Rule of Law

There have been plenty of "teachable moments" with respect to the rule of law lately, just not the one's the President would choose. By now everyone who gets their news from the internet or TV has heard about Professor Gates run in Officer Crowley of the Cambridge police. While I admit that the Professor behaved like a jackass, and had no basis to assume that the Officer's conduct towards him was based on race, I am still not happy about the "disturbing the peace" arrest. First, since when is behaving like a jackass a crime in America? Second, whose peace was being disturbed? Gates was not arrested until he had been asked to step outside, because, in my opinion his conduct, when fully confined to his own home, did not constitute disturbing the peace. That is because it requires the element of other witnesses. I think the police like to use this crime as a catch all when their authority is challenged. I understand the tough job they have to do, but I still think the arrest unwarranted by the facts as presented. But did they act stupidly? Au contraire, the police actions showed remarkable restraint and understanding of the law. What bothers me is that the law is written so broadly as to given almost unlimited discretion to law enforcement to make an arrest.

But remember also that the President is the chief law enforcement officer in the land, by virtue of heading the executive branch. For him to state that the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" without possession of the facts is a gross dereliction of his duties. His statements certainly prejudice the playing field. Further, what if the police were in the wrong, legally? The President's rash statements make it harder to find an unbiased jury pool. Another sad commentary on our legal system.

On this same subject, the WSJ has a nice breakdown on the race vs class aspects of the confrontation.

On to other legal matters, Obama's place of birth and ipso facto, his eligibility to be President. The birthers are wingnuts, there I said it. The fact of the situation that convinced me are the newspaper blurbs announcing the Chosen One's birth in Honolulu. Hard to believe a conspiracy theory so devious, so penetrating, so all powerful, as to be able to reach into the past over forty years. I am not even going to argue the rest of it, because it is so absurd. Sometimes you only need one fact to make a judgement. For example, in a famous local murder here in America's finest city, the victim, a married male in his twenties was found with rose petals scattered around him. Sorry, that one fact allowed me to correctly conclude that the little wifie did it, no guy is going to commit suicide in that fashion.

Finally 'Dawg sent me an email with a link to this video below. While it appears outrageous at first. I think it is a clever piece of propaganda.



I am generally unsympathetic to Muslim causes because they often act like intolerant dictator wanna-be's. While I agree that the security guards behaved badly, I still have a question. Let's say this were a Christian gathering like Promise Keepers at a public stadium like Qualcomm. If some Muslims showed up with literature, wouldn't the Promise Keepers security team have the right to have them removed? That's because the Promise Keepers have the permit to hold their rally and it interferes with their freedom of speech to have that rally disrupted. Doesn't excuse the assaults security goons, but maybe puts a different perspective on the whole deal. I think the permit holders have the right to eject who they want, even if the individual was acting reasonably. But we also don't know what the guy said or did before the whole video shoot started, so I am not exactly sympathetic.

Government Health Care Sticker Shock - UPDATE

Now that sticker shock is setting in, Obamacare is proving a tough sell. Around the news and blogosphere today, there was more evidence of how hard this is getting for the administration.

First, the President himself did not appear to know the details of the bill, as pointed out by Dean. He was asked about the provision outlawing private health insurance and couldn't give a coherent answer, other than punting the question. Without the TOTUS by his side, Obama continues to flounder.

Second, outlandish claims of future efficiencies and more unicorns are not selling well either. Congressman Carnahan (D-MOron) is shown here trying to sell the big lie:



The sticker shock of the CBO's $1 Trillion dollar cost estimate seems to be giving people some buyer's remorse as Obama's poll numbers continue to fall.


Also, Democrats from tonier districts are getting nervous over all this tax the rich talk. From the Wall Street Journal:

A group of Democrats elected in recent years from some of the country's richest congressional districts have emerged as a stumbling block to raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for President Barack Obama's ambitious health-care overhaul just as the plan has begun to meet increasing resistance over its cost.

I think there is an opening to put forward an alternative health care financing reforms that are far less costly and less intrusive. I know that the Democrats demagogued social security reform to death, without a credible alternative, but that isn't a strategy for a long term majority party. Do we really want to be like them?

UPDATE #1

I can't believe I missed this one, hat tip to Pop for pointing it out. Obamacare also means pressuring seniors into refusing care and therefor dying to save us all money. From the New York Post article where former Lt. Gov. McCaughey of New York states:

One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and "the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration."
This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues?

And oh by the way, wasn't Roe v Wade decided on the issue of privacy, i.e. the government couldn't invade the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship by regulating abortion? Is Obamacare arguing that the constitutional principals that case are no longer valid? To quote 'Dawg, just because he's studied the constitution, don't mean he agrees with it.

From the wikipedia article:

The opinion of the Roe Court, written by Justice Harry Blackmun, declined to adopt the district court's Ninth Amendment rationale, and instead asserted that the "right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."

But apparently no other decision between a doctor and a patient would be so protected by constitutional scholar Obama. I look forward to myriad court challenges to Obamacare on this basis should it pass.

Free Markets and Health Care

Republicans shot themselves in the foot last week on the health care when Senator Jim DeMint said that health care would be Obama's Waterloo. It allowed Obama to portray them for the narrow minded political operatives they are. I guess going from the majority party to irrelevance in a few short years wasn't good enough. However, our side needs a plan that will be both popular and helpful in solving some of the problems with health care financing (let me be clear it is financing not health care itself that is being changed). I offer an alternative, but first this quote from the Ludwig von Mises Institute:

It's true that the U.S. health care system is a mess, but this demonstrates not market but government failure. To cure the problem requires not different or more government regulations and bureaucracies, as self-serving politicians want us to believe, but the elimination of all existing government controls.

So what's to be done? The two issues that Obamacare purports to solve are the rising cost of health care and the lack of coverage for 46 million Americans. (By the way that last number includes 11 million illegal aliens, why aren't the Republicans all over that?) Over at Carpe Diem, Professor Perry has documented that the costs of elective cosmetic surgery have been totally contained, in fact they have risen less than inflation. The obvious lesson is that folks with "skin in the game" help control costs. This is economics 101, a subject Obama clearly flunked, or more likely, was never taught. It seems that the best health insurance scheme would be to have plans that give money back to the beneficiary for not using the insurance. Alternatively, perhaps the first $3000 dollars, or pick some other number, of medical expenses are paid out of pocket. After that insurance kicks in to cover catastrophic conditions, with some sort of copay upt to a limit to discourage bad behavior.

With respect to the uninsured, the 46 million number is a vast exageration. But that is actually good news, it means that the problem can be solved with much less pain and market distortion than Obamacare proposes. I would propose that we just put together a health insurance subsidy for those with less than poverty line income, a little like the earned income tax credit works today. But even the poor need "skin in the game" too, or they will overwhelm the system. So such a subsidized system should require large initial out of pocket expenses until a catastrophic cap is hit or some way to reward those who did not use their insurance. Further, the government should not be providing the insurance, only the subsidy, it would still be up to the poor to purchase their own policy. This will keep the feds out of the insurance business. I know this still costs some money, but not nearly what Obamacare will cost and it will be far more effective.

There are certainly other changes needed. We need more doctors and should allow as many to immigrate as want to. Many ailments do not require one to visit a doctor, other health care providers work just as well. I know this from military medicine, where the vast majority of my prescriptions over the years came from Nurse Practicioners or Independent Duty Corpsmen. Frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits remain a problem; Texas showed the benefits of cleaning up that mess. This package of reforms could bring real relief to Americans while not endangering the free market that has made American health care so advanced.

I think it is important to have free market solutions as ready alternatives. People are conservative and generally don't want radical change but they also are unhappy with the present system. Given the choice between change and the status quo, I think change is going to win. Friends of liberty need to offer a better change.

Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie offers this half a loaf solution that reinforces some of my themes.

Why Stopping Obamacare Should be Top Priority

Of all the stupid change that Obama hopes to pass through the Congress, Health Care Financing is the one most pernicious and deserves our attention.

First a summary of the big ticket items on offer.

1. Supreme Court nominee. Sonia Sotomayor is going to be confirmed, it could have been far worse. In fact some liberals are disappointed.

2. Crap and tax (aka cap and trade). This useless paean to the political correctness that "SOMETHING MUST BE DONE" about global warming actually does almost nothing. There was the usual log rolling and minor corruption, all legal mind you, to buy the necessary votes. But this bill is so watered down that it will have little real impact on the economy. Further, it will not be difficult to substitute a carbon tax or repeal this ugly baby altogether if AGW does not prove out.

3. Prosecution of former Bush administration officials for ...? I still can't figure it out exactly. Hatching a CIA plot to kill Osama bin Laden? Issuing amazingly legalistic and detailed legal opinions on the limits of interrogation? This liberal blood lust is actually a welcome distraction. If it slows down Obama's legislative agenda, so much the better. By the way, if you can go to jail for writing the tortured legal prose in the linked article, most lawyers would be in jail today. I'm not saying that's a good thing, I'm just saying.

4. Obamacare. This is the true horror show. As detailed elsewhere, this is not about health care reform, but about changing the financing of health care. Health care will not improve one iota for the average American if any of the pending legislation passes. The key detail to remember, which the left has never really denied, is that eventually, the only health care insurance will be government health care insurance. As detailed in a previous post, the scheme will be priced to drive employers out of the market for providing health care insurance to employees. Further, a little reported on clause in the bill will outlaw private health insurance. H/T Hotair.

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day.

Further, the creation of vast new entitlement programs can almost never be undone. The left knows this, which is why they always seek new entitlements. Additionally, now all the talk is about new taxes to pay for Obamacare. It takes herculean efforts to lower tax rates, which is why the left is always proposing to raise them.

For these reasons, I think that conservatives and libertarians should put all our efforts into opposing Obamacare, more that any other initiative.

Lefty Hatred of Wal-Mart - Updated

What is it with the left and Wal*Mart? Hat to Tip to Carpe Diem for pointing us to this editorial in the Chicago Tribune:

Wal-Mart wants to provide jobs to Chicago.
Ald. Howard Brookins wants Wal-Mart in his 21st Ward.
Yet the company and the alderman face huge resistance from the City Council to a proposal for a Wal-Mart Supercenter on the South Side, at 83rd Street and Stewart Avenue just west of the Dan Ryan.
What's there now? A vacant lot. A vacant lot where no one is working.

The article goes on to say that these jobs aren't going to be coming to Chicago because Wal-Mart doesn't provide Union jobs. 500 new jobs in the middles of a recession plus more jobs for the constructon and still no sale?

I'm sure ACORN will come to the rescue, organize the community and convince the city council to approve Wal-Mart's plans. Isn't that what community organizers do, help the community? NOT!

UPDATE #1

Dean found a 2006 George Will column on lefty hatred of Wal-Mart. I liberated the money quote below, to answer my own question.

Liberals think their campaign against Wal-Mart is a way of introducing the subject of class into America's political argument, and they are more correct than they understand. Their campaign is liberalism as condescension. It is a philosophic repugnance toward markets, because consumer sovereignty results in the masses making messes. Liberals, aghast, see the choices Americans make with their dollars and their ballots and announce -- yes, announce -- that Americans are sorely in need of more supervision by . . . liberals.

Race Baiting Lefty

Over at BwD, Dean points out the total hypocrisy of Maureen Dowd's following quote:

It was a disgrace that W. appointed two white men to a court stocked with white men.

But Maureen Dowd is the disgrace. She continues the race baiting that is so bad for this country. Tribalism kills. We see it all over the world. Racism is just another form of tribalism. Lefties see the problem and think that dividing up the spoils by race will placate the disenchanted and calm racial tension. It does not, it only stokes the fires of tribalism as each group competes for wealth through the means of theft by government. And government can only divide the spoils by seizing the wealth of citizens, killing the goose laying the golden eggs.

The only real answer is to ask that we all live lives as color-blind as possible. Sure, we will be imperfect. But didn't America just elect a black man as President? We have already shown an ability to rise above. We need to identify with the tribe America, a tribe founded not on race or religion but on a set of ideas and ideals, like equality before the law, civil liberties, the right of everyone to vote. We ought to treat individuals as individuals. Sonia Sotomayor should be treated not as a Latina woman, even if she insists, but as judge with a record of rulings from the bench and a set of written opinions. They should be weighed against the goals of a constitutional republic. And race, tribe and religion should have no say in the matter.

Dems Shocked at CIA Plans to Kill Osama, Obama to Apologize

Top Democrat lawmakers expressed outrage that the CIA was working on a Tippy-Top Secret project to put together a process that would lead to a plan to eventually kill Osama bin Laden and other key al-Qaeda operatives. (My sources indicate lean six sigma was inolved.) Eight years later, nothing had come of the plan and it has been scrapped by CIA Director Leon Panetta, who reported its existence to Democrat lawmakers. Democrats expressed outrage that the U.S. would try to assassinate al Qaeda leaders without first getting authorization from Congress.

Meanwhile, other sources inside the White House say that the President is preparing to apologize to al Qaeda for this breach. A snippet of the speech follows:

"... recently, tension has been fed by our inhumane treatment of prisoners that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a so called "War on Terror" in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated without regard to their own aspirations and denied the opportunity to democratically elect Taliban or al Qaeda leaders..."

The President is counting on these and other apologies to prevent future terrorist attacks on the United States.

Planning for these clandesting ops at the CIA was so secret that only crack investigators at the Washington Post were aware of its existence. Mysteriously, the Washington Post article written by Barton Gellman, on Sunday, October 28, 2001; on Page A01, detailing the program has mysteriously disappeared from the post's web site. However, you can read snippets at Weasel Zippers, Free Republic or the whole thing at Subliminal News and judge for yourself the depth of Cheney's evil in trying to kill bin Laden AND keep the whole thing secret from Nancy Pelosi.

Breakin' Down Obamacare

Over at Politicalmath comes this awesome video comparing Massachusetts vs Georgia on Health Care. Politicalmath has all the technical background affirming the bona fides behind the numbers portrayed.




By the way, the Massachussetts plan was signed into law by Romney, who took great pride in it during the campaign. There is no way he should have ever been the front runner for the Republican nomination after watching the way is health care bill is wrecking his home state.

H/T Are We Lumberjacks? And thanks to Foxie, who linked to that blog in BwD comment.

Fighting Back on the California Budget Mess

I don't normally give financial advice in this column, but California's budget mess provides a perfect opportunity to take personal action to protect your finances in a way that also sends a political message. As you may be aware, the State of California is actually bankrupt, and has started issuing IOUs, except that they are called "registered warrants." Here is a little Q&A from my financial institution:

Q. What is a state-registered warrant? How is it different from other warrants or checks issued by the State of California?

A. State-registered warrants are essentially IOUs that are serialized and distributed to customers in lieu of actual payment. They can be deposited only at financial institutions who agree to receive them. California-registered warrants will be identified with "REGISTERED" printed on the face of the warrant and a special endorsement stamp on the reverse side. Both the issue and the maturity date will appear on the warrant. Registered warrants bear interest and are redeemable by the State Treasury only when the General Fund has sufficient money.

Q. Who is impacted by State of California's registered warrants?

A. At this time, the state has indicated it will issue registered warrants to state business vendors, local governments, for tax refunds and certain others. We understand that state employees will not receive registered warrants at this time. For more specific details about the state's plans, please visit the state treasurer's Web site (www.treasurer.ca.gov) or call the treasurer's registered warrants hotline at 1-888-864-2762

Here is where the personal collides with the political. Note that not all banks are accepting these IOUs. Note also, that tax refunds are among the categories of checks that are no longer being issued by the state. So even though a taxpayer has overpaid the state, he or she won't get a refund. In response, I have significantly changed my state withholding and urge everyone I know to do the same. This way, you won't lose out next year when the state is unable to pay you the refund you are owed. Further, this will starve the state government of cash now, putting more pressure on them to solve this budget crisis. I count on the Republicans to hold steady against new taxes (I could get burned, I know) so this is an opportunity to force spending cuts on our bloated state government. If you are nervous about having to pay a big tax bill next April or you count on that refund, I suggest that you increase you federal withholding by the amount you decreased your state withholding. The Feds will just print enough cash to cover your refund, so no worries there. The other worry is that you might underpay by too much and incur a penalty. Since I don't know your personal tax situation, you'll have to work that one out on your own. I have typically overpaid every year, so my course of action was an easy decision to make.

Hope my readers find this advice helpful. It is an easy quick way to fight back, that might save you some grief down the road.

Keeping The World Safe from What?

In the "In case you missed it" department comes this little gem. State governments have set their sites on a new breed of pernicious scofflaws who have been endangering the public. That's right, Yoga instructors that teach other instructors are now in the sights of sharp eyed bureauthugs lurking in state capitals all across America. Preventing hamstring pulls from over strenuous yogaing is clearly a national priority. Apparently, the Yoga instructors tactical mistake was to put together a national registry of instructors in an attempt at a little informal self regulation. This only invited state scrutiny. From the NYT article:

In March, Michigan gave schools on the list one week to be certified by the state or cease operations. Virginia’s cumbersome licensing rules include a $2,500 sign-up fee — a big hit for modest studios that are often little more than one-room storefronts.

The mindset of government regulators is clearly captured in this paragraph:

The conflict started in January when a Virginia official directed regulators from more than a dozen states to an online national registry of schools that teach yoga and, in the words of a Kansas official, earn a “handsome income.” Until then, only a few states had been aware of the registry and had acted to regulate yoga instruction, though courses in other disciplines like massage therapy have long been subject to oversight.

That whole "handsome income" thing is particularly appalling to state governments who are afraid they weren't getting their cut.

Obama is a Moron

Just a quick note. I am sick of the the way that the press treats every utterance from Obama's mouth as "thoughtful." He is clearly an idiot. He clearly doesn't understand the lessons from Japan in the early 90s.



Dean has continued to hammer his lack of understanding of history. He famously can't speak without the teleprompter. My favorite example is this from a campaign debate:

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

There it is. We've elected a "thoughtful" President who hasn't thought much about history or economics. Doesn't say much for the schools from which he graduated either (Columbia and Harvard, in case you were wondering.)

I will sprinkle other examples in future blog posts, but just had to get that off my chest.

The Politics of Personal Destruction

To paraphrase the Godfather, you can count on the left doing exactly what of which they always accuse conservatives. In the 90s the Clintons famously complained about the "politics of personal destruction," when in fact it was their alleged misconduct while in office that was the real issue. Fast forward to the Obama campaign, and we have a regular guy, "Joe the Plumber", who has the temerity to ask The One a tough question, when Obama has invaded his neighborhood, who gets his reputation trashed because government hacks in Ohio leaked personal information about him to the media.

Now, we have the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Her most controversial ruling against white firefighters in New Have was recently overturned by the Supreme Court. Now, I believe that Ms. Sotomayor is about as good a nominee as we are going to get under the current administration with 60 Democrat senators. However, it is stil the minority's perogative to point out flaws in the nominee and ask questions about her written opinions and decisions.

This is where the left wing neo-fascist public humiliation of individuals comes into play. The ironically named "People for the American Way" are inviting journalists to smear the reputation of one of the firefighters involved in the lawsuit, as if that will somehow make the legal issues go away. From the KC Star:

Supporters of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor are quietly targeting the Connecticut firefighter who's at the center of Sotomayor's most controversial ruling.

On the eve of Sotomayor's Senate confirmation hearing, her advocates have been urging journalists to scrutinize what one called the "troubled and litigious work history" of firefighter Frank Ricci. This is opposition research: a constant shadow on Capitol Hill.

And this quote from Fox News: "People for the American Way, a liberal advocacy group, and other advocates urged the newspaper to dig into Ricci's background, specifically an earlier 1995 lawsuit..."

Look out ordinary Americans, if you cross the politically powerful, especially those on the left, prepare for your reputation to be savaged.

4th of July Music Chill

I can't add much to what Dean had to say about Independence Day, so I thought I would post some music instead. I saw the new MasterCard commercial promoting blue jeans, which I think is a great piece of advertising. It reminded me of how much everyone in the family likes David Bowie, so here he is, in all of his androgynous glory, performing Jean Jeanie.

Sorry, the embed isn't working for the video link above; also, some of the computers in my home aren't even playing that link, so here is an alternate version with convenient embed.



And just because Dean loves SRV, here's one more version.

The Government Option in Health Care - Update 2

In today's Wall Street Journal, the aptly named Robert Reich, makes more of the left wing argument for the so called "public option" in health insurance coverage. After tilting at a number of straw men, he gets to the crux of the argument:

Critics charge that the public plan will be subsidized by the government. Here they have their facts wrong. Under every plan that's being discussed on Capitol Hill, subsidies go to individuals and families who need them in order to afford health care, not to a public plan. Individuals and families use the subsidies to shop for the best care they can find. They're free to choose the public plan, but that's only one option. They could take their subsidy and buy a private plan just as easily. Legislation should also make crystal clear that the public plan, for its part, may not dip into general revenues to cover its costs. It must pay for itself.

He has rolled out what other propagandists used to call the Big Lie, a lie so audacious that no one would believe you would make it up. I repeat "the public plan... may not dip into general revenues." And how many examples do we have of quasi-government entities doing just that, in the history of our country? How about in the last year? The public option will be priced so attractively that it will lose money, then the Congress will step in and bail it out. What else will reasonably happen when the federal government, which knows nothing about running businesses, starts losing money in health insurance? What fools do the lefties take us for?

The other money quote that I just can't resist: "Without the government as competition, the private sector has little incentive to improve." So chip makers, computer manufacturers, television manufacturers, etc. all improved their products due to competition from the federal government? These arguments for public option health care are too easy to demolish, unfortunately, the left has a majority in the Congress so Common Sense may not necessarily prevail.

Editorial note. I typically do not use the term "liberal" to describe the left wing today. That is because I consider myself a liberal in the original sense of the term. Fortunately, our nation was founded on the liberal principals of equality before the law, free markets and limited government. Because we wish to conserve those liberal traditions, we are tagged with the label conservative, although that does not really capture my philosophy.

Government Option in Health Care - Update

In an earlier post, I ridiculed the defense of the so called "public option" (leftie-speak for government option) because they compared it to AMTRAK, and other government failures. However, there is already a direct and relevant comparison; Medicare and Medicaid spending on health care has risen faster than private sector spending by more than 34% according to a new study from the Pacific Research Institute.

From the article:

Across nearly four decades, Medicare's costs have risen more than one-third more, per patient, than the combined costs of all health care nationwide apart from Medicare and Medicaid. This is true even when viewing Medicare's costs in a charitable light.

President Obama asserts that creating a Medicare-like "public option" is the way to slow the rising costs of health care. Experience shows the opposite, that costs have risen faster under government-run care. As Benjamin Franklin and George Mason argued at the Constitutional Convention, let's defer to "experience, the best of all tests."

H/T: Weasel Zippers

Nuclear Politics Update

Little reported until this morning, the US Navy is tracking a North Korean ship bound for Singapore or Myanmar. It is believed the ship is carrying banned material, like missile parts, that earn the Norks hard currency. In an earlier post, I opined as how denying Kim Jong Il hard currency is the best leverage we have to influence his behavior on the nuke issue. I am waiting to see how the current administration handles the situation. They have been getting quite an education lately between Iranian electoral shenanigans and North Korean nuclear sabre rattling. Let's hope they are fast learners. As usual, Information Dissemination has excellent in depth naval analysis. They also believe that Kim Jong Il will not last without Chinese support and have reason to believe that Chinese support for "the little perv" as Dean called him, is eroding.

Interestingly, Information Dissemination linked to this scholarly mathematical analysis showing that the Iranian election results were almost certainly fraudulent (99.6% likely to have been faked). This is important, because the nuclear hard line taken by Ahmedinejad is certainly not in the best interests of the people of Iran. This will dawn on them as events unfold; posessing nuclear weapons means you can also be on the receiving end of nuclear weapons. A move to true democracy won't make Iran our new BFF, but will result in a regime more amenable to listening to reason on the nuke issue.

Happy Father's Day

Pastor Jim had a great sermon today about why men matter in our society and fathers in particular. I won't try to repeat the wealth of statistics he cited about the effects of the lack of a father on teen pregnancy rates, criminality, etc. The key fact he quoted was that the absence of a father in the home is the single biggest predictor of social ills (drop out, teen pregnancy, criminality) more than poverty, race, etc. Also, KT has had a number of great posts on this subject, including this one, where he quotes Charles Murray extensively and this one.

I want to share that my brothers and my sister have been blessed to have a father who understood the importance of just being there. When I was growing up, I just thought it was normal that my Dad was there for every important and lots of not so important events in my life. He never missed a football game or a school event. He took an interest in my school work, and not just when my report card came in; always ready to help. Sadly, I have learned that his example is often not followed and the world is a poorer place for it.

So here's to you Pop, thanks for being the great Dad you have always been and for always being there for us.

Here's Pop in the sixth grade with his class mates. Hope this makes him smile.

Who's Afraid of the Government Option in Health Care? I am.

Sometimes the lefties just makes things too easy for a lib/con blogger. But, first some background. The Obamacare proposal to nationalize health care by stealth has been effectively unmasked by Wall Street Journal, the American Medical Association, Roger Hedgecock, Rush Limbaugh, et al. It will work like this. The government will offer cut rate health insurance to those currently not covered by their employer. Further, they will assess a tax on employers who don't offer such insurance. But for most small businesses and maybe big ones, the tax will initially be cheaper to pay than the current cost of health insurance for their employees. As surely as supply follows demand, there will be a stampede away from employer funded health insurance to gummint funded health insurance. Next, the Congress will look at the huge budget hole created and jack up the tax on the employers. But when employers try to reinstate their own health insurance programs, it will be too late, either there won't be any insurers left or the law will prevent that option. (Hat tip to Roger Hedgecock for laying this out on his show.)

So now that the plan has been outed, Josh Greenman is defending the Obama plan by essentially saying "hey, what's the big deal, government provides services alongside the private sector in plenty of areas." And the shining examples he chooses? Public schools, the Postal Service, Amtrak, Social Security and the VA health system. Hooray, we're saved; the feds are going to run health care with their customary vaunted efficiency.

I won't even bother to respond; like I said, this is too easy. Recommend you click the links, especially Social Security.

Shocking News, Stimulus Dollars Being Wasted!

Like Captain Renault, I'm shocked at the LA Times article on wasteful spending in the stimulus package. From the Times article:

A report due to be released today by a Republican senator contends the Obama administration's stimulus program is fraught with waste and incompetence -- evidenced by a turtle crossing in northern Florida that will cost more than $3 million and a snafu in which thousands of Social Security checks went out to people who had died.

I feel like this guy:



But what do you expect? The federal government shells out money to spend on projects that private businesses and individuals, not to mention state and local governments wouldn't fund. That makes it ALL waste, if you ask me.

BTW, Dean has more news on the porkulus front, with swindlers and con men taking center stage.

Nuclear Politics

The threat of nuclear war has never been greater than it is today. During the height of the cold war, we were much further away from the possibility, because we could count on the Soviets (Russians) to act rationally. Not so with the jokers pictured here. Both Iran and North Korea appear to be moving steadily towards a limited nuclear capability, that is, the ability to put a nuclear warhead on a medium range missile. There is little that America can do to stop this directly.

However, we need to prepare for the eventuality of their use by these madmen. Samuel Johnson is quoted as saying "Nothing more wonderfully concentrates a man's mind than the sure knowledge he is to be hanged in the morning." We need to use this fact to our advantage. It is little known nor appreciated that until Iran possesses nuclear weapons, the U.S. is forbidden by treaty from using nukes against them. This came up in the Iraq war, where some people thought we would respond with nukes if Saddam used chemical or biological weapons. We would not have, because Iraq was a signatory on the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and we did not know if they possessed nuclear weapons. North Korea has withdrawn from the treaty, so they are a different case. The differing status of the two nations calls for different approaches to dealing with their ambitions.

First Iran. It is a blessing in disguise that Ahmedinejad won or stole the Iranian election. Iran is really run by the mullahs, and the policy to obtain nukes was not about to change, no matter who won, but now no one can argue about the basic nature of the regime, unless your a Daily Kook. Further, Ahmedinejad hasn't had quite enough time to fully wreck the Iranian economy with his socialist policies. Ultimately, only the people of Iran can through off the yoke of Islamic Socialism. Our approach to Iran needs to be non-provocative, so that we don't feed the propaganda machine of the regime. I know that they will manufacture propaganda, like the good fascists they are, but Iranians are surprisingly able to obtain other sources of news, from Persian language stations in LA for example. Our non-provacative stance will help. But we need to make clear to the people of Iran the true consequences of the path their leadership has put on them on. Right now, they are free from the threat of nuclear retaliation; when the mullahs launch a nuke missile, they face the possibilty of death due to very high temperatures. I think the trajectory of the current regime is inexorably downward, as the young and middle class especially loathe the lack of freedom in the Islamic paradise.

North Korea is a whole different problem. We can never expect the people to rise up, they are starving and can barely perform the basic functions of life. Further, they have no knowledge of the outside world. However, Kim Jong Il plays his little games at the sufferance of China. Right now, it amuses them to watch him threaten the hated Japanese. However, we need to make clear to the Chinese the inherent instability of the situation and our resolve to respond with nukes if the Norks use theirs. Such a retaliation would bring nuclear warheads and fallout uncomfortably close to the Chinese border. I don't think they are going to be too happy with that outcome once they think it through. The other way to influence Kim Jong Il is to remove his access to hard currency. Kim clearly enjoys the finer things that the West produces, so denying him hard currency hits him where he lives. For a while, the U.S. had an effective policy to limit North Korea's criminal enterprises of counterfeiting, cigarettes and currency, drug traficking and sales of missiles. Bringing back this policy and making it explicitly linked to Kim standing down from weaponizing plutonium is also required.

Will any of this work? I am not sure, but I believe a pre-emptive strike is off the table for now, so these are the options available.

Edward Whitacre Knows Nothing About Cars

"Big" Ed Whitacre said he's ready to learn about cars and the auto industry today. Before the advent of Bailout Nation, this might have been a problem. Why is that, you might ask? Because, Ed is the new Chair of Government or is it General Motors. From the news:

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Hey Dude, stop worrying about cars, you only need to worry about your shareholder in chief. I'm sure Ed's prior experience at AT&T with its constant interactions with the courts, the Congress and regulatory apparatus makes him the perfect fit for the new GM. Just don't expect any ideas about how to build better cars.

Maybe There's Hope Yet

In the news today, Justice Ginsburg issued an order staying the sale of Chrysler assets to Fiat. Whether this means the whole SCOTUS will hear the case is unknown. Most likely, the Justice wanted more time to study the issues before the scheduled sale mooted the case.

Dean had previously blogged about how teacher's police' pension funds were getting the shaft on this cramdown from Obama, in apparent violation of the rule of law, in this case bankruptcy law. However, the state pension funds in Indiana, unlike private firms that Obama can put the muscle on, appealed all the way to the Supremes.

I thought I would cruise over to Daily Kos, to see if any bile was being served up on this issue, despite the fact that Ginsburg is one of the most liberal justices on the court. I wasn't disappointed, some idiot claiming to be Libertarian Friend, was accusing Rush of wishing to make everyone share in the misery of the Chrysler bankruptcy, and was railing against the ruling, arguing that it was in the "public interest." I saw an opportunity to engage in terms that might resonate with the lefties. Here's what my what left wing Doppleganger had to say:

Why can't we judge this case on it's merits under the law? The plaintiffs are public pension funds, teachers and police if I remember correctly, not some whacko right wing nut jobs. To trash pension fund claims just because of the right wing is the worst kind of ad-hominem ill-logic.

We rightly trashed the Bushies for abusing power and ignoring the constitution in the name of fighting the "war on terror." Even if this bankruptcy was decided in the "public interest" that doesn't mean the constitution or the law were followed. I thought we were more principled than that.

(My apologies, I adopt a certain style when I comment on DailyKos and MyDD.) Imagine my shock when this line of reasoning got some traction. There were of course, moronic counterattacks ("the real plaintif is Murcouck" huh?), but more than one person agreed with the position that the rule of law mattered. I was pleasantly surprised at my new plus four rating for arguing for the rule of law on Daily Kos, which of course is Rush's, Dean's and I'm sure, KT's position on the issue as well.

Maybe there's hope yet. You can read the whole thing here. Click on comments and search for BDaddyL to see the responses.

Weekend Music Chill

One of my favorite 80s bands was Oingo Boingo. Our sub, the Guitarro, made "Dead Man's Party" our unofficial breakaway song, but I always liked this number better.

Crony Capitalism

Over at BwD, Dean riffed off the "Busy Not Running GM" theme with some choice words about Barney Frank getting into the act. Dean correctly labels this a new era in "crony capitalism." In the comments, 'Dawg pointed out that Congressman Murtha has really gone above and beyond in the crony and capitalism departments, with your money, of course. 'Dawg, thanks for pointing us to this ABC report.



As you may know, Murtha is also having some problems with how defense contractors obtained earmark spending on defense, including his nephew. So here's to you John Murtha, the croniest of cronies, may you spend some quality time here, wearing some of these stylish fashions.

Your (Local) Tax Dollars at Work

So here's a nice little gig, if you can swing it. Charlene Tressler, was until recently, the Commissioner of San Diego County's First 5 Commission. These commissions were set up to distribute Prop 10 largess to favored constituencies around the state,... sorry, I meant to say to save the children with tobacco tax money. On top of her busy schedule running the commission, she also ran a charity and a preschool, making her the perfect kind of person to be looking out for the welfare of San Diego's wee ones. In fact, she was so awesome that the First 5 Commission paid out $8.3 million in grants to her organizations. Hooray, the children are SAVED!

For once, our local paper is breaking a story of interest. Charlene wasn't the only one on the commission doing well by doing good. Turns out that being on the advisory committe was better than a paying gig and that $67 million (or 44% of all grants) over three years was paid out to members of the commission's advisory committee. I'd like to be giving that kind of advice myself.

Just like the gun turn-in program detailed below, local government shows itself to be just as brilliant at conflicts of interest and lunacy as the feds. And who pays for this madness? The typically low income folks who still purchase cigarettes legally.

Pray for the President's Safety

Mrs. Daddy and I feel strongly moved by the Holy Spirit, we believe, to pray for the safety of President Barack Obama while he gives his speech in Cairo on Thursday. Whatever your faith, we ask you to join us in praying for the safety of our President.

Busy Not Running GM

What we are not doing -- what I have no interest in doing -- is running GM.

So says the captain of industry pictured here. In the quoted Wall Street Journal article, Obama reassures the mayor of Detroit, that GM headquarters won't be moving to nearby Warren, MI. Because it would be bad for GM's profitability? Hardly, because this is all about what's good for Detroit, not GM, or good for the UAW, not GM, or any body else politically connected, but not GM.

A small, but telling first example of the politicization of this industry that Dean and KT have already been warning us about.

Meanwhile, all may not be roses for the administration's disregard for the rule of law in bankruptcy court. A group of Indiana pension funds have won a hearing with the 2nd circuit court of appeals to prevent the sale of Chrysler assets to Fiat. As Dean pointed out earlier, and is conveniently left out of the WaPo article, these funds represent teachers and police officers, whose unions probably contributed to Obama's election.

I am adding GM to my list of products I don't buy on principle, right up there with French beer. Although I have purchased Dodge minivans in the past, no more, but that is also a practical decision over their pathetic decline in quality.

Keeping Our Streets Safe?

The esteemed mayor of Los Angeles, is keeping the streets of LA safe in between intimate moments with TV anchors, by sponsoring the buy back of guns, and getting them off the streets. The big headline from last month was "L.A. gun buyback nets 1,700 weapons, including grenade launcher." Wow, so what happens when you can get $100 bucks in coupons from Ralph's for any firearm you turn in. I liberated the following quote out of an email from Pop.

I got a call from a friend who is a big time sportsman. Makes his living outfitting hunting trips, teaching firearms courses, etc. He wanted to know how he could best use four $100 Ralph’s gift cards; give them to the church to give to the needy, use them to buy groceries for the poor pantry or what? I asked him where he got the cards and he said that LA had a “Make the streets safer” campaign. If you turned in a firearm of the proper category, no questions asked, they would give you a $100 Ralph’s card. So he and his buddies rounded 11 totally useless weapons, 8 of which were in the right category for redemption, took them to LA and came home with the 8 gift cards. All of the weapons were good only for scrap metal. One worst had been found in a trash heap on an abandoned farm in Chino. You could not see down the barrel for corrosion. $100 may seem like a lot of money for a piece of scrap metal but not to a mayor could tell his constituents how many guns that he had removed from the streets of LA and how they were safer tonight because his actions. God bless you, mayor. We need more public servants like you.

Carbon Conservativism

Conservatives and Libertarians are losing credibility by arguing that man made sources are not responsible for global warming. While I appreciate that the left has seized on the issue in order to seize our income and control of the economy, arguing against the underlying science is a long term losing proposition. Further, having done nothing about the issue when they controlled the Congress and the Presidency, the Republicans have paved the way for Henry Waxman's hair-brained, reward-your-buddies scheme that will actually do little to nothing to solve the problem. For scathing critiques of Waxman-Hartley also see the Reason article and Economist article.

First, I want to examine a little of the science. It is established fact that greenhouse gases, CO2, water vapor, ozone and methane, exist and cause the surface temperature of the earth to be about 57 deg F warmer than if they were not present. Hooray, it would be mighty cold without them. I worked the equations to determine this difference in a college level physics class well before the current debate. Further, the concentration of CO2 is increasing steadily and is now about 37% higher than a century ago, so it is not too far a stretch to believe that this will cause a warming of the earth's atmosphere. How much? Perhaps one degree Celsius. However, we continue to increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.



The historical record of the last million years has been dominated by ice ages, with relatively brief warming periods that occur on a 100,000 year cycle. We are currently in such a warming period, called the holocene that started about 10,000 years ago. During the warming period, the rise in carbon dioxide levels generally lagged the rise in temperature by 800 to 1100 years. While this proves that historically, CO2 did not cause the initial increase in temperatures, it is hypothesized that the rising carbon dioxide levels, released from warmer oceans, due to lower CO2 solubility created a positive feedback effect that caused temperatures to rise quickly.

Today, we appear to be in a historically anomalous time. The interglacial period has lasted almost as long as any for the last million years, so it is an open question as to whether the increased carbon dioxide will be overwhelmed by the natural forces that seem to be cooling the earth over the longer haul. More importantly, the surface temperatures of the earth have been very stable during the holocene; this very predictability has contributed to economic development. The argument on the left is that because we are dependent on temperature stability for our current economic structures, it would be disastrous to allow anthropegenic (man-made) global warming to upset the balance.

However, the balance is likely to be upset anyway, and it seems that the Waxman's proposal is to wreck the economy to in order to save it. However, because the main source of global warming is the burning of fossil fuels, which is associated with air pollution, it would still seem prudent to reduce carbon emissions in a way that does the least damage to the wealth of the planet, for the very reason that this wealth will be needed to adapt to climate changes that have probably become unstoppable for the time being. Because I believe in the power of deregulation and free markets to effect change, the proposal that makes the most sense is to phase in a carbon tax and offset the revenue with an equal phased reduction of the income tax. This has the advantage of not choosing favorites with respect to which alternative sources of non-carbonated energy should be used and minimizing the impact to the economy. Because it doesn't raise revenues nor reward favored groups, Democrats will never go for it. Republicans, you suck too, for not putting this in place when you had the chance. Now, we are all going to suffer.

I will post more on this topic at a later date.

I am calling out 'Dawg to comment. Other posters are welcome as well.

I leave you with a quote from Reason: "Man-made climate change may be a huge problem, but cap-and-trade proponents need to stop pretending that the solution will cost virtually nothing while producing more jobs than it destroys."

Obama Memo to Hecklers: I'm Popular, You're Not, So Shut Up Already

Concerned that hecklers are reminding the public that Obama has actually attempted to take a stand on some positions, Rahm Emmanuel has drafted a memo to would-be hecklers at future Obama speaking events. TLT has obtained a leaked copy on a memo that offers insight on the thinking of the new administration. Some quotes:

"Both the POTUS and the TOTUS must be seen at all times as the impartial and wise judges of all they survey. Reminding the audience of their actual position on abortion, for instance, distracts from the key message of Obama as head of a worldwide reunification movement, in which he constantly asks 'Why can't we all just get along?'"

Addressing potential hecklers, "You must remember that President Obama is very popular, and you are not. You should go home because you lack popular support on abortion for instance."
"You should consider that if your name becomes known, Democrat minions in state government will investigate you and lackeys in the press will smear you."
"As you know, Obama is the first black President. Publicly disagreeing with him will cause many to think you are racist, and if they don't, liberal bloggers will remind them that you are."

Third Party Payer and Prayer

Over the weekend, I was making a few calls to recent visitors to our church. One woman, a nurse named Anne asked for prayer for Melissa, an 18 year old. Melissa had been in and out of her large HMO's doctor's offices with pain in multiple parts of her body for the last nine months. (Just call this HMO K.) Finally, she was able to be seen at UCSD Medical Center and was told she has bone cancer that has spread throughout her body. They sent her home to die. Anne asks for prayer, because Melissa has no faith and is afraid of dying. Please join me in praying for her.

It also turns out that the doctors at K thought she was a teen hypochondriac trying to get pain meds. I am not alleging that she could have been saved by earlier treatment, but it seems to me that when doctors and hospitals are not being paid by the patient, we start to distort the relationship. The patients often seek treatments that might not if it was their own money. HMOs, in an effort to keep treatment affordable, erect barriers to obtaining specialty care. There are certainly enough horror stories about HMOs for us to see the worst effect of this phenomenom.

But rather than cast blame on HMOs or patients for that matter, I think we should reconsider third party payer for health care and insurance. Wouldn't we all be better served if the patient was the one with the power to decide how their health care dollars get spent and had an incentive to limit their own treatment because they would receive some cash back? Something to consider as we debate health care "reform." As discussed at Carpe Diem, health care costs for cosmetic surgey have been contained, because insurance doesn't cover this.

I know the left will object that some people will die because they can't afford treatment, but that is what catastrophic caps are for. As for the rest of the debate, I don't care what the left will say, the relationship is better and therefore the care will be better when the patient is truly seen as the customer.

Kim Outwits Obama - UN Outraged

UN High Commissioner for Intellectual Fairness, Clive Smith-Graves expressed outrage today at Kim Jong Il's punking of Barack Obama with his latest underground nuke test. "We strive for fairness in these battle of wits," explained the commissioner, "it's certainly beyond the pale for Kim to be engaged in such mental fisticuffs against an overmatched opponent." Only days before the test, the Obama administration was reportedly relaxed over the prospect of such a test. "I tell ya, they sucker punched us," said Rahm "Mickey" Emmanuel, Obama's handler. "Who'd a thunk that Kim saying he was going to conduct a test was any kind of warning. I tell ya, Obama has the talent to become a good fighter, but instead of that he's becoming a legbreaker to some cheap, second rate loanshark." When asked which loanshark he had in mind, Emmanuel declined to comment.

Smith-Graves explained that there are good reasons for UN rules for these sorts of affairs. "Allowing battles of wits to get out of hand can lead to real violence. It's like the class valedictorean teasing the schoolyard bully that he can't do his sums; the bully ends up breaking our hero's nose. I think we all have lived through this kind of situation," he sniffed. Asked what action the UN would be taking, Smith-Graves responded, "You know, the usual, feigned outrage, empty resolutions and private toasts that the U.S. has once again received it's well deserved comeuppance."

Hiatus

Friends and Readers,
As you have already noticed, I have not blogged in a while and was getting pretty inconsistent. I find that my heart isn't into blogging of late and the guilt I feel over not blogging only makes me feel worse. Additionally, this administration is proving far more rotten and vile than I had imagined, thank you George Bush for setting this up, and my anger and outrage can only last so long before it exhausts me. Finally, I have taken on some personal responsibilities that I find challenging.

As a consequence, I am going to give blogging a break. If and when I feel ready to start again, I will ask KT and Dean to let you know via their blogs. Thank you to those who have been reading and commenting, I hope my attitude improves soon.

B-Daddy

Weekend Music Chill

For no particular reason, other than I have been listening to exceptionally "smooth" music lately, I wanted to put up Bryan Ferry of Roxy Music doing "More Than This." And hey, who doesn't like 80's music, except Pops of course. If anybody understands the Christian iconography at the start of the video, please comment.

Saving Newspapers

Dean has been commenting about the demise of newspapers here and here. I must admit, I share Dean's fondness for them. It's easier to read them while eating breakfast (and less sloppy) than sitting in front of my computer or scrolling the Blackberry. Government cash is only going to kill the newspaper industry, so I thought I would present a different business model, so they can be saved.

Newspapers have some strengths they should play to. First, they have an unparalleled knowledge of the local community. Second, if they haven't squandered it, they have a reputation for even-handedness in reporting. Finally, and much overlooked, they have a low cost distribution network.

So what's to be done? First, to cut costs, they need to jettison the foreign bureaus and anything else where they can't be be number one or two. Second, they can't compete with the free ads offered by Craigslist and The Reader online, so don't try. Instead they should offer their ads for free on line.

I know what you're thinking, where does the money come from? First, if classified advertisers also want their ad in print, then they get charged, but it is going to be the same ad as offered on line to keep costs down. Second, their traditional source of print ads from businesses will remain, but probably continue to decline. But the key to further revenue streams is to emulate Google and Facebook.

I think that newspapers can successfully compete with Craigslist because Craigslist has failed to monetize their operation, so a monetized operation can probably deliver a better product. Craigslist only charges for a few categories of ads. Newspapers could offer targeted ads based on viewer searches and page views of other ads, advertising on top of advertising, but it already works. Just like Google delivers ads targeted based on user search so can the newspapers. They will probably even want to outsource the technology provisioning to Google, at least initially. Although I would be personally wary of Google's business practices, their failure to prevent click fraud being my chief concern.

Next, subscribers would get online accounts, to go with home delivery, that will allow them to receive coupons or other bargains they can't get anywhere else, to incentivize on line use. Developing a knowledge of consumer preferences from the subscriber base will allow the newspapers to deliver targeted free samples or coupons to their readership. This is intended to emulate the way Facebook delivers ads based on your interests and seems to make good money doing so. This is also something no else can do as cheaply as newspapers and plays to one of their strengths, in distribution. To my knowledge, the only targeted physical advertising today goes through the mail system. Seems like competing with post office shouldn't be too tough, especially with more in depth customer knowledge.

This plan is just a broad outline, and as simple as it appears, I doubt that most newspapers will do anything about it. For some reason, practitioners in dying industries tend to stop innovating and circle the wagons. I hope for a better outcome, so that's my two cents.

More Spending, More Debt

The Senate passed Obama's budget 55-43 today. After eight years of spending excess under Bush, the Democrats are going piling in for seconds thirds and fourths. This will certainly solve our long term problems:

The Obama budget would borrow an estimated $9.3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office, doubling the public debt as a share of the nation's output from 41 percent to 82 percent. The budget calls for nearly $4 trillion in deficits over the next five years.

So where will all this cash come from? KT has been all over this. There are really only two sources left, the Chinese and printing it. The Chinese have indicated they aren't happy with us debasing their investment, so count them out.

As America's biggest creditor, Beijing is now worried about its over-investment in U.S. Treasury debts. "We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S.," Premier Wen Jiabao said last month. "Of course, we are concerned about the safety of our assets." He called on the Obama administration to "maintain its good credit, honor its promises and guarantee the safety of China's assets."

Stand by for inflation, hopefully sooner than later, so we can turn out Obama like a one term Carter type Presidency that we deserved for electing such an unprepared fool.

Punkin' Europe

The fabulous (or not) sculpture, titled Entropa, pictured at right was commissioned by the Czech Republic to commemorate the occasion of taking over the rotating Presidency of the EU. Since my readership is probably not comprised of trendy hipsters of the art scene, this requires some explanation. The sculptor, David Černý, created this 8 ton masterpiece as a sort of unassembled model kit, with each piece representing a member state of the EU. He purportedly brought together 27 artists, one from each member state, to assemble this erection, unveiled in January of this year.

Some of my favorite representations:
The Netherlands - submerged in the sea, with minarets poking up out of the water.
France - with a sign that tranlates "strike" (GRÈVE) is blank because "as a result of the global and local politicial, economic and cultural situation" the artist is on strike.
Romania is a Dracula style theme park.
Bulgaria is depicted as a Turkish style toilet.
And for Dean, Sweden is a large Ikea style furniture self assembly box containing Gripen fighter planes.

Later, Černý admitted that there were no other artists and returned the $50,000 commission he had received. He also covered up the Turkish toilet.

H/T Reason magazine.

Anti-Capitalist Protesters at G20 Summit?

The headline from the Daily Mail reads "Protesters storm RBS office as thousands of anti-capitalists ransack the City in G20 riot." My question: What makes them so sure? And I mean both the protesters and The Mail. I defy you to show me a capitalist at the G20 summit. So what are these a**hats protesting?

On the subject of who is the capitalist, see the G20 web site for membership and let me know if you find a capitalist country listed.

I'd much prefer to hang with protesters with a sense of humor. At least those guys know they are anti-socialist. Which begs the question, if anti-socialist and anti-capitalist protesters have the same object of their ire, who is right?