Monday, March 19, 2007

NY Times: MUSSOLINI EAGER TO MAINTAIN PEACE

The news media assure us that Iraq is a disaster and that the UN represents the scientific consensus on global warming. The news media's accuracy is easy to assess in retrospect and it isn't good. Consider this New York Times headline from Jun 5, 1933:
MUSSOLINI EAGER TO MAINTAIN PEACE [caps in original]
Yes, this NY Times story, written by Anne O'Hare McCormick, claimed that the great fascist was "eager" for peace. The story ($$) continues:
Mussolini, the conciliator, is no longer the flaming captain who headed the young armies of blackshirts in the march on Rome. Rather, he is the sober statesman, striving to calm and reassure panicky nations which are as jumpy as a man with a toothache. ....

No one who meets him today can doubt his conversion to the cause of world peace.

If you believe that the news media are unbiased and have layers of editors and fact checkers, then you should believe that 1930s fascists were dedicated to the cause of world peace.

Quick Press Bias Links

The L.A. Times, seemingly on purpose, misstates the facts in the firing of US Attorney Carol Lam to make it seem like the firing was retribution for targeting a Republican house member. Additional misrepresentations on the attorney firing issue are detailed here. Contrast this with how the "unbiased" media treated Pres. Clinton's firing of the attorney who was investigating the whitewater scandal.

American deaths in Iraq have declined since the surge begin.  The NY Times bizarrely finds a way to spin this as a negative.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Childhood pain and liberalism

It is often observed that Democrats are more depressed/pessimistic than Republicans. Part of this could be due to childhood experiences. Consider Sen. Obama who wrote about his childhood:
I kept finding the same anguish, the same doubt, a self-contempt that neither irony nor intellect seemed able to deflect,
Barack Obama's family situation must have been quite painful, at least if we believe the (UK) Daily Mail's research into Sen. Obama's father:
At 18, [Barack's father, Obama Sr.] married a girl called Kezia. But Obama Snr was more interested in politics and economics than his family and his political leanings had been brought to the notice of leaders of the Kenyan Independence movement. .... At the age of 23 he headed for university in Hawaii, leaving behind the pregnant Kezia and their baby son.

Relatives say he was already a slick womaniser and, once in Honolulu, he promptly persuaded a fellow student called Ann - a naive 18-year-old white girl - to marry him. Barack Jnr was born in August, 1961.

Two years later, Obama Snr was on the move again. He was accepted at Harvard, and left his little boy and wife behind when he moved to the exclusive east coast university....

...Ann divorced her husband after she discovered his bigamous double life. She remarried and moved to Indonesia with young Barack and her new husband, an oil company manager.

Obama Snr was forced to return to Kenya, where he fathered two more children by Kezia. He was eventually hired as a top civil servant in the fledgling government of Jomo Kenyatta - and married yet again.

Now prosperous with a flashy car and good salary, his third wife was an American-born teacher called Ruth, whom he had met at Harvard while still legally married to both Kezia and Ann, and who followed him to Africa.

A relative of Mr Obama says: "We told him[Barack] how his father would still go to Kezia and it was during these visits that she became pregnant with two more children. He also had two children with Ruth."

It is alleged that Ruth finally left him after he repeatedly flew into whisky-fuelled rages, beating her brutally.

Friends say drinking blighted his life - he lost both his legs while driving under the influence and also lost his job.

However, this was no bar to his womanising: he sired a son, his eighth child, by yet another woman and continued to come home drunk.

He was about to marry her when he finally died in yet another drunken crash when Obama was 21.

Alexander Hamilton was also abandoned by his father. Between the ages of 10 and 14, young Alexander was not only abandoned by his father but also his mother died, his cousin, who cared for Hamilton after his parents left, committed suicide. Also during these same years, Alexander's aunt, uncle, and grandmother died. [Src: Ron Chernow's book, p.26]. A conservative might think that abandonment by a father would lead a person to distrust authority. However, both Mr. Obama and Mr. Hamilton adopted a political belief in giving central governments more power and authority.

In contrast, while we know relatively little about the childhood of Hamilton's opponent, Thomas Jefferson, what we do know points to a relatively uneventful childhood in a stable family with none of the pain and instability that either Mr. Obama or Mr. Hamilton endured. Mr. Jefferson was early America's leading advocate of small and decentralized government.

Paranoia strikes deep

The Washington Post reports:
"Ladies and gentlemen, what happened in New Orleans could happen anywhere," [Mayor] Nagin said at a dinner sponsored by the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a trade group for newspapers that target black readers. "They are studying this model of natural disasters, dispersing the community and changing the electoral process in that community." [emphasis added]
Sometimes the left tells us that Pres Bush is dumb. At other times, he is supposed to be at the center of a vast political intrigue that involves control of the weather for the purpose of harming minorities. Whether it is 9-11, hurricane Katrina, or the JFK assassination, the left believes in huge secretive conspiracies.

Civilization to collapse says global warming alarmist

The apocalypse is coming:
"If humans pursue a business-as-usual course for the first half of this century, I believe the collapse of civilisation due to climate change becomes inevitable." --from The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery, [emphasis added]
Tim Flannery is a field zoologist. That is closer to being a hard scientist that sociology.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Democrats listen to the children

In 1980 during the presidential candidates debate, Pres. Jimmy Carter infamously explained that he had asked his daughter for advice on nuclear weapons policy. Two decades later, Pres. Clinton, in front of stunned middle east leaders, asked his daughter for her opinion on peace plans. Earlier this year, the Vermont legislature asked 6th grade students for their opinion on global warming. Well, they do say the children are our future.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Abandoning superstition

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Ca) is apparently the highest ranking atheist in the American government. One might hope that such a person who had abandoned ancient superstitions would be a model of the new enlightened scientific man. Rep. Stark, however, does not seem to be such a model. In 2003, the San Francisco Chronicle reviewed his behavior:
Stark, 71, added to his legend of buffoonery last week when he called Rep. Scott McInnis, R-Colo., "a little wimp" and a "little fruitcake" -- and suggested the two should step outside. Capitol police were called to the hearing.

It was reminiscent of the 2001 debate when Stark made a reference to the children of Rep. J.C. Watts, R-Okla., all being "born out of wedlock." It was not only insulting, it was -- as Watts pointedly told Stark in a face-to-face confrontation -- not true.

And there was the time he accused Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., of being a "whore for the insurance industry." Stark once brought up President Bush's personal battles with alcohol during a debate on federal funding of faith- based programs.

Yes, this is the same Pete Stark who in 1990 suggested former Health and Human Services Director Louis Sullivan, an African American, was a "disgrace to his race."

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Today's global warming scare from AP

The AP has a frightening story on the effects of global warming:
The harmful effects of global warming on daily life are already showing up, and within a couple of decades hundreds of millions of people won't have enough water, top scientists will say next month at a meeting in Belgium.....

"Things are happening and happening faster than we expected," said Patricia Romero Lankao of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., one of the many co-authors of the new report.

So, you might ask, what are Ms. Lankao's qualifications for writing about how fast the climate is changing? Google her and you find that she is a sociologist.

Democrats: "Do as I say, not as I do"

Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) smokes. After the Democrats have spent decades waging a war against tobacco, there are few public places for him to smoke now. At the Capital Hill Club, where Republican legislators hang out, smoking is illegal under D.C. law. So, Rep. Boehner has to travel to the National Democratic Club which, unlike the Republican's club, has exemption to get around the District's new smoking ban.

Thursday, March 08, 2007

Who cares about genocide?

Which country has an ongoing genocide "10 times greater than Darfur's and more than twice as large as Rwanda's"? That would be Zimbabwe according to a well-researched article by James Kirchick in The New Republic online. That the usual politically-correct sources have expressed little concern over this is possibly due to the socialist/communist pretensions of Zimbabwe's president Mugabe.

For the love of disaster

With the global warming disaster scenario so much in the news, it seems useful to review past popular disaster scenarios. Michael Fumento reviews a past king of disaster predictions, Paul Ehrlich. History has proven Mr. Ehrlich wrong again and again. Yet his popularity and fame only grow. In 1996, Mr. Fumento wrote:

Ehrlich, a butterfly specialist, began his spectacular doomsaying career back in 1968 with his best-selling book "The Population Bomb." Among his predictions then and since:

  • "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines . . . hundreds of millions of people (including Americans) are going to starve to death." (1968)
  • "Smog disasters" in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (1969)
  • "I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." (1969)
  • "Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion." (1976)

Yet today: 1) Food production is well ahead of population growth and obesity now kills 300,000 Americans a year, 2) the air in New York and L.A. is cleaner than it has been in decades, 3) with two years until 2000, England's odds are looking mighty good, and 4) there are no key minerals facing depletion. Almost all of them, along with raw materials in general, are far cheaper now relative either to the Consumer Price Index or wages.

But have Ehrlich's preposterous predictions hurt his reputation? Far from it - they've made him both celebrated and rich.

In one year - 1990 - he published a sequel to "Bomb" called "The Population Explosion," received the MacArthur Foundation's famous "genius award" with a $345,000 check, and split a Swedish Royal Academy of Science prize worth $120,000.

Just a few months ago, the New York Times published an Op-Ed by Thomas Homer-Dixon who, despite everything, claims that maybe Ehrlich will somehow turn out to be right after all. From Malthus to Ehrlich to Gore, whether the cause is pollution or population or divine retribution, many people seem to have a need to believe in the coming apocalypse.

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Peace activists turn violent

On Monday, three peace protesters were arrested for third-degree assault. This is not unusual. Last month, a peace protester was arrested for assault against suspected Republicans. In 2002, a march of 1500 peace protesters in Belgium turned violent and 29 were arrested. In 1968, 200 were arrested in a violent peace protest in London. Historically, if peace protesters favor peace, it is only as an end not as a means.

UPDATE: James Taranto has two more current examples (scroll to "They love to hate hate") of peace protesters getting violent.

My enemy's enemy is my friend?

Newsweek profiles Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of the bestselling book Infidel, who is now living in exile. Christopher Hitchens finds that Newsweek has turned the facts upside down:
Accompanying the article is a typically superficial Newsweek Q sidebar, which is almost unbelievably headed: "A Bombthrower's Life." The subject of this absurd headline is a woman [Ayaan Hirsi Ali] who has been threatened with horrific violence, by Muslims varying from moderate to extreme, ever since she was a little girl. She has more recently had to see a Dutch friend butchered in the street, been told that she is next, and now has to live with bodyguards in Washington, D.C. She has never used or advocated violence. Yet to whom does Newsweek refer as the "Bombthrower"? It's always the same with these bogus equivalences: They start by pretending loftily to find no difference between aggressor and victim, and they end up by saying that it's the victim of violence who is "really" inciting it. [emphasis added]
The behavior of Ms. Ali's critics, as described by Mr. Hitchens, fits a familiar pattern in which America's enemies, or maybe more precisely Geo. Bush's enemies, are imagined to have all manner of good qualities that all could see if only America, or Pres. Bush, or, in this case, Ms. Ali, would stop misbehaving.

In mosques in London's Islamic community, there are lectures on the proper way to beat your wife. They preach death to gays. Liberals would find all of this repulsive if they were not busy defending it against the perceived criticisms of Ms. Ali or Mr. Bush. Instead, Newsweek describes that London muslim community with lovingly PC terms like "thriving," "modern," and "diverse."

UPDATE: Bret Stephens has much more on the strange socialist-islamist alliance.

Monday, March 05, 2007

Is bin Laden just like one of us?

Similar to the New York Times piece discussed below, Sunday's Washington Post has an Op-Ed by Alberto Mora and Thomas Pickering bemoaning the lack of terrorists rights and its effect on our "reputation":
Our country's detention policy has undermined its reputation around the world.... [emphasis added]
Why would reputation be important? They see it this way:
The United States cannot expect other nations to afford its citizens the basic guarantees provided by habeas corpus unless it provides those guarantees to others.
This pleasant theory, though, does not pass a reality check. In the past 70 years, American POWs have been held by North Vietnam, North Korea, Saddan's Iraq, and Japan, none of which followed international standards. All tortured US POWs with real torture, not the panties-on-the-head "torture" that so concerns liberals now. Our "reputation" was irrelevant. More recently al Qaeda has captured Americans. Can anyone honestly imagine al Qaeda deciding to extend legal rights to prisoners before videotaping their beheading? Of course not because al Qaeda is philosophically opposed to all Western ideas of civil rights.

In Mora and Pickering's world, however, the enemies of America shares the same goals and dreams as liberals and decide how to treat prisoners after considering America's "reputation" for civil rights. This is like Sen. Murray imaging that bin Laden shares her passion for daycare centers. (More examples here.) This liberal view may not be rational but it is one that many hold consistently.

Fretting over America's image

A New York Times editorial proposes a terrorist bill of rights. Some of the well-qualified lawyer-bloggers have, in my opinion, long ago shown the legal arguments and 'facts' claimed by the NYT to be specious. Below, I excerpt the emotional arguments. The NYT seems to think what others think of us is very important, as if the world was one big high school:
[Habeas corpus] is essential to bringing integrity to the detention system and reviving the United States’ credibility. ....

[The Military Commissions Act that] Mr. Bush triumphantly announced ... was a defeat for America’s image around the world. ....

The United States should apologize.... [emphasis added]

As noted previously, French law provides for extensive rights to detain suspected terrorists. Will the NYT ever fret about France's need to restore its "image" or "credibility"?

More importantly, will the NYT ever call for bin Laden to "apologize"?

PREVIOUSLY on the subject of "image" over substance: "I don't fall down"

Sunday, March 04, 2007

Channel 4 (UK) to show documentary skeptical of UN's "global warming" spin

On Thursday, Channel 4 (UK) will show a global warming documentary. This summary includes some quotes from the scientists that they interviewed:
I've often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue, that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system, Well I am one scientist, and there are many, that simply think that is not true. -- John Christy, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center, NSSTC University of Alabama.
As for what does cause climate change, if the human influence is not so large:
Solar activity over the last hundred years, over the last several hundred years, correlates very nicely, on a decadal basis, with temperature. --Ian Clark, Professor of Isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology at the Dept of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Separately, Russia has been developing more accurate methods to measure solar activity and Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, believes that solar activity accounts for most of the observed climate changes both here on Earth and on Mars. This result seems to be in line with a Danish study noted here.

Previous posts on this subject are here, here, here, here, here, and here.

UPDATE: A list of 76 scientists willing to go on the record as skeptical of global warming is here.

UPDATE: Another physics professor, Bjarne Andresen of University of Copenhagen, has expressed doubts about the UN interpretation about the usefulness of the "global warming" concepts and warming's affects on the climate. His study will be published in the Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

The Cambodia-Iraq parallel

Democrats and the news media seem to have a strong desire to repeat in Iraq the disaster 30-years ago of abandoning Cambodia. Scott Johnson reviews the parallels.

This contrasts strongly with the understanding of history that some Iraqis have, as explained in an interview that Stars and Stripes conducted with Col. MacFarland:

Now, “If you talk to these sheiks, they’ll tell you that they’re in no hurry to see the Americans leave al-Anbar,” he said.

“One thing Sheikh Sattar keeps saying is he wants al-Anbar to be like Germany and Japan and South Korea were after their respective wars, with a long-term American presence helping ... put them back together,” MacFarland said. “The negative example he cites is Vietnam. He says, yeah, so, Vietnam beat the Americans, and what did it get them? You know, 30 years later, they’re still living in poverty.”

Hat tip alphabetcity.

ADDENDUM: Another parallel to Iraq is the US Civil War. As noted here and at Gateway Pundit, the Democrats ("Copperhead Democrats") blamed the Civil War on the North and wanted to settle even if it meant letting the South keep their slaves.

UPDATE: A Commentary article is now online which includes a passage written in 1994 by well-known former-Kissinger-critic William Schawcross discussing press-bias in the 1970s that seems so similar to today's coverage of Iraq:

[T]hose of us who opposed the American
war in Indochina should be extremely hum-
ble in the face of the appalling aftermath: a
form of genocide in Cambodia and horrific
tyranny in both Vietnam and Laos. Looking
back on my own coverage for the [London]
Sunday Times of the South Vietnamese war
effort of 1970-75, I think I concentrated too
easily on the corruption and incompetence
of the South Vietnamese and their American
allies, was too ignorant of the inhuman
Hanoi regime, and far too willing to believe
that a victory by the Communists would pro-
vide a better future.
Scott Johnson has more.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

Democrats oppose democracy

Secret ballots have long been recognized as essential to functioning democracy. However, the Democrat-controlled House just voted 241-185 to strip workers of the right to secret ballot elections before a union is recognized. This would remove a right that has been in place since 1935.

Previously on this topic: The skeptics of democracy

UPDATE: More details on the House bill are here.

The Canadian view of global warming

Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Defense Minister, believes that the answer to global warming lies in UFO technology:
I would like to see what (alien) technology there might be that could eliminate the burning of fossil fuels within a generation ... that could be a way to save our planet....

We need to persuade governments to come clean on what they know. Some of us suspect they know quite a lot, and it might be enough to save our planet if applied quickly enough





powered by performancing firefox

The Joys of Demonization

If the MSM gets a story wrong, what should it do? Blame Matt Drudge. Michael S Malone of ABC News writes about Alan Greenspan's latest comments:
Indeed, the story was so unthrilling that it appears only AP covered it - and, contrary to its current reputation, actually managed to write a balanced and objective story. And, as you might expect, it produced little more than a shrug from the financial markets.



But that's when Drudge stepped in. For no obvious reason, he decided to link to the two day old AP story. He then attached one of his classic scare headlines: "Greenspan warns of likely U.S. recession." Personally, I love stuff like that - it harkens back to the good old days of newspapering and the vastly underrated age of yellow journalism - and if the viewer chose to read the term 'imminent' into Drudge's words, and then link through to the AP story . . .well, bully for Matt. That's his job, and he does it better than anybody.
ABC News got that completely wrong: "Greenspan warns of likely U.S. recession" was not written by Drudge but rather was the AP headline for the story used by several MSM outlets, as can be seen here and here. Drudge merely copied the AP headline. Matt Drudge must make such a fun target that ABC News' "fact-checkers" took a holiday.

Further, despite ABC's claims, the AP story was not "balanced and objective."





powered by performancing firefox

Clicky Web Analytics