May 31, 2007

Global warming warning warning

No, this is not a warning about global warming per se, but about the high levels of global warming blather we are certain to be hearing as the presidential campaign - you should excuse the expression - heats up. As I'm sure you can imagine, each one of the major candidates is going to be asked his/her opinion on the subject ad infinitum and it will all mean nothing because none of them knows much about the science of the matter other than what they are told by advisers who themselves usually know little. And even if some of those advisers know more, are the candidates themselves qualified to understand and analyze the information? I haven't seen too many science PhDs in the field.

That science itself is far from unified in their view of the situation came to the fore again today when NASA's top official, of all people, made a statement to the effect that the global warming problem was over-rated. Was he right? Beats me. (I'm not qualified to analyze it either.) But he certainly generated a response from another NASA official who evidently had made a prominent appearance in Al Gore's film. Three guesses where he stood.

Maybe we should make people take a pop science quiz before they are allowed to offer a public opinion on global warming - something like "define the second law of thermodynamics" and if they can't do it, they shouldn't bore us with their opinion on the subject. That would take care of most movie stars, politicians, Hannity & Colmes and ninety-five percent of the pundits on television. Sooner or later, however, we will have to suck it up and allow the pols some say because some kind of political action will have to be taken on the matter. But it's much simpler and far less controversial to me to look at energy consumption as a conservation and quality of life issue. That's somewhat more, even a lot more, comprehensible than the level of anthropogenic global warming, which has to be, as we have seen, taken largely on faith. Pollution is something we have all observed. Also, easy to understand is not wanting to enrich our enemies. We've all seen what they've done with our oil money. That doesn't take, as they say, a rocket scientist.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 3:32 PM
Comments (25)

May 30, 2007

Rosie O'Donnell: There's money in paranoia

If the whole subject of 9-11 weren't so serious, you could get a big laugh at the idea of Rosie O'Donnell pontificating on such technical subjects as the melting point of steel. According to Wikipedia, Rosie didn't make it through college and my best guess is she'd have a helluva time passing high school physics or maybe even geometry. But we live in a day and age when everybody has an opinion on scientific matters whether or not they've seen the inside of a petri dish or even know what one is.

Of course that Rosie is mostly clueless about science only works to her advantage. She doesn't have to trouble herself with pesky facts. This also helps her as a conspiracy theorist because they can't show doubt-the essence of the scientific method- at any time.

Speaking of conspiracy theorists, for the most part they bore me stiff. Rosie O'Donnell certainly does. But I'm beginning to be jealous of them - there's gold in them thar hills. And the more bizarre the accusation .... such as Rosie's contention that 7 World Trade Center may have been taken down by Enron to avoid investigation????.... the more money can be made from it. Maybe I should think of a really good conspiracy and write a book about it. How about.... Ahmadinejad is a CIA agent? [But everyone already knows that's true.-ed. They do?]

Posted by Roger at 4:16 PM
Comments (13)

May 29, 2007

McCain - Slip... Slidin' Away

The two most recent political polls our (Rasmussen and Zogby) show a continuing slide for John McCain. Maybe Rich Miniter is right. He will be out by Fall. F. Thompson, still undeclared, seems to be hanging around in a statistical tie with Romney and McCain beneath the still front-running Rudy.

How is Rudy's continued popularity possible when Republicans are supposed to abjure his social views? I think Hugh Hewitt puts his finger on it:

This realism about the next decade is very much alive within large numbers of Americans, and it is what secures Rudy's position at the top of the national polls and which presents the greatest challenge to Romney and eventually Thompson --they have to persuade the security-conscious voter that they are at least as reliable as Rudy in a crisis. If the country is struck a blow even greater than 9/11 --and many of us think such an event is inevitable-- will Romney or Thompson be able to meet or exceed Rudy's almost certain-to-be ferocious response to our enemy abroad and vigorous repair of the damage at home?

Hugh goes on to link this problem - an internal jihadist threat - to a strong stand on immigration. Although I have tremendous sympathy for the poor of Mexico and Central America, I basically agree with him. Hugely difficult as it is, if we don't know who is in our country, we are not safe in the modern world. A national identity card - as so many nations now have - is the bottom line first step. You can't even give amnesty without it, assuming that is what you want to do. Sorry, but I have little respect for those who feel this is an invasion of their privacy. They are living on a rigid ideological Pluto (which, I remind you, is no longer a planet). Actually, fairness itself dictates a national ID when there are so many other forms of ID out there from driver's licenses to credit cards. At least there will be some hope of accountability in the madness. And, please, spare us the cliché-ridden nonsense that the federal government can't do anything. It can when it puts its collective mind to it. Don't believe me? Go here. Or here. The idea that the federal government can't do anything is just as dopey as the reverse.

Posted by Roger at 4:06 PM
Comments (26)

In my mailbox

A review copy of Voices of Protest: Documents of Courage and Dissent. These documents range from Emma Goldman to Ronald Reagan. Now that's what I call scope!

Posted by Roger at 4:00 PM
Comments (0)

Attention Newsweek!

Worried about Korans in the toilet in Abu Ghraib (not)? Read this?

Posted by Roger at 3:15 PM
Comments (1)

May 27, 2007

Confessions of a Chickenhawk on Memorial Day Weekend

I never joined the Army, wouldn't have thought of it, in fact did everything I could to avoid the draft during Vietnam short of burning my draft card because ... I was too chicken even to do that (there ... I've said it!).

But wait, as they say, there's more.

When I so much as see violence in the street I do my best to avoid it. Once, sitting on a restaurant patio in Venice CA, when I witnessed some gangbangers bashing in the face of a member of another gang, I bolted back inside the restaurant like the Road Runner, ostensibly to make sure someone was "calling the cops," but really because I was scared out of my knickers they'd beat the crap out of me. On other occasions I have crossed the street when I have seen scary characters coming down the sidewalk, sometimes two or three blocks off. I don't go too close to the weight lifters on Muscle Beach and I generally steer clear of bikers. I don't even own a gun and, although the Second Amendment makes some sense to me, I have never seriously considered buying one.

My family's military history isn't very distinguished either. My father served in World War II, but was sick most of the time and never left the US. An uncle of mine went to West Point but dropped out after two years.

In much more recent times, I have been invited, once or twice, to visit Iraq to report on the situation over there but declined, saying I have a wife and eight-year old daughter (don't our troops?) and that didn't allow me to go. Actually I was thinking "no-way-hosay-I-don't-want-be shot."

But then I wondered. Maybe I would go ... Now ... If I were single. And therein lies the reason for this post: More than anyone I can think of, this onetime war protester, who had pacifism drummed into his head as child by his mother, admires the US troops. Not only are they defending our county, they are defending the best of our civilization. They are more than our hope. They are humanity's hope, even if some sections of our body politic and media do not want to admit it.

But I wouldn't be surprised if ... just like us "Off the Pig" hippies calling the cops in days of yore when our houses were broken into ... those same anti-war "progressives" will soon be screaming bloody murder for the help of that military to whom they now pay only lip service. That would be poetic justice, but much as I might enjoy it, I sincerely hope that it is justice that doesn't have to be served. And if it isn't, it will be, ironically, because of our military.

UPDATE: Something you can do for our military on Memorial Day - donate your frequent flier miles to wounded soldiers. [Full disclosure: I am donating some, not all, of mine.]

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:48 AM
Comments (66)

Never trust ...

... biased reviews. [Even if you have written them yourself?-ed. All the more reason.]

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:33 AM
Comments (0)

May 26, 2007

Stop tofu abuse! Mangez le foie gras!

How could I missed this important post from Louis la Vache with which I am completement d'accord. (Well, not completely. Au Japon, on mange de tofu. En France...)

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 4:14 PM
Comments (0)

No Zig-zag on Zogby

A new Zogby Poll is out and what's interesting is it still doesn't show that much movement in the presidential derby. Giuliani continues to lead the Republicans with McCain a surprisingly distant second (although Romney and F. Thompson are practically neck and neck with McCain.... What does this mean when F. Thompson enters officially?). On the Dem side, no big movement either. Hillary still leads comfortably over Obama with "John of Edwards" (if that sounds like a hair salon, it's deliberate) luffing in the rear.

What's significant in this poll is the potential power of Obama in a general election. He is evidently quite popular with swing/independent voters. He defeats the Republican leaders in head-to-head polling. Hillary does not.

Looking down the list, it's worth noting that Mike Huckabee is creeping up on the Republican side. He is a candidate with practically no money or organization, but is acquitting himself very well in the early debates and TV appearances. He seems to have quite a bit of wit and grace.

Huckabee is now at four percent. Compare this with Ron Paul (still under one percent here and on Gallup) whose supporters continue to bombard Pajamas Media like so many lemmings on steroids. It's an oldie... but maybe they should have a look at this book.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:54 AM
Comments (16)

May 25, 2007

Reading the tea leaves at the New York Times

Not much more than a day after the military appropriations bill finally slogged through Congress without a troop withdrawal deadline, the NYT is locked and loaded with a new inside story on Iraq policy - White House Said to Debate '08 Cut in Iraq Troops by 50% "Said?" If that weasel-ish word right in the headline weren't enough, how about this sentence, which is run as a full paragraph in itself? "The officials declined to be quoted for attribution because they were discussing internal deliberations that they expected to evolve over several months."

In other words, you'll never be able to check the truth of this. By the time a decision is made this article will be irrelevant (and long forgotten) anyway - so don't blame us if it turns out to be hooey. We're all in the game of propaganda anyway... wink, wink.

It's a long way from the days of "All the News that's Fit to Print." Seems like a distant hieroglyph, doesn't it? These days the Times is in essence a convenient quasi-scandal sheet for disaffected administration officials, intelligence agents, lobbyists, insert your favorite leaker here, to dump their info/disinfo on an increasingly numb public. At least I know I'm feeling numb. And now it's getting to be a battle of the scandal sheets as the NYT complains about the WaPo in the race to expose the latest Hillary dish.

And how about those Hillary rumors? In this long election, it looks as if we're going to be subject to more lurid marital details than a shelf full of Judith Krantz novels. Hillary better win after all this - or she's going to be mighty angry.

Posted by Roger at 9:51 PM
Comments (4)

Ahmadinejad Rocks?

According to YNet, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Jews today of being "beastly" people. That's pretty over the top - even for Crazy Ahmad. Seems like a mistranslation on YNet's part. The fanatic Iranian pres obviously meant "Beastie" people. Now that would make sense.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:58 AM
Comments (12)

May 24, 2007

Hillary goes off the deep end

I admit that part of me wanted a Democrat to win in 2008 - especially if it was Hillary Clinton - because that would force that party to "own" the War on Terror and, I thought, victory over Islamofascism is so crucial we need as much of our society participating in this battle as possible.

Well, I was wrong about Hillary and, I suppose, I'm glad I found out now.

By voting against the military appropriations bill for Iraq today, Hillary, even more than the other Democratic presidential aspirants who voted against it, showed herself to be venal and cowardly. Why more? Because she more than any of them, I strongly suspect, was motivated entirely by political pandering. Obama etc. on some level believe (absurd as it is) the pseudo-pacifist drivel promulgated by the neo-isolationist left. I doubt Hillary does for one minute. She was governed by fear in her vote and acting out of a slavish need to be elected. In these times, someone like that has no business in the Oval Office.

Posted by Roger at 9:10 PM
Comments (9)

Good news, folks ... Sarkozy could be for real

Putting your eggs in the basket of a politician is often ... to say the least ... a risky procedure, but the news that Nicolas Sarkozy ... only a couple of weeks after his election ... has lined up with the US against the (redundancy alert) UN hack Mohammed ElBaradei by continuing to oppose Iran's enriching uranium is good news indeed. (BTW, has anyone checked ElBaradei's bank account lately ... hello, Claudia!)... From the JPost:

French President Nicholas Sarkozy called Wednesday for sanctions on Iran to be tightened if the country does not adhere to the West's demands to cease its nuclear agenda.

"We were indeed surprised by several comments from Mr. ElBaradei over the weekend," said French Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei. "We share the gist of concerns expressed by our American partners - along with several other partners, for that matter."

Looks like Bush ... and America ... have a New Best Friend. What pseudo-liberal idiot will be the first to call him "Bush's new poodle." (And another btw, what's with the "poodle" thing anyway. Watching the dog walkers in my neighborhood, I don't see a lot of poodles acting like, er, poodles.)

UPDAT: And speaking of Sarkozy (and hacks), wouldn't it be ironic if this ignorant doofus became President of the United States while Sarkozy was th President of France. It would almost be like a political sex change operation. The "War on Terror" is a bumper sticker? Talk about projection. No, amigo, you are a bumper sticker.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 6:00 AM
Comments (24)

May 23, 2007

The Soros and the Pity - Part II

Michael Ledeen bitch slaps George Soros over the billionaire's slapping by the mullahs.

But here's a thought that came into my paranoid mystery writer's brain .... What if it turns out after all these years that Soros himself was a CIA agent under deep, deep cover? I know it sounds crazy, but what else better explains the financier's bizarre behavior and opinions - followed by the current arrest in Tehran? [You have gone off the deep end.-ed. With or without a diving board?]

Posted by Roger at 1:11 PM
Comments (12)

May 22, 2007

Living in Ideology vs. Living in Reality: Immigration Revisited

The more people live in ideology - defining themselves exclusively as liberal, conservative, anarchist, libertarian, marxist, Freudian, whatever - the less they seem to be living in reality. They see the world through their belief systems and rarely anything else. Of course each of those systems may once have had some value, indeed still have to one degree or another, but the more one is a true believer in any of them, the more the granularity of fact-based reality fades away.

The extreme example of this is someone like Ahmadinejad, when it starts to be delusional and becomes dangerous. But considerably more minor examples are all round us. When I heard Andrew Sullivan had written a book about reconnecting with "true conservatism," I knew this was a book in which I had no interest. That its author is one who equated Christian fundamentalism with Islamofascism is highly-related and an another example of my point that the more you wallow in ideology the further you get from fact.

This of course relates to the immigration issue. Here are a few of the facts I observe. Bear with me if they seem obvious.

1. As a citizen of California, I see that my economy runs, to a significant extent, on illegal immigration, largely from Mexico, as a cheap labor force. This is also true of other parts of our country to varying degrees.

2. Mexico has always been incapable of governing itself in a rational way and taking care of its people. There is no expectation that it will in the future. So there will be continued pressure on Mexicans (and others in similar situations) to come here.

3. Many, probably most, illegal aliens are decent people who want to work hard and live normal lives.

4. Some illegal aliens are criminals.

5. Our borders are porous.

6. There are a significant number of people in the world who want to overthrow our civilization and replace it with Islamist ideology. Some of these people want harm us physically.

7. The rule of law is a necessity for a functioning democratic society.

8. Immigration is necessary to the economic health of our society.

9. Immigration is good for our national character.

Do you agree with these? Can you add more? Let's stay with reality and then build some conclusions together. Who knows how they will track with the attempts of our Congress?

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 12:29 PM
Comments (60)

May 21, 2007

Meeting Flemming and Leon - a lesson in globalism

The cliché goes that we live in a small world. It's wrong. We live in a minute world these days - and it's shrinking with every digitally-enhanced second. That has it's good and bad aspects. I was reminded of the good last when, at an event in the Reagan Library (my first time there, of which more anon), I had the pleasure of meeting two men I had admired at a distance, Flemming Rose and Leon de Winter. The odd thing is I felt as if I had known them a long time, not for mystical reasons but because the Internet draws kindred spirits together. I instantly had more in common with these guys than I do with my neighbors, and not just because they are both writers - my Hollywood Hills neighborhood, as it happens, is lousy with writers - but because we all shared similar concerns and had known that about each other for some time.

So that's the good part (or one of them) of globalization - meeting colleagues form across the world and making instant friends. One of the bad parts Flemming pointed out to me last night - the perils of instant communication between the developed and the undeveloped world. He understood it better than most of us because he had experienced that danger as the man responsible for the publication of the Danish cartoons. If those cartoons had been published in a pre-Internet era, who would have known? Almost no one, probably, outside Copenhagen. In this era, the most minor bit of satire, as the cartoons were, can set off an instantaneous conflagration.

Now about the Reagan Library, it's worth a visit, despite the longish drive from LA. Reason: Air Force One is there (the one that was in service through the eighties all the way to 2001). You can go aboard. It's an interesting experience that starts you fantasizing.

Posted by Roger at 3:54 PM
Comments (6)

May 19, 2007

Thompson, bipartisanship, immigration and the war

The hugely well-received post by Fred Thompson on PJM has received a few caveats, both in the comments and elsewhere, regarding Fred's support for bipartisanship. Most of this seems to be a reflection of understandable frustration with the immigration legislation currently going through Congress, which has supporters on both sides of the aisle (Kennedy, McCain, etc.).

Although I have nowhere near enough time to read the voluminous legislation itself, my view on the subject tracks pretty well with that expressed by Rudy Giuliani the other day:

"I think the focus here has to be on the security of the United States. We should do nothing to compromise the security of the United States and we clearly need more security now after September 11th. If we need to be reminded of it, think of what happened in New Jersey at Fort Dix. Six who were apparently going to attack our troops at Fort Dix - three of them were illegal. ... We need to know everybody who’s in the United States. That's almost a basic of proper security. We need to know who's in the United States from foreign countries. A number of other countries do this. We should do it.

"So how do you get there? You need a tamper proof ID card, which anyone who comes in here from a foreign country has to have. It should contain identification criteria that is as tamper proof as possible. Second, you have to have a database in which all these names are entered so that they can be found easily and we can make the determination of who's good, who's average, and who's bad. ... And finally we need to have a border patrol that is capable of dealing with it. If you have that, if you have the tamper proof ID card and the database and you've achieved the objective of we know who's in the United States, then I think this idea of working things out between the Democrats and the Republicans and each side has to make some compromises in order to get there, then I can see a lot of flexibility there to get that accomplished. But if you don't accomplish, if you go through all of this and you don't accomplish a tamper proof ID card, a database in which we know everybody that is here, then you really haven't achieved making this country more secure ..."

In other words, it's about security. Which brings me back to the issue of bipartisanship. It doesn't take Fort Dix to remind us we are in a war against a world view that is radically different from ours. The adherents of that world view seem to be growing in number. We need everyone our side, most everyone anyway, to defeat them. You don't win a war with half your troops. That means some degree of bipartisanship, like it or not. I think that's what Thompson was driving at when he advocated talking across party lines in an evenly divided society. I can't see that we have any choice.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 9:38 AM
Comments (62)

May 18, 2007

No Gun Control in Gaza (Child Abuse is the Problem)

Opponents of the Second Amendment might point to Gaza as a place that a little gun control might go a long way. It seems to be a one-man-three-hundred-and-twenty-guns kind of place with the idea of a "license to carry" about as close at hand as Alpha Centauri.

Of course, in the press reports it's the Israelis (who left) who are overtly or covertly to blame for all this. Never mind that Israeli citizens themselves are under daily bombardment far inside their borders. They should grin and bare it, I guess these "progressives" are trying to say. It's not even worth wondering what these reactionary media nabobs would do themselves if their families were under similar attack - we know. (Well, we don't - they might run for the hills or go for the nukes, depending on their temperaments. You also find yourself weirdly sympathetic to the inept Ehud Olmert when the likes of Eli Wiesel are telling him to negotiate with the Palestinians. How? In a flak jacket? And with whom?)

We also know the source of this Palestinian craziness. It is sadly obvious and it is in no way new. And the cycle couldn't be more vicious and scary and endless. Child abuse is the problem. Almost every Palestinian child is raised with guns in their hands and the Islamist words of the Koran in their ears, spewing hatred at every Infidel, the monkey and pig Jews first. And now they're doing it with their own "Mickey Mouse" on television. Until this changes, Solomon himself couldn't negotiate a peace that was worth a Chinaman's hudna.

I never thought Golda Meir was right when she said years ago: "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." Now I wonder.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:38 AM
Comments (10)

Today's Zen Koan from Pajamas Media

If Fred Thompson were the First Blogger, would he have to close comments?

Posted by Roger at 12:19 AM
Comments (2)

May 16, 2007

Democrats Strike a Blow for Censorship (and Cowardice)

After the generally good notices (as compared to MSNBC's) received by the Fox News Team (Hume, Wallace, Goler) for moderating the Republican Presidential Debate last night, it's particularly ironic that Fox News has been left off the recently-published list of network moderators for the Democratic debates. Of course it's no surprise. The Democratic candidates - led by John Edwards, as I recall - have been falling over each other to prostrate themselves like so many Islamists at the feet of moveon.org, et al, promising never to be tainted by the "unclean" Fox.

What does this mean?

Well, it obviously attests to the extreme need for ideological purity on the part of the Democrats, even in an era when such purity has clearly shown itself to be fake (cf. Bill Clinton, whose actual policies may be seen to be to the right of George Bush's from a conventional perspective.) More than that, however, it signals a kind of breakdown in the democratic process in which one side or another can refuse to submit to questioning from its opponent.

You could call that "stonewalling" or perhaps, more pejoratively, "censorship". But I think there's a simpler word - cowardice.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 3:04 PM
Comments (13)

May 15, 2007

Fred Thompson makes a mockery of the pro-fascist idiot Michael Moore

After seeing this video, I don't know if I can NOT vote for Thompson. More of this, Fred! Please!

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 2:09 PM
Comments (34)

And they're off and running in Hialeah!

President Bush (33%) is leading the Congress (29%) by a nose in the latest (un)popularity derby from Gallup.

But wait.

Why these lousy numbers over all? The DOW is at record high, unemployment low, global warming hasn't really set in yet (if it's coming), air pollution's a whole lot better, water pollution too, no one's taking a buzz saw to our forests and our national park system is actually being extended (that giant protected area in the Pacific). I haven't seen rioting in the streets, although the traffic's worse and road rage may have increased. But we're all enjoying the fruits of technology as never before (you may hate cellphones, but imagine life without them now). Even our cars seem to break down less.

So what's the problem?

It can't all be Iraq.

If you ask me - and you're probably not - I think it comes down to two things: 1. The media's unremitting desire to tell us things are bad. 2. That innate part of human nature that can't stand prosperity.

HOWEVER, and it's a deliberately all caps big "however," the spectre of expansionist Islamofascism hangs over our daily lives, no matter how pleasant the surface of our daily lives may be. So erase everything I have said above. Those low poll numbers may be with us for a long time to come.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 11:36 AM
Comments (28)

May 14, 2007

Iran's "Breakout Capability"

The NYT's just published report on Iran indicates the mullah's are further along in their nuclear ambitions than many of his thought, not that we questioned the ambitions themselves. They appear to be on th edge of "breakout capability."

The inspectors have tested the output and concluded that Iran is producing reactor-grade uranium, enriched to a little less than 5 percent purity. But that still worries American officials and experts here at the I.A.E.A. If Iran stores the uranium and later runs it through its centrifuges for another four or five months, it can raise the enrichment level to 90 percent - the level needed for a nuclear weapon.

In the arcane terminology of nuclear proliferation, that is known as a "breakout capability," the ability to throw inspectors out of the country and then produce weapons-grade fuel, as North Korea did in 2003.

Okay, now what? Is it bombombbombbombiran, in the melodic cadence of John McCain and Brian Wilson? Or do we negotiate with those "honest brokers," the mullahs? If you prefer the latter, I would suggest educating yourself on your adversaries. A good place to start is the Wikipedia citation for chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani. Then ask yourself what such a person's goals might be in any discussion and to what degree he would be willing to lie to achieve them? Indeed, you might consider this.

Apropos, one of points the NYT makes to reassure us - although they do not do that as much as usual in this article; how could they? -is that, close though they may be to nuclear weapons, the Iranians may not yet have the technology to reduce them to the size necessary to fit in a missile warhead. Of course the folks at the newspaper don't have to tell us that there are other means. And it should be obvious this is only a short run problem in the first place.

Posted by Roger at 3:40 PM
Comments (12)

May 13, 2007

Money Talks

I'm not sure I agree with Captain Ed when he wrote yesterday (in response to a report that presidential candidates will no longer reveal their tax returns): Personal income had been considered a private affair before Watergate. After that scandal, which had nothing to do with tax evasion, candidates seized on the release of their 1040s as some sort of honesty test. It might be time to recognize that private income should remain private, and that tax returns give us little germane data about the candidates.

Sure we'd all like a little privacy on matters financial in this "snoopiest of all possible worlds." But in a globe seemingly driven by corruption large and small that may not be a smart thing, particularly in regards to those who lead us - or wish to. A case in point today is the revelation that Barack Obama's wife is "Wal-Mart friendly," at least from the perspective of personal gain. How important is that? I don't know, but the stench of hypocrisy is now around her husband who has engaged in the traditional liberal Wal-Mart bashing. This is all the more interesting because Obama's true views are essentially unknown to us. He is riding a crest of popularity based largely on charisma.

We live in a country, actually a world, where politicians tend to have immense personal wealth. Bloomberg is a billionaire, Romney is close. We all know about John Kerry who "wived it wealthily in Padua" and then some. And talk about serious bucks - how about Castro?

No, Captain Ed, in Dr. Pangloss's "best of all possible worlds" we perhaps should have a zone of privacy around politicians' money. But you don't have to be Voltaire to know we aren't there yet. Until then, we need every possible window into our leaders' finances - including IRS returns. If they can't stand that heat, as Mr. Truman wisely said, they should get out of the kitchen.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 10:59 AM
Comments (10)

Pajamas in the New York Post

The New York Post is running a slightly condensed version (probably better) of the review of "Islam vs. Islamism" I wrote for Pajamas Media the other day as op-ed in their Sunday edition. PJM has many writers, myself included, who have written op-eds for major dailies, but this is the first time a piece has been picked up directly from our site for reprint. We hope this is a harbinger of things to come.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 9:23 AM
Comments (5)

May 12, 2007

Mao Defaced: Communism as Religion

The defacing of the Mao portrait in Tienanmen Square, which I saw back in my more "fellow traveling" days, calls to mind what most of us are beginning to realize. Communism, indeed leftism in general to a great extent, has shifted over from a political ideology to a religion. Mao is almost inarguably the greatest mass murderer in human history. An estimated twenty-thirty million deaths are on his hands, nearly all of them Chinese. And yet the Chinese themselves "religiously" guard against his image being defaced.

Mind-boggling, isn't it? Furthermore, China today is hardly Communist at all, or even socialist. They are a kind of rigid state capitalism out to compete for all they are worth in global markets. Mao is used as an icon to preserve the perquisites of the ruling classes, which now have gone far beyond the traditional communist nomenklatura. If one were to be honest, it should be Chairman Deng, not Chairman Mao whose image dominates Tienanmen. But Mao the Mass Murder must stay, to serve his religious function. Perhaps soon there will be a resurrection from the Lenin-like tomb where he has been so meticulously embalmed.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 11:46 AM
Comments (31)

May 11, 2007

Blair's Legacy

I was driving home to the Al Rantel's show yesterday, listening to Al and John LeBoutillier work themselves into a lather over so-called mistakes made by Tony Blair. As far as I could tell - these guys often throw off more heat than light - their beef with Blair was that he swallowed Bush's WMD intell whole (although he - Blair - knew better), so that he - Blair - could go join the US in the Iraq invasion.

Hmmm.... Well, who's to know the inside of something like that? But does it matter? And what does this really tell us about Tony Blair, the man they were choosing to evaluate in such a jejune manner?

One thing I am clear about is the Blair they were discussing was far from the man I observed in those days. I can hardly remember Blair discussing WMDs in the run-up to the Iraq War. That was never his reason (primary anyway) for advocating action against Saddam. He was always talking democracy, democracy, democracy. He was a believer in bringing rational government to the MidEast and, through that, peace for all of us.

Blair was our democratic idealist and a man of great eloquence. He gave voice to things Bush, and most other American politicians of recent vintage, do not have the skills to articulate. That man has been destroyed and the people who killed him should be ashamed of themselves, ashamed of the envy and cowardice that motivated them. i wonder if LeBoutillier and Rantel realize how small-minded they sounded.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 3:57 PM
Comments (8)

Giuliani - A Return to Form

Running for office, especially these days and especially for President, is like an obstacle course that never ends, so it's no surprise that the candidates will have many ups and downs. Rudy Giuliani, who was once riding high, has been in a trough of late because of some waffling on the abortion issue. Rich Miniter mentioned this on today's Corn & Miniter Show, pointing out that Rudy fared better when he was forthright about his pro-choice position.

I doubt that Rudy was listening, because this link predates C & M, but I am pleased to report that Giuliani is returning to form, stating (not parsing) his position.

We all know it anyway, so what's the purpose of hiding behind a wall of words. What the Mayor has always had going for him is his having the courage of his convictions. That's why he wants us to trust him to lead us through the war against Islamism. He should stick with that,.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 3:14 PM
Comments (29)

May 10, 2007

Morons of the Media

These guys shouldn't be kicked off the air for being vulgar. They should be kicked off the air for being absolute no talents! (They are also a form of pollution, burning up needed energy resources while adding to the already high noise levels destroying the peace and quiet of our neighborhoods.)

Posted by Roger at 3:26 PM
Comments (5)

Good News for John LeCarré!

The Cold War is back! His books haven't been very good since the fall of the wall.

President Vladimir Putin of Russia obliquely compared the foreign policy of the United States to the Third Reich in a speech Wednesday commemorating the 62nd anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany, in an apparent escalation of anti-American rhetoric within the Russian government.

Putin did not specifically name the United States or NATO but used phrasing similar to that which he has used previously to criticize American foreign policy while making an analogy to Nazi Germany.

The comments marked the latest in a series of sharply worded Russian criticisms of the foreign policy of the Untied States - on Iraq, missile defense, NATO expansion and, broadly, the accusation that the United States has striven to single-handedly dominate world affairs.

Some political analysts see the new tone as a return to Cold War-style rhetoric by a country emboldened by petroleum wealth. But Russians say the sharper edge is a reflection of frustration that Russia's views, particularly its opposition to NATO expansion, have been ignored in the West.

Ah, those poor Russians - how could we ignore them? I say besides LeCarré it's time to revive other aspects of the flotsam and jetsam of the Cold War, like cultural exchanges. I volunteer to go on one, since I have experience, having been on two such writers' trips during Soviet days. (Are my old minders still alive - or have they died of alcohol poisoning?)

But seriously and sadly, we've come a long way since ebullient optimism of Yeltsin standing on that car. I wish it weren't true , but the dominant trait of the Russian character - paranoia - evidently cannot be repressed.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:34 AM
Comments (9)

Banned in Boston - PBS disgraces itself

I was able to obtain a copy of of the suppressed PBS documentary "Islam vs. Islamism" and have reviewed it for Pajamas.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:27 AM
Comments (7)

May 9, 2007

Rational or Irrational Exuberance?

You tell me - is it time to sell?

Stocks have risen steadily over the last five weeks, with the Dow carving out its longest up streak in 80 years, closing higher in 24 out of 27 sessions through Monday. [bold mine]

My guess is - it's always time to hold .... in the long run.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 4:09 PM
Comments (16)

May 8, 2007

Obama Speaks Truth to (Former) Power

Although I know this blog has some readers who think the market should handle everything, I do not agree. I am one of those old-fashioned American pragmatists who takes it one issue at a time. Dumb as it sounds - sometimes government works and sometimes it doesn't.

So I have to say Barack Obama seems to be making sense with his proposals to America's fusty auto industry:

The Democratic presidential contender, in a speech yesterday that drew about 2,000 people to a sold-out Detroit Economic Club luncheon, also proposed what he called a government-industry bargain: Auto makers would get some federal assistance for their crippling retiree health-care costs, in return for producing more fuel-saving hybrid vehicles. And Mr. Obama promoted his new legislation, an idea borrowed from California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, mandating a low-carbon fuel standard for the oil industry to spur development of alternative fuels.

Actually, Obama is doing General Motors, et al, a favor. Toyota is already cleaning their clock. The lack of innovation in Detroit is mind-boggling. I have written before that I thought they should hand the US auto industry to Steve Jobs - or, failing that, transfer the whole thing to the Silicon Valley or somewhere where executives are unafraid of the future. How about handing control of General Motors over to Boeing?

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:17 AM
Comments (41)

May 7, 2007

Stormin' Norman - "Win, or Get Out"

Norman Podhoretz ... you remember him - John's pop ... the guy who wrote all those books about the literary life and maybe was the first of us lefties to leave the reservation. Or one of the first. He and his wife ran this mag that might best be described as the antidote to People. (In fact, I gather he's still editor-at-large.) Anyway, this "codger" - who still seems to have more of his marbles than the rest of us; he must have had a lot of them to begin with - hasn't been reading his Cook Report or paying much attention, if any, to the latest Newsweek poll. He has the temerity to write the following on Commentary's Contentions blog:

In spite of what the polls supposedly tell us, I strongly suspect that the Democrats may already have blown the 2008 election. Unlike the late Senator Aiken of Vermont, who proposed that we declare victory and get out of Vietnam, the Democrats want us to declare defeat and get out of Iraq. This, they imagine, is what the American people were demanding in the congressional election of 2006.

But it seems far more likely that the message of that election was not "Get out," but rather "Win, or get out." In any case, the position the Democrats are now taking can only have the effect of revivifying and reinforcing the sense of them as weak on national security. And this was the very factor that led to the ignominious defeat of their presidential candidate, George McGovern, in 1972, when they also misread the public temper by paying too much attention to the left wing of their party.

Er... what can I say? Except, as Albany had it at the end of Lear:

The weight of this sad time we must obey;
Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.
The oldest hath borne most: we that are young
Shall never see so much, nor live so long.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:11 PM
Comments (15)

Evans and No-facts?

Remember that knock on the old Evans and Novak Show? I was reminded of it when I read Robert Novak's sliming of Fred Thompson's Lincoln Club speech this morning. Novak said it disappointed the Repub crowd. Mebbe so. I wouldn't know. (You can judge for yourself here.) But it's worth noting, early in the speech, Thompson made a dry wisecrack about Novak. Maybe the pundit couldn't stand the heat.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:21 AM
Comments (11)

May 6, 2007

Sarko's Big Win - What It Means

The New York Times, in its pre-election coverage this morning, informed us the victory of the first French President in memory who is not at least partially anti-American would mean very little. The French resist change, the Grey Lady said.

Was it projection, lack of imagination or fear that inspired the Times to proffer one of the hoariest clichés about our Gallic cousins? Probably some of each, but I would put the emphasis on the fear ... because the biggest loser in the Sarkozy blowout is the media. The French media is far more monolithic in its political views than ours (and that's saying something) and it was uniformly aligned against Sarkozy. The people, obviously, weren't buying their message. Naturally, the Times would be alarmed.

What were they buying? Well, I'm not French, so I don't know. And even if I were, I could only guess - just as I do about elections here that I vote in. But I suspect we are witnessing a sea change in Europe that began with election of Angela Merkel and is continuing into France. The Old Country, simply put, may be waking up to the defense of their invention - The Enlightenment - no matter what their Foucault-besotted chattering classes wish.

So what does that mean here? We live in a country where Bush's favorable percentage hovers somewhere around Jimmy Carter's and the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi seem to be riding high, heading off to Damascus to hobnob with the ophthalmologist. Maybe I need my eyes examined, but I suspect that kind of (moral) blindness is only temporary. When 2008 rolls around... and in some ways it already has... and the American public is called upon to make a judgment about the future of our civilization that pits a Rudy Giuliani or a Fred Thompson against a Hillary Clinton or a Barak Obama, the Times may have to be as dismissive of the results as they have been with the French.

On a more social note, American tourists will now be heading back to France. Brush up your French. Or as we used to say in simpler times, "Just tell your cab driver 'Sank roo danoo'." (assuming you want to go to Harry's Bar. Is it still there?)

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 1:42 PM
Comments (38)

Presidential politics: money no longer talks

The rise of Fred Thompson is a leading indicator that the internet is leveling the playing field in our politics and lessening (although obviously not eliminating) the need for big money. Thompson is emerging as a major candidate while hardly spending anything at all. His strategic appearance on Breitbart.tv was brilliant. And thanks to Drudge it is now going viral. Cost to Thompson: car fare.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:57 AM
Comments (1)

Fortuyn's Day

Pieter Dorsman has an excellent homage to Pim Fortuyn over on Pajamas. It's been five years since the Dutch political figure was murdered by an environmental activist.

Events were of course more important, but more than any other individual I can think of, Fortuyn inspired me to question beliefs I had held for decades. He was a true radical and progressive, not the stodgy and predictable bourgeois variety I had become with so many in my generation. I remember back in the sixties we used to say "Question everything." But indeed we... I... had been questioning nothing. Then this gay libertarian fop appeared in Holland and challenged all my ideas. His death at the hands of a deranged nitwit was tragic, but his life continues to inspire.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:55 AM
Comments (1)

May 5, 2007

Long ball versus short ball

I was impressed by the Fred Thompson interview on breitbart.tv (link iffy) because Thompson seems to be playing "long ball." The Democratic Congress seems to be playing "short ball," as if the War in Iraq were a thing in itself.

It's not even remotely. In fact, it's almost irrelevant whether we get in or out of Iraq. We're in anyway. We've been in for hundreds of years without evening knowing it.

Ayatollah Khomeini knew, of course. When he returned victoriously to Iran in 1979, telling a nonplussed Peter Jennings that coming back to his home country meant nothing to the soon-to-be Supreme Leader. Like most of us, Jennings did not realize at the time that Khomeini was not interested at all in temporal nation-states. Only Allah's Kingdom was of concern to him - spreading it as far and wide as he could.

Now if you believe ... I mean really believe ... in the primacy of eternal life over our humdrum reality, then Khomeini had a point. And it follows you can treat anyone who doesn't go along with you in the tawdry material world as despicably as you wish (just as he, Bin Laden, etc., etc.) have. But if you don't, you should be thinking about the hundreds of millions of people (far more than ever followed Hitler) who lean in Khomeini's direction and try to figure out what to do about them.

That's what I mean about "long ball." It's a very hard game, particularly for a politician who is running for office. But, in the age of nuclear proliferation, it has never been more necessary.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:45 AM
Comments (7)

May 4, 2007

Segolene the Desperate Demagogue

Talk about "running scared," I can't think of any U. S. Presidential candidate who would go so far as to say something like this on the eve of an election: "Choosing Nicolas Sarkozy would be a dangerous choice," Royal told RTL radio. "It is my responsibility today to alert people to the risk of (his) candidature with regards to the violence and brutality that would be unleashed in the country (if he won)."

What a little hate-monger.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 2:13 PM
Comments (12)

May 3, 2007

Who is winning the Republican Debate (near end)?

Fred Thompson. By a lot.

Much as I admire Giuliani and agree with most of his policies, this whole debate was dull dull dull. The wise man stayed out.

One other observation: Ron Paul looks like an extra in a 1940s movie.

Posted by Roger at 6:16 PM
Comments (11)

PBS' Big Lie

It's well known by now that PBS has excluded the documentary Islam vs. Islamists: Voices From the Muslim Center from its American Crossroads series from reasons of "bias."

As an American citizen and as a filmmaker, I find this despicable censorship. It is also based on an absurdly obvious lie:

All movies are biased. The form itself is biased. The camera is a pen, as the French auteur theorists correctly told us decades ago. Movie-making, documentary or not, is done through selection via script, camera and editing and those selections are made by wholly biased human beings. There has never been an unbiased film ever, not even Andy Warhol's experiments, because the Warhol himself picked who he put in front of the camera and where he put them before setting his actors free.

And the biased nature of film has been known practically since the medium's inception when early Soviet filmmakers like Dovzhenko demonstrated editing by visual association. In fact, it is arguable that films that appear to be less biased are more biased through the pretense of even-handedness - although perhaps this is over the heads of the bourgeois middlebrows at Public Broadcasting.

Nevertheless, one thing is clear: what the nabobs of PBS are objecting to is not bias at all, it is a bias they don't like. They are censoring an opinion - that's it. This makes them reactionaries - and cowards. Shame.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 10:18 AM
Comments (11)

Snubbing The Big Snub

Must be a slow news day because Drudge is making a big deal ("The Big Snub") over Time Magazine leaving George Bush off its list of 100 most influential.

Now it's obvious Bush - though still commander-in-chief of the world's most powerful military - doesn't quite have the clout he had a few years ago, but Time...? Who cares what Time Magazine thinks? Does actually anybody read it anymore? Even at the dentist I prefer the guilty pleasure of People. Time is just dead weight. I don't have a clue what they're doing or writing unless I read about it on the Drudge Report - and even then I don't pay much attention. Time Magazine is a weekly news magazine - about as relevant to our lives as a triceratops.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 7:49 AM
Comments (8)

May 1, 2007

A Service for Presidential Candidates - The Favorite Novel Survey

Here's another reason (if you need one) for why I shouldn't be running for high office. Evidently, you're supposed to have a favorite novel. Even though I have published a number of the critters myself, I can't imagine having a favorite one. It seems almost vulgar. I don't have a favorite painting or film either. Or a favorite poem. But I do have a favorite ice cream flavor - dolce de leche, if you're interested.

If I did have a favorite novel, however, I doubt it would be L. Ron Hubbard's"Battlefield Earth," apparently the choice of Mitt Romney. (I haven't even read it ...or considered reading it, for that matter). I interjected "apparently" because Romney supporters are evidently now distancing their man from the sci-fi thriller by the father of Scientology. [As well they might.-ed. Indeed.]

Even so, since this "favorite novel" thing seems to be (for some unknown reason) of interest in the presidential race and since we have a fairly literate audience on this blog, I am throwing out this challenge to you, dear reader. What novel would you advise the ambitious presidential candidate say was his favorite? "Remembrance of Things Past," for example, is probably not a good idea - too pretentious and too French. And someone might actually ask you a question to see if you read it.

Posted by Roger at 10:02 PM
Comments (41)

Another Reason Not to Run for President (as if you didn't know)

I'm sympathizing with Fred Thompson today, who is evidently having gumshoes snoop around into his past in Nashville. Now I don't know diddley about Fred's personal life, other than he's had three wives (who hasn't?), but I suspect there's got to be something nasty there. He's a human being.

As someone who once upon a time wrote a few private dick novels, I should have some advice for Thompson, but I don't. We just live in an era of no secrets. The idea of a private life is over. And running for President - or doing anything public for that matter - makes it worse.

But what's fascinating in all this is that, for all our information, you rarely learn the real truth about anyone. When you finally or accidentally meet someone about whom you've been reading this endless stream of rumors, facts and what-not, you end up encountering something totally different. Again: a human being (with all his/her attendant pluses and minuses - many of them surprisingly lovable.)

It's a strange Google word we live in.

Posted by Roger L. Simon at 8:15 AM
Comments (4)