“…is based on three pillars: loopholes, fudges and lies.”
[Via Andrew Stuttaford]
Category Archives: Political Commentary
A Victory For Free Speech
In the Netherlands:
The presiding judge said Wilders’ remarks were sometimes “hurtful,” “shocking” or “offensive,” but that they were made in the context of a public debate about Muslim integration and multi-culturalism, and therefore not a criminal act.
“I am extremely pleased and happy,” Wilders told reporters after the ruling. “This is not so much a win for myself, but a victory for freedom of speech. Fortunately you can criticize Islam and not be gagged in public debate.”
Meanwhile, back in the supposed land of the free and home of the brave, Yale has decided that criticism of some anti-semitism is off limits:
An antisemitism program needs scholars who deal with Qassam rockets, Grad rockets, and other rocket systems, not snowballs. Scholars who deal with satellite systems, and firebombs targeting Israeli civilians and tanks. Who study soldiers of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other antisemitic terror groups. It needs scholars who deal with Islamist thinkers, from Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb to Mohammad Chatami, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s anti-Israel and pro-suicide-bombing fatwas.
It needs scholars who deal with the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamism — not only in Egypt, but in the entire Middle East, Europe, North America, and elsewhere. It needs scholars on Iran and the analysis of incitement to genocide.
It needs scholars on Turkey, lawful Islamism, and its relationship to anti-Zionism and antisemitism.
It needs scholars on Islamic jihad, terror, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and homegrown terrorism in the West.
It needs scholars on left-wing, progressive, Muslim, and Neo-Nazi anti-Zionist antisemitism, and the ideologies and concepts of postorientalism, postcolonialism, and their possible relationship to antisemitism (e.g., in the work of Edward Said). And it needs scholars on antisemitism and anti-Israel propaganda in Western mass media in the 21st century.
There is nothing wrong with scholarship on France and Jewish history; it is important. But it shouldn’t be seen as a replacement for serious scholarship on contemporary antisemitism. The study of dead antisemites and past campaigns of vilification is already part of every single Jewish Studies department in the world. And dealing with Jewish literature (the topic of Samuels’ new book in 2010) has nothing to do with research on (contemporary) antisemitism.
Unfortunately, any serious anti-Semitism program at Yale would probably end up indicting much of the faculty there, which is probably why it was shut down to be replaced with the more anodyne one.
[Update a few minutes later]
More thoughts from Mark Steyn:
Nevertheless, as in all these cases, the process is the punishment. The intent is to make it more and more difficult for apostates of the multiculti state to broaden the terms of political discourse. Very few Europeans would have had the stomach to go through what Wilders did — and the British Government’s refusal to permit a Dutch Member of Parliament to land at Heathrow testifies to how easily the craven squishes of the broader political culture fall into line.
And at the end the awkward fact remains: Geert Wilders lives under 24-hour armed guard because of explicit death threats made against him by the killer of Theo van Gogh and by other Muslims. Yet he’s the one who gets puts on trial.
As he says, it’s shameful.
Unexpectedly!
A compilation of headlines. What’s amazing to me is that none of them were in any way unexpected to me, because I’ve recognized the high level of economic nincompoopery at the highest levels of government for years. It’s a shame our intellectual betters (just ask them) in the media can’t figure it out.
[Update a while later]
Gee, I guess I’m smarter than the head of the Fed, too:
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told reporters Wednesday that the central bank had been caught off guard by recent signs of deterioration in the economy. And he said the troubles could continue into next year.
“We don’t have a precise read on why this slower pace of growth is persisting,” Bernanke said. He said the weak housing market and problems in the banking system might be “more persistent than we thought.”
You don’t say.
[Update a few minutes later]
Hard to argue with this:
As an economist, if I were working for a foreign government and were to design a package of policies to destroy a country’s economy, I would design a plan very similar to what we’ve undertaken in the U.S. over the past 18 months.
If we pursue another economic stimulus of similar size to the previous one, we may as well condemn the economy to another 10-20 years of recession.
Not only will it not work, but it will significantly add to an already grave debt problem. Stimulus is what keeps entrepreneurs from creating new jobs and products. It makes them nervous, because we have to raise taxes in the future to pay for stimulus spending, and this makes for a very uncertain business environment.
You could make a similar statement about space policy. As the preface to the book I’ve been working on for a while begins: “Imagine that extraterrestrial aliens had secretly contacted the White House and U.S. Congress after the Apollo landings, and told them under dire threat that humans were to never again venture beyond low earth orbit, but that the public was not to know this, and to make sure that their successors were aware as well. If it were the case, how would space policy have been much different for the past four decades?”
[Update a few minutes later]
More thoughts from VDH:
Two thoughts: One, the latest Democratic idea of borrowing even more money is de facto proof that all the bailouts, borrowing, vast increases in unemployment and food-stamp monies, Obamacare, etc., have done nothing but terrify employers, who are holding off buying and hiring. And, second, when one adds in the National Labor Relations Board roguery, the presidential quips about the wealthy, the Chrysler creditor mess, the nonstop spread-the-wealth, already-made-enough-money demonization of those who make over $200,000, etc., we are witnessing a sort of psychological stasis in which millions of employers are shrugging and collectively sighing, “I think I’ll pass until this crazy outfit is out of here.”
It can’t happen soon enough.
Is Barack Obama A Bad Man?
Bad people come to us as sweetness and light, charming, intelligent, confident, and often successful. But, they are chameleons who will say whatever is necessary in order to get what they want and do what they may. No truth. No empathy. No soul. Shape-shifting through life they reinvent themselves to suit their audience so as to be everything to everyone. Inside, they are soulless. Alone. Scared. Afraid of being found out and exposed as a fraud. Their fragile self-image hides behind a facade of confidence, humor, and “I’m above it all.” Hence, they appear arrogant, haughty, and cannot bear scorn or reproach.
Barack Obama is one of these bad people. He’s dishonest, narcissistic, and pinning him down can be like nailing jello to the wall. He’s all things to all people, but he is no one — an empty vessel. He uses people and then disposes of them when it’s expedient. His grandmother, his spiritual mentor, anyone who becomes an inconvenience is thrown under the now infamous bus. He is adept at mockery and ridicule. His arrogance is legendary. His skin is decidedly thin and he cannot bear to be contradicted or challenged. He works, not for the American People but, for himself.
He’s a lot like Bill Clinton in that regard, though people tell me the latter is very charismatic in person. It certainly doesn’t come across to me on television.
The Tea Party Platform For Space
Tea in Space has a press release:
June 23, 2011 — For Immediate Release
TEA Party in Space (TPIS), a non-partisan organization, today publicly released the TEA Party Space Platform. “This is our response to the vacuum of leadership in Washington, D.C., for America’s national space enterprise,” said Andrew Gasser, President of TPIS. “Whether it’s timidity from the White House or Congress’ earmark-laden ‘compromises,’ our space dreams will be stuck on this planet unless someone articulates a vision based on economic and technical reality, so that’s what we’ve done.”
Continue reading The Tea Party Platform For Space
The Roots Of Liberal Nostalgia
Michael Barone has an interesting article at the Journal today (subscription required, at least for now):
There’s a longing on the left for the golden years of the 1940s, ’50s and early ’60s. Income distribution was significantly more egalitarian than it is today, and Americans had far more confidence in big government, the wisdom of our elected officials, and the ability of Keynesian spending policies to stimulate economic growth.
Hence the search for policies that will somehow get us back to those golden years.
I would note that the current nostalgic longing among some for a big-government space program has its roots in that same “liberal” impulse, though many, perhaps most conservatives don’t understand what an unconservative project Apollo was. NASA was, after all, one of those big-government institutions in which so many had faith in the post-war, early sixties. If you take away the raw rent seeking on the part of those who don’t want to see their home-state pork going away, this nostalgia lies at the heart of much of the outrage over Obama’s sensible new space policy. But unfortunately for NASA, the current justifiable disillusionment with government institutions in general is bleeding over to them as well.
Operation Barbarossa
Some thoughts on the seventieth anniversary.
All Hitler had to do was not be as bad as Stalin. The Ukrainians initially welcomed the Nazis as liberators.
But being a fellow leftist, he couldn’t manage it.
The President’s Speech
I managed to actually listen to the whole thing because, praise Gaia, it was short.
I remain bemused at his idiosyncratic pronunciations. The Taliban remains the Tollybahn (Hey Mr. Tollybahn, tolly me banahna, daylight comes, and me wanna go home), yet Afghanistan is pronounced like Stan Laurel. It is clear that he doesn’t want to end the war so that he can reduce the nation-destroying deficit, but so that he can “reinvest” (i.e., continue to spend us into oblivion) at home.
And he remains, like most modern Democrats, congenitally incapable of using the words “win” and “war” in the same sentence, at least when it’s an American war — at best, it can be “ended.” He would choke on such a conjunction — our national sins remain too great to allow such an outcome. He only wants to “end” it. He reserves actual victory for his goal with respect to his much more fearsome and evil domestic enemies.
Setting The Record Straight
Justin Kugler knocks down the latest bit of media space mythology.
The Runaway NLRB
I agree with this:
The NLRB has five seats (and four members serving; there’s a vacancy at the moment). The fact that such a tiny group of unaccountable political appointees can just wake up one fine morning, have some Pop-Tarts, and then decide to rewrite the nation’s union-election rules is terrifying. Such changes ought to require an act of Congress.
My own preference would be to dissolve the NLRB, repeal the Wagner Act and the Railways Labor Act, and stop forcing businesses to accept contracts that they do not wish to accept. (In what other field of life is a contract considered valid if one side does not wish to be a party to it?) Our labor “relations” are an exercise in extortion, and they probably cost American workers more in the form of forgone opportunities and lost investment than they win for them. The problem is that the fruits of that extortion are highly concentrated: among government workers and the 7 percent or so of private-sector workers in unions. Repealing the Wagner Act sounds radical, and it would not be easy, but it would be a very good thing for the country.
I guess that makes me an “extremist.”
[Update a couple minutes later]
NLRB rulemaking at the speed of light.