and who wanted all students to exercise critical thinking. This time, unfortunately, the wrong side won.

For the record, Carpe Bonum posts on this topic were:

Moderate Liberal posts were:

And the debate was inspired (or was it incited?) by this post in WizBang:

Evolution Nazis- Don't Let Children Think

I'll let Mark have the last word.

Carpe Bonum interview posted

2005-01-14T12:01:00.000-08:00

Jennifer Larson has posted the Carpe Bonum interview on her blog Jennifer's History and Stuff. Thanks, readers, for the questions. And thanks Jennifer for the interview!

Carpe Bonum War on Terror post second in Watcher vote

2005-01-14T11:54:00.000-08:00

Carpe Bonum's War on Terror post has taken second place in this week's Watcher of Weasels vote, beating such luminaries as Michelle Malkin and Right Wing News' 2nd Victor Davis Hanson Interview in the Non-Council category. I am truly humbled.

Beating out Carpe Bonum for first was Varifrank's excellent Today, I Was "Unprofessional"....

Thanks to the Council.

Oh no, a STICKER!

2005-01-13T22:30:00.000-08:00

See, this is what I'm talking about.

Evidently U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper has ruled that a sticker placed on science books in Cobb County Georgia is unconstitutional. The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU.

Wow, it must be a pretty bad sticker. Let's see what it says:

This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.

What do we have here? Two self-evident facts, and advice to be open-minded use critical thinking.

What's wrong with this? Let's check with Mark, the Moderate Liberal:

The only reason for those stickers are religious ones, not scientific. Let the scientists teach science and the ministers teach the gospel.

Ah ha! Even though what the stickers say is true and reasonable, if an idea comes from religious people, it must be destroyed! I'm sure Kevin Drum would agree.

Actually Mark's paragraph is half right. And one of the most fundamental things about teaching good science is to keep students keenly aware that theories are only theories, not facts, and critical thinking is necessary to the advancement of science. Mark even gives a wonderful example of a progression of theories, from Newtonian mechanics to relativity to quantum theory. Each refutes important parts of its predecessor, and would not exist if not for critical thinking.

Hey Judge Cooper and the ACLU, stop trying to crush dissent. Stickers stating that theory is a theory are not heresy. What's next, the Spanish Inquisition?

(Reuters link via Wizbang)

Iraqis' attitudes on upcoming election

2005-01-13T15:02:00.000-08:00

From Omar at Iraq the Model:

The ArabicBBC site put up a forum for the readers to discuss the subject of some of the "militant groups" that distributed leaflets threatening the Iraqis who decide to participate in the elections, whether voters or candidates.
The total number of commentators was 141; the Iraqis were 104 and 37 were Arabs from other countries till the post was prepared.
89 of the participating Iraqis were strongly with the elections and determined to go to the boxes on the elections day in spite of the threats.
15 were against the elections, for different reasons.

13 of the Arab participants were also against the elections while the rest of them (24) were supportive of the Iraqis in holding the elections on time.

Omar then includes many quotes from the message board. Looks pretty hopeful. Click through and read for yourself.

Carpe Bonum in Carnival of the Vanities

2005-01-13T13:41:00.000-08:00

A very creative Carnival of the Vanities is up and one of Carpe Bonum's Social Security posts is included. "Like a tiny bud becoming a huge hibiscus flower," wow!

Thanks to Josh for the link.

WMD hunt fizzles -- War on Terror strategy sound

2005-01-13T13:13:00.000-08:00

The Washington Post reports that Charles A. Duelfer's Iraq Survey Group has completed their Weapons of Mass Destruction investigation and left Iraq without finding any of the expected WMD stockpiles.

So what does it mean? Is this a great failure of the United States? Did we lie to the world and murder thousands of innocent people? Absolutely not. The reasons for removing Saddam are fully valid and the strategy is sound.

Yes, one of the justifications has not been proven. But the UN and many countries around the world agreed that Saddam had WMDs. Bizarrely, we were all deceived by Saddam Hussein. We may never know why he chose to do this.

Leftie bloggers Atrios, Kevin Drum, and Kos are gloating. They "knew" it was a big lie all along. Charles notes the event on Little Green Footballs without comment. But his commenters have lots to say.

And Mark at Decision '08 is deeply concerned about the credibility hit this represents:

I firmly believed the WMDs were there, so did the members of the UN Security Council, so did the U.S. Congress, so did Bush - still, they weren't there. We should have known better than to make WMDs the centerpiece of our war argument, in light of the flimsiness of the evidence, when the better argument was the humanitarian, anti-totalitarian one.

But let's look at the record.

Did the President claim Iraq was an imminent threat? No. Did he call out Saddam's human rights abuses? Yes. Here is the President in the 2003 State of the Union address:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

Did the administration articulate other reasons for ousting Saddam, like his ambition for regional domination and his defiance of the UN? Yes. Here is Colin Powell speaking before the UN:

When we confront a regime that harbors ambitions for regional domination, hides weapons of mass destruction and provides haven and active support for terrorists, we are not confronting the past, we are confronting the present. And unless we act, we are confronting an even more frightening future.
...
Underlying all that I have said, underlying all the facts and the patterns of behavior that I have identified as Saddam Hussein's contempt for the will of this council, his contempt for the truth and most damning of all, his utter contempt for human life. Saddam Hussein's use of mustard and nerve gas against the Kurds in 1988 was one of the 20th century's most horrible atrocities; 5,000 men, women and children died.

Was the administration choosing the proper moment to act against Saddam? Yes. From the President's ultimatum to Saddam:

We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be far greater. In one year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict harm on all free nations would be multiplied many times over. With these capabilities, Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies could choose the moment of deadly conflict when they are strongest. We choose to meet that threat now, where it arises, before it can appear suddenly in our skies and cities.

But Duelfer has repudiated all that, hasn't he? If he didn't have a stockpile, Saddam was harmless right? Wrong. From the key findings of the Duelfer Interim Report:

Throughout the 1990s and up to OIF (March 2003), Saddam focused on one set of objectives: the survival of himself, his Regime, and his legacy. To secure those objectives, Saddam needed to exploit Iraqi oil assets, to portray a strong military capability to deter internal and external threats, and to foster his image as an Arab leader. Saddam recognized that the reconstitution of Iraqi WMD enhanced both his security and image. Consequently, Saddam needed to end UN-imposed sanctions to fulfill his goals.

In 2003 Saddam was collecting billions of dollars through the corrupt UN "Oil for Food" program and he was making progress on eroding the sanctions regime that was in place. If we had not acted then, the UN would probally be arguing now over when, not whether, to lift the sanctions on Saddam.

So the clearest and most factual justification for the war, WMDs, turn out to be absent. But the argument for invasion remains sound.

UPDATE: The end of the WMD hunt leaves Arthur Chrenkoff cold.

What is cb's real name?

2005-01-13T11:11:00.000-08:00

When I started Carpe Bonum, I decided not to use my real name. But my email replies include my real name. And a resourceful Googler could probably figure it out in about two minutes. So it's not secret, just anonymous. Sista Toldjah has an article on this today, which sums up my thoughts nicely.

The fishie war hits the blogosphere

2005-01-12T14:46:00.000-08:00

Carpe Bonum Quick Take

I don't have time to do the topic justice right now, but here is a quick take on the evolution vs. creationism debate.

Have you noticed the fishie war on people's bumper stickers? You know, the little Jesus fish redrawn as a Darwin fish having sprouted legs, being eaten by a big Truth fish? It's a fun little snark war being played out on our freeways.

But the serious side of it is that both Creationists and Darwinists feel threatened by each other and there is no need for it.

The Moderate Liberal has a posting today sounding the alarm: The War Against Evolution. It has a quite entertaining series of cartoons from one side of the debate.

But may I offer this advice to each side?

Creationists: By definition, science does not refute faith. They coexist peacefully if you treat science as a process by which we arrive at our best human understanding of the world around us. Scientific knowlege is in constant flux as we improve our methods of observation. The state of scientific knowlege at one particular moment can not and should not be regarded as ultimate truth. Instead, science is a tool to make useful predictions about the world, nothing more. Stop trying to evict science from science classes.

Darwinists: Science does not refute faith. Stop characterizing religious people as stupid gullible robots. Faith is a legitimate basis of belief. But the theory of evolution is not a faith, it is science. It is not heresy to question it. Many things about Darwin's original theory have been discredited (such as the law of use and disuse). Science must be questioned in order to...

wait for it...

evolve! So don't be afraid of religious people questioning science. Use your best science to discuss it. Point out where the other person's argument diverges from good scientific method. Agree to disagree when it comes to matters of faith.

Keep science class scientific, but don't crush dissent.

And enough with the fishies.

UPDATE: Kevin Drum is sounding the alarm, too. And there is more on Outside the Beltway (Hat tip, Wizbang).

UPDATE 2: Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost puts it nicely:

Science should remain science and religion should remain religion.

Carpe Bonum nominated in Watcher vote

2005-01-12T08:22:00.000-08:00

Carpe Bonum's preemptive link whoring worked. Watcher of Weasels has nominated this post on the war on terror to their weekly council vote. Thanks to Watcher for the nomination.

Go check out all of the nominations.

Armor Geddon Battle of Fallujah series

2005-01-11T16:15:00.000-08:00

This is a superb series of postings telling a tank commander's story of the battle of Fallujah.

Many thanks to Neil Prakash for posting his story.

UPDATE: Added four links covering from November 10-11.
UPDATE 2: Added "CB: 8 November" link.
UPDATE 3: Added "12 November: Caught In The Kill Zone" link.
UPDATE 4: Fixed "CB: 8 November" link.

Carpe Bonum in the Bonfire again

2005-01-11T08:09:00.000-08:00

Carpe Bonum once again makes an appearance in the Bonfire of the Vanities:

A post from Carpe Bonum (I haven't seen this many "CB"'s in one place since Convoy) has everything: link whorage, naive advice to someone who will never read it, and dorky, stolen clipart. Here is "CBS, I don't get it".

Thanks (I think) to Spacemonkey for the link.

SoCal Photoblogging

2005-01-11T07:37:00.000-08:00

We always have to be careful when complaining about the weather here in southern California, but I must report it has been raining here for weeks.

See also Citizen Smash's picture of the flooded Mission Valley, and the Santa Ana rainfall chart on The Truth Laid Bear.

Rathergate report abets Media Induced Ignorance

2005-01-11T01:27:00.000-08:00

Here is the obligatory post from Carpe Bonum on the CBS Rathergate/Memogate report by Thornburgh and Boccardi.

Though there is an abundance of commentary on the details of the report, whether it is a whitewash, and which players are guilty of what, I have not yet seen a comment on the report as a next step in the ongoing battle against Media Induced Ignorance.

Every blogger on the right side of the blogosphere has linked to other bloggers' reports on the report, so there is no need to do that here (except this from Powerline -- must bow to the giants). Also, many bloggers have made the point that the report gives lots of interesting facts, but despite the overwhelming evidence in the report itself, it just doesn't have the guts to conclude:

The documents are actually fake

The false Texas Air National Guard story was politically motivated

Based on the facts in the report, one would have to be truly deluded to conclude otherwise, but the report just doesn't get 'er done.

It also offers a complex "perfect storm" scenario where time, competitive pressure and other factors coincide resulting in this purportedly aberrational event. A far simpler explanation would be as follows: As a group, the people in the organization responsible for developing content vehemently disagree with the President's policies, personally dislike the President, and at the time thought it was terribly important that he not be reelected. In their minds, it was only natural to turn cocktail party smears into a "news" report once a shred of evidence surfaced to justify it.

Meanwhile the left side of the blogosphere:

...sound of crickets chirping...

No, that's not quite true. Atrios has this to say:

[T]he entire saga is proof that there is no goddamn liberal media

Which returns us to the topic of Media Induced Ignorance. Because the Thornburgh/Boccardi report falls shy of making the obvious conclusions listed above, and because it offers up the bogus "perfect storm" scenario as an explanation for how such an error could possibly happen, the report obscures the real causes and effects of Media Induced Ignorance.

In this case, the media themselves suffered from their own ignorance, giving undue credence to the crudely faked documents because they were so consistent with their world view. That misinformation was passed on to CBS viewers. The effective response of alternative media exposed the deception in this one incident, but did not expose the pervasive self-reinforcing delusion of the media elite.

CBS's response to the incident is to fire four people and institute several procedural and organizational changes. Since the Thornburgh/Boccardi report fails to identify the true cause of the problem, naturally the actions taken in response to the report are of no use. The proper actions would have been:

Admit that political bias exists in the organization

Reinforce to staff that their views are at odds with those of most of the country (i.e. CBS staff is bright blue while the country is actually reddish purple)

Reinforce to staff that journalistic ethics proscribes using a news report as a means to achieve a political end

Train staff on how to distinguish facts from conclusions

Establish guidelines that require news reports be limited to factual reporting

Prominently identify editorial content as such

Instead, the next few news cycles will be filled with "perfect storm" and "myopic zeal" and "CBS ousts four," all with the reassuring subtext that all the rest of the media is just fine.

And so the cycle continues.

UPDATE: OK, fine. Here's a link to a nice roundup by PunditGuy. Happy now?

Carpe Bonum in Carnival of the Capitalists

2005-01-10T09:05:00.000-08:00

This week's Carnival of the Capitalists is up. CotC is a weekly roundup of blog postings on economics. It is well worth the read.

This week, some of Carpe Bonum's seemingly endless blathering on Social Security is included. Thanks to Travis for the link.

Watcher's Council qualification post

2005-01-09T15:52:00.000-08:00

As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around. They didn't exactly ask for volunteers this week, but I'm going to try to weasel my way in anyway. Per the Watcher's instructions from last week, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.

Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.

Wish me luck!

Losing the spin war on benefits?

2005-01-09T14:26:00.000-08:00

I'm detecting a serious problem in the Social Security debate.

In discussing Social Security privatization, both the left and the right are tightly focusing on the fact that a strawman reform plan, CSSS plan 2, reduces benefits.

But there is little acknowledgement of two facts. First the analysis uses a grossly conservative assumption on investment returns in which private investment returns are "risk adjusted" to match the returns on Treasury Bills. Actual returns will surely be higher. Second, even assuming such low returns, the ratio of lifetime benefits to lifetime contributions is the same as if we do nothing.

In Votehunter, JustOneMinute blog notes that any plan perceived to cut future benefits will be an easy target for attacks from Democrats and even some Republicans.

Indeed. And if the debate ignores the fairness of the benefits to contributions ratios and the many other positive consequences of privatization, Social Security reform will die on the vine.

Browse around the Carpe Bonum archives for lots more on this.

Internet access, a journey that never ends

2005-01-09T13:55:00.000-08:00

Evan Coyne Maloney writes about his Internet access journey in The Wanderings of a WiFi Junkie. I chagrined to admit how similar my internet access experiences have been to his!

Armstrong Williams: something constructive

2005-01-09T12:36:00.000-08:00

As noted in the mainstream media and blogosphere, Armstrong Williams is (or was) a commentator who was paid $240,000 by the Department of Education to promote the No Child Left Behind Act. Others have discussed the many bad consequences of this. But now it seems that someone has decided to do something constructive in response.

Jeff Jarvis at BuzzMachine is sending Freedom of Information Act requests to find out what other media figures have been paid in the same manner. He also requests help from the public in spotting or recalling specific instances of similar corruption.

Kudos to Jarvis. Here's wishing him good luck and good hunting.

Hat tip: Wizbang. Also noted by Michelle Malkin

Social Security reform: Attack!

2005-01-09T01:32:00.000-08:00

Matt Margolis at Blogs for Bush overstates it a bit when it links this article as evidence that the Democratic a party is denying that there is a Social Security crisis. The article only lists Charlie Rangel as a crisis-denier. As this earlier post documents, there are plenty of attacks from the left beyond simple denial.

But Matt is spot on when he says:

The last thing they'd want is for a Republican President (especially George W. Bush) and a Republican Congress to be creditted with saving Social Security.

Kevin Drum was crystal clear the other day in his "insanely partisan" post. He thinks Arnold Schwartzenegger's anti-gerrymandering idea is great on the merits, but:

how stupid would a California Democrat have to be to agree to meekly support a goo-goo proposal that would have the effect of giving Republicans more seats in yet another state?

Then again, Kevin Drum is only one person.

Aspiring bloggers, don't miss...

2005-01-09T00:55:00.000-08:00

Aspiring bloggers should not miss The “How To Start a Blog” Series over at the evangelical outpost.

Venison...mmm

2005-01-08T11:02:00.000-08:00

This post on Sic Semper Tyrannis brings back a good memory: Virginia Tech top five for deer hunting opportunities.

My friend Doug Butler was an accomplished deer hunter, one of those guys who goes out with only one round for his rifle. One summer Doug and I shared an apartment with two other guys (in Foxridge for those who know Blacksburg). Our routine was for each of us to make dinner for everyone once per week. The three other nights we were on our own for food. But those four nights per week we all ate together.

Most of us had, shall we say, limited culinary skills (including an infamous incident in which the cook, uh, learned the difference between a clove and a bulb of garlic, and another which climaxed with a flaming pan of nachos flying out of our kitchen window). But Doug knew what to do with venison. One week he brought in a roast from a deer he had shot and turned it into a wonderful, mustard encrusted delight. I have never been an adventurous eater, and to that point had never had venison. But that night I became a big fan of roast Bambi.

I lost track of Doug about 12 years ago. At that time he was in Texas working what was then called Space Station Freedom.

Thanks for the memory.

How the terrorists can win the war

2005-01-08T02:26:00.000-08:00

Let's be clear about this.

There is only one way for the terrorists to win the war. The United States must quit. We cannot be defeated by military or economic means. Even a devastating weapon of mass destruction attack on our soil cannot destroy us. We have too many cities, too many people, too much land, too many natural resources. No, the only way to defeat us is to induce us to give up.

Yes, victory will cost us dearly in treasure and in blood. Yes we will make errors along the way, even grievous ones. But the terrorists' only hope is that enough Americans decide the cost of victory is too high. The terrorists cannot win any other way.

But they have hope. The United States has a history of looking the other way or retreating when attacked, as in the Beirut Marine barracks suicide bombing, Somalia, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole bombing, and the assassanation attempt on President Bush in Kuwait.

But the terrorists overreached with the 9/11 attacks. Like the Japanese in 1941, they "awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with terrible resolve." Even if those are not really Yamamoto's words, they are a true reflection of what he accomplished.

Yes America was awakened on 9/11 and filled with a terrible resolve. The terrorists were dealt heavy blows in Afganistan and the Horn of Africa and many other places. In elections in Australia, the United States and Afganistan, free people have affirmed their commitment to democracy and liberty over retreat and appeasement.

Today the terrorists face an existential danger. If, like a cancer, democracy can take hold in Iraq, it might metastasize and spread to Iran, Jordan and the rest of the Middle East. As Alberto Abadie's breathtaking study found, terrorism dies out where freedom and stability flourish.

And yet, the terrorists still have hope. How long can America keep its terrible resolve? We also have a sad history of allowing our resolve to weaken and give in to fatigue, isolationism, discord and subversion. Indeed, our defeat in Vietnam was a defeat of political will, not of arms.

Like Ho Chi Minh did before them, the terrorists fight only a holding action with fire and steel. The terrorists' real weapons are video tapes, radical web sites and deluded media. Using or manipulating these tools, they hope to erode our terrible resolve before freedom takes root.

And the tools are sharp. The media's pervasive and unrelenting negative reporting leaves millions of people, including some bloggers, the victims of Media Induced Ignorance. As Melanie Phillips pointed out in her blood chilling speech:

It is this weakness and moral confusion that comprise the great goal of terrorist strategy; it is this that has characterized the west’s response to Islamic terror for many decades; it is this that has brought us to where we are today. In the war that has been declared upon the free world, the western media’s abuse of power is perhaps the most lethal weapon of all.

Which brings us to a recent posting by The Poor Man, I'm Not Sure How Many More Corners We Can Stand To Turn (via Michael Bérubé and Rox Populi):

Appreciate this. Understand that the people killing us in Iraq aren't motivated by Gore Vidal or inspired by Susan Sontag or organized by Michael Moore or in cahoots in any way with any of the right's celebrity piñatas - not literally, not metaphorically, not if you look at it in a certain way, not to any infinitesimal degree, not in any sense, not in any way at all. They do not lead a clandestine international conspiracy of Evil which has corrupted everything in every foreign country plus everything in America not owned by loyal Bush Republican apparatchiks; nor are they members of such a conspiracy; nor does a conspiracy remotely matching that description exist. To think otherwise is, literally and to a very great degree, insanity. It is insane.

No, the terrorists are not motivated by Michael Moore. And whether the mainstream media, Hollywood, and the intellectual elite are acting in a vast left wing conspiracy or are simply immersed in a postmodern echo chamber is not relevant. The fact is they are pulling in the same direction as the terrorists, the direction of doubt, confusion and ultimately retreat.

So the war is a race, not to kill all the terrorists before they can kill all of us, but to cement freedom and stability before our will to win is worn away.

UPDATE: Atrios takes another swipe at our will to win. Par for the course, it seems.

Embassy Guards, Semper Fi

2005-01-07T22:04:00.000-08:00

They also serve who guard our embassies and consulates abroad.

They don't get a lot of headlines, but the United States Marines who guard our embassies and consulates are well admired in the Foreign Service, and vital.

Last month Diplomad expressed his esteem for the young Marine Security Guards in About the Marines . . .:

Watching these guys as they pulled toys out of the big "Marines' Toys for Tots" box in the Embassy lobby and hearing their cheerful shouts of "Oh, cool! Check this one out!" I couldn't help but think, "They're kids. They're just kids. Probably not much older than the orphans to whom they'll give those toys." I kept thinking about my own kids, living safely in the States, and the fact that they're older than these kids, these Marines.

But then I went with the "kids" out to the gun range. Suddenly they became deadly serious. The "kids" disappear; no goofing around; strict discipline and concern for safety kicks in. They certainly know firearms, and treat them with respect and care. It was quite a sight to see the former "kids" deliberately, methodically pumping out rounds from their M-4s -- single shot, three-shot bursts, full auto -- punching out quarter-size groups in targets I can barely see. They don't look like kids anymore.

December 6 last year, the United States consulate in Jeddah was attacked by al-Qaeda affiliated terrorists. Five consulate employees were killed, none American.

As they always do, the Marines performed under fire. An email account of the attack has been circulating around the State Department. It was written by a Foreign Service employee posted in Jedda who was present during the attack. Today the Daily Demarche posts an edited version of it. As you can see, the Marines were cool under fire, and fought intelligently. They accomplished their mission of protecting the Chancery building and the Americans within.

From Jeddah:"Three at the front!", "GAS,GAS,GAS- now!:"

During these first few seconds, Post One alerted the Marines and they grabbed their radios and gear but were unarmed. Post One advised them to stand fast because the terrorists were at the door the Marines were supposed to enter, firing their machine guns at the door. All of a sudden the terrorists ran toward the XXX building. When the area was clear again Post One said "GO GO GO", directing the unarmed Marines to make a break for the back door of the chancery. As the Marines entered the back door, terrorists ran back spraying the door with machine gun bullets.

Read both posts in full.

Armor Geddon's Fallujah series continues

2005-01-07T01:30:00.000-08:00

Here is an update to the Armor Geddon Fallujah roundup I posted previously.

This is a superb series of postings telling a tank commander's story of the battle of Fallujah.

(BTW, warning language).

See also this message from a US Navy Surgeon who has treated some of the Marines wounded in Fallujah.

UPDATE: I'm seeing a fair number of hits to this fairly old index, so I went ahead and updated it with the episodes that Neil has posted since I originally got posted this version of the index.
UPDATE 2: Fixed broken link on "10 November: For S__ts and Giggles."
UPDATE 3: Added "Mewborn, Crank It Up" link.
UPDATE 4: Added "CB: 8 November" link.
UPDATE 5: Added "12 November: Caught In The Kill Zone" link.
UPDATE 6: Fixed "CB: 8 November" link.

JustOneMinute and Dead Parrot Society on Social Security

2005-01-06T18:59:00.000-08:00

JustOneMinute weighs in on the Social Security debate here, here and here.

Minuteman seems gloomy:

I am having trouble seeing how folks can rally around [CBO CSSS Plan 2].

No need to be gloomy, Minuteman. From an email I sent to a reader:

Like I said in my post, "the question is, is reducing the tax burden by 1% of GDP, stabilizing the Social Security System, and eliminating the 2050 train wreck worth that reduction in benefits, and will todays infants and preschoolers have time to prepare for the change?"

The cons are lower projected lifetime benefit levels (though the ratio of lifetime benefits to lifetime contributions is about the same) and a deficit for the first half of the century.

The pros are: 1% of GDP more in the private sector, no train wreck, and large surplusses by the end of the century. I believe future retirees (1990 and 2000 cohorts especially) have plenty of time to prepare for the lower benefit amounts. And don't underestimate the financial, political, economic and social turmoil that the train wreck will cause. It is a huge benefit to head it off before it happens. And it is much cheaper to do it now than if we wait a few more decades.

Chile is 20 years into their pension privatization and it is working. Sweden and Australia have privatization plans also.

To me that is more than defensible.

Dead Parrot Society comments here, here and here.

It is pretty heavy stuff, but there are two major questions about the CBO report: First, are the CBO's economic growth assumptions correct? And second are the rates of return in the private accounts correct? In fact, DPS points out the report's statement, "Thus, the returns are "risk-adjusted" and set equal to the returns on Treasury bonds." It seems like in reality the return will be a lot higher than that, no?

Of course, I will be very interested in anything that points to higher benefits out of the privatization plan than the CBO report suggests. But keep in mind that the lifetime benefit to lifetime contributions are the same in CSSS2 and the train wreck scenario.

I believe CSSS Plan 2 stands up as it is.

Josh Marshall, Atrios and Kevin Drum are pulling out all the stops to try to kill this reform bill, including using selected tidbits of the CBO report to make it look worse than it is. We'll keep fact checking as best as we can.

Lots more to read about Social Security on Carpe Bonum:

Arlen loved on the left

Benefits under privatization

More on Social Security private accounts

Pensions and the Ownership Society