Legal and Illegal Immigration

I am a big supporter of the border fence (especially in Texas) and really liked the border webcam test project that has just been completed at several Texas border crossings. It looks like the State of Texas is going to fund webcams all along the border.

In today's National Review Online, Charles Murray, libertarian extraordinaire, was asked his views on legal and illegal immigration. I thought this would be timely given the news breaking this morning about Swift Meat immigration raids.

From Charles Murray, via National Review Online:

What's my position on immigration? Well, since apparently someone asked (and I have never published anything on immigration), here goes.

Regarding illegal immigration:

1. Making laws about who gets to become a citizen, under what circumstances, is a legitimate function of the state.

2. Protecting borders is a legitimate function of the state.

3. Enforcing the law is a central function of the state.

4. Immigration reform must begin first with enforcement of existing immigration law. If it takes a wall, so be it.

5. And while I'm at it, I'll mention that English should be the only language in which public school classes are taught (except for teaching English as a foreign language) and in which the public's business is conducted.

Regarding legal immigration:

1. Immigration is one of the main reasons—I'm guessing the main reason apart from our constitution—that we have remained a vital, dynamic culture, but immigration of a particular sort: Self-selection whereby people come here for opportunity. That self-selection process used to apply to everyone. It still applies to the engineers and computer programmers and entrepreneurs who come here from abroad, but it is diluted for low-job-skill workers by the many economic benefits of just being in the United States. Most low-job-skill immigrants work very hard. But Milton Friedman was right: You can't have both open immigration and a welfare state. The tension between the two is inescapable.

2. Massive immigration of legal low-skill workers is problematic for many reasons, and some of them have to do with human capital. Yes, mean IQ does vary by ethnic group, and IQ tends to be below average in low-job-skill populations. One can grant all the ways in which smart people coming from Latin American or African countries are low-job-skill because they have been deprived of opportunity, and still be forced to accept the statistical tendencies. The empirical record established by scholars such as George Borjas at Harvard cannot be wished away.

3. I am not impressed by worries about losing America's Anglo-European identity. Some of the most American people I know are immigrants from other parts of the world. And I'd a hell of a lot rather live in a Little Vietnam or a Little Guatemala neighborhood, even if I couldn't read the store signs, than in many white-bread communities I can think of.

4. When it comes to the nitty-gritty, I would get rid of reuniting-families provisions, get rid of the you're-a-citizen-if-you're-born-here rule, and make immigrants ineligible for all benefits and social services except public education for their children. Everybody who immigrates has to be on a citizenship track (no guest workers). And I would endorse a literacy requirement. Having those measures in place, my other criteria for getting permission to immigrate would be fairly loose. Just having to get through the bureaucratic hoops will go a long way toward reinstalling a useful self-selection process. But, to go back to basics: None of this works unless illegal immigration is effectively ended.

I suppose other libertarians will disagree, but I don't see a single item in this approach that runs against the principles of classical liberalism.

Charles Murray

Hat Tip: National Review Online

Thanks to our Military -- and to hell with the ISG

I have the pleasure and honor to know many active-duty and retired military men and women. The quote below aptly represents, to a man, the attitude and spirit of each and every one of them. Too often we forget to say "thank you".

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"I am not influenced by the expectation of promotion or
pecuniary reward. I wish to be useful, and every kind of
service necessary for the public good, become honorable
by being necessary."

-- Nathan Hale (remark to Captain William Hull, who
had attempted to dissuade him from volunteering for
a spy mission for General Washington, September 1776)

THANK YOU.

Hat Tip: Patriot Post's Founders' Quote Daily

Traveler Profiling by the Feds -- Go Go Go

The Dept of Homeland Security and whoever it designates hereby has my permission to collect the data about me indicated in this story, as well as any other data it deems necessary to insure that I am not a security risk while flying. I've been a frequent flyer for 25 years, with over 2.7 million miles on Delta alone. I feel MUCH safer if they do this to EVERYONE flying.

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS

Feds Quietly Assign Terror Risk Scores to Millions of Americans

Thursday, November 30, 2006

WASHINGTON — For the past four years, without public notice, federal agents have assigned millions of Americans and other international travelers computer-generated scores assessing the risk they pose of being terrorists or criminals.

The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments. And the government intends to keep them on file for 40 years.

Earlier in November, the government disclosed the existence and details of the Automated Targeting System (ATS) for the first time in the Federal Register. Privacy and civil liberties lawyers, congressional aides and even law enforcement officers said they thought the ATS had been applied only to cargo.

• Get more coverage at the Homeland Security Center.

The scores are assigned to people entering and leaving the United States after computers assess their travel records, including where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meals they ordered.

The Homeland Security Department notice called it "one of the most advanced targeting systems in the world" and said U.S. ability to spot criminals and other security threats "would be critically impaired without access to this data."

Still, privacy advocates view ATS with alarm. "It's probably the most invasive system the government has yet deployed in terms of the number of people affected," David Sobel, a lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group devoted to electronic data issues, said in an interview.

A similar DHS data-mining project for domestic air travelers — now known as Secure Flight — caused a furor two years ago in Congress, which has barred its implementation until it can pass 10 tests for accuracy and privacy protection.

So Help Me, Mohammed

I promise this will not turn into a rant.

Below is a link to a Dennis Prager column from today, stating that our one and only Muslim elected to Congress wants to swear on the Koran, not the Bible, during his oath of office. Mr. Prager makes THE salient point about this in his column -- what happens if an elected official wants to swear on a stack of Playboys? No, I'm not making this up -- read the article from the link below. Here are the first two paragraphs:

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran.

He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

Read the entire article here.

H/T Townhall.com

New element Asinine-90

More from National Review Online...

Kerry Can't Apologize [Jonah Goldberg]
If you take Kerry's two statements — the written and unwritten — in their entirety, I really don't think he can apologize at this point. I really do think he could have defused this whole thing, maybe not entirely, by simply saying "I botched the joke and I'm really sorry it sounded like I was diminishing the talent and work of our troops, something I would never do. I take a back seat to no one in my respect for blah blah blah..." But now he's questioned the sanity, the integrity and the manliness of anybody who could have possibly taken him the wrong way. That means, in effect, that he's calling all these servicemen who understandably took offense at the plain meaning of his words, wusses and nutters. That makes Kerry a tool of the first order. And, if he apologizes now, with some Gilda Radneresque "never mind," it will once again reinforce his metaphysical toolishness. The guy thinks he can be president and he thinks he's doing what the "fighting Dem" base wants him to do. The problem is he has basically radiated himself with the isotope Asinine-90 and the only way the rest of his party can protect itself from radition poisoning is to sequester the guy in some lime-pit for 10,000 years until his asininity half-life deterioates to managable levels.

Amen, brother Hanson -- a must read

From today's National Review Online

Kerryism [Victor Davis Hanson]

Kerry surely must be one of the saddest Democratic liabilities around. Some afterthoughts about his latest gaffe, which is one of those rare glimpses into an entire troubled ideology:

(1) How could John Kerry, born into privilege, and then marrying and divorcing and marrying out of and back into greater inherited wealth, lecture anyone at a city college about the ingredients for success in America? If he were to give personal advice about making it, it would have to be to marry rich women. Nothing he has accomplished as a senator or candidate reveals either much natural intelligence or singular education. Today, Democrats must be wondering why they have embraced an overrated empty suit, and ostracized a real talent like Joe Lieberman.

(2) How could Kerry possibly claim that he was thinking of the uneducated in the context of George Bush, who, after all, went to Harvard and Yale?

(3) Some of the brightest and most educated Americans are not only in the military, but veterans of Iraq. Two of the best educated minds I have met-Col. Bill Hix and Lt. Col. Chris Gibson, both Hoover Security Fellows-were both Iraqi veterans. What is striking about visiting Iraq is the wealth of talent there, from privates to generals. Without being gratuitously cruel, the problem of mediocrity is not in the ranks of the military, but on our university campuses, where half-educated professors and non-serious students killing time are ubiquitous. Personally, I'd wager the intelligence of a Marine Corps private any day over the average D.C. journalist. Every naval officer I met at the USNA, without exception, seemed brighter than John Kerry, whose "brilliance", after all, has managed to offend millions of voters on the eve of a pivotal election. If the Democrats lose, it will be almost painful to watch the recriminations against Kerry fly.

(4) This is not the first, but third, time he has denigrated soldiers in the middle of a war-and there is a systematic theme: John Kerry's assumed superior morality allows him to pass judgment from on high about supposedly lesser folk who become tools of a suspect military: thus we go from limb-loppers and Genghis' hordes to terrorists to dead-beats. The only constant is that the haughtiness is always delivered in the same sanctimonious, self-righteous, and patronizing tone.

(5) The mea culpa that Democrats are blaming the war and not the warriors is laughable after Sens. Durbin, Kennedy, and Kerry have collectively compared American soldiers to Nazis, Pol Pot's killers, Stalinists, terrorists, and Baathists.

(6) The problem is that Kerry is not just a senator, but the most recent presidential candidate of the Democratic Party, and thus in some sense, especially given the diminution of Howard Dean, the megaphone of the entire party.

(7) His pathetic clarification, as he blamed everyone from Tony Snow to Rush Limbaugh, displayed the same Al Gore derangement syndrome, and thus raises a larger question: what is it about George Bush that seems to reduce once sober and experienced liberal pros to infantile ranting?

(8) And why is the supposedly lame Bush so careful in speech, and the self-acclaimed geniuses like a Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, or Howard Dean serially spouting ever more stupidities? For all the Democrats' criticism of George Bush, I can't think of a modern President who has so infrequently put his foot in his public mouth, and, by the same token, can't think of any opposition that on the eve of elections seems to have an almost pathological death wish.

The Democrats should use this occasion to have an autopsy of Kerryism, or this strange new tony liberalism, that has turned noblisse oblige on its head. It used to be that millionaire FDRs and JFKs felt sympathy for those of the lower classes and wished to ensure that the hoi polloi had some shot at the American dream. But today's elite liberals-a Howard Dean, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, George Soros, Ted Turner-love the high life and playact at being leftists simply because they are already insulated from the effects of their own nostrums that always come at someone poorer's expense while providing them some sort of psychological relief from guilt. Poor Harry Truman must be turning over in his grave-from bourbon, cigars, and poker to wind-surfing and L.L. Bean costume of the day says it all.

Scares the Be-Jesus out of me

From National Review Online:

Concentrates the Mind [Mona Charen]

This is from Majority Whip Roy Blunt’s office. It’s a Who Would Be Who in a Democratic majority Congress. It's intended to scare Republican voters into showing up at the polls on November 7. It sure scares me.

Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.)
Elected 1969, 18th term
Rep. Obey voted with the AFL-CIO 100% of the time. Obey voted against the Deficit Reduction Act, against Defense Funding (FY06), against the Legislative Line Item Veto, and against funding the Global War on Terror (FY04).

“Mr. Obey was one of those Democrats who ripped Mr. Clinton for endorsing a balanced budget in 1995. Rather than cut spending, his goal would be to spend less on defense and more on domestic programs and entitlements.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.)
Elected 1970, 18th term
Rep. Rangel voted with the ACLU 94% of the time. Rangel consistently voted against free trade agreements, against the Bush tax cuts, against Pension Reform, and against Welfare Reform.

Rep. Rangel “opposed the Bush tax cuts and recently voted against free trade with tiny Oman. His committee's crucial health care subcommittee would be run by California's Pete Stark (1972), who in 1993 criticized Hillary Clinton's health care proposal because the government wasn't dominant enough.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

“No question about it.” -Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), when asked whether tax increases across the spectrum would be considered should Democrats take control of Congress. (CongressDaily, 09/26/06)

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.)
Elected 1964, 21st term
Rep. Conyers voted with the AFL-CIO 100% and the ACLU 100% of the time. Conyers consistently voted against any liability reform, against the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization, against REAL ID, against the Child Interstate Abortion Notification bill, and against Border Protection and Immigration Reform.

“He recently made his plans clear in a 370-page report… the report accuses the Administration of violating no fewer than 26 laws and regulations, and is a road map of Mr. Conyers's explicit intention to investigate grounds for impeaching President Bush.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.)
Elected 1955, 25th term
Rep. Dingell voted with the AFL-CIO 100% of the time. Dingell voted against exploring for American-made energy in ANWR and OCS, against reforming the Endangered Species Act, and against the Telecom Reauthorization bill.

“The Michigan Congressman would do his best to provide taxpayer help to GM and Ford. But telecom companies would probably get more regulation in the form of Net neutrality rules, and a windfall profits tax on oil would be a real possibility.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.)
Elected 1974, 16th term
Rep. Miller voted with the ACLU 95% of the time. Miller voted against Higher Education Reauthorization, against Head Start Reauthorization, and against Pension Reform.

Rep. Miller is “the chief sponsor of the ‘Employee Free Choice Act,’ which would make it much easier for unions to organize by largely banning secret elections… The Californian also wants to raise the minimum wage and fulfill the National Education Association wish to spend more federal dollars on local school construction.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.)
Elected 1980, 13th term
Rep. Frank voted with the AFL-CIO 100% and the ACLU 95% of the time. Frank voted against the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act, against Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement, and against Credit Rating Reform.

“…the ascension of Barney Frank (1980) would mean a reprieve for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, despite $16 billion in accounting scandals. His main reform priority has been to carve out a new affordable housing fund from the two companies' profits. And forget about any major review of Sarbanes-Oxley.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.)
Elected 1974, 16th term
Rep. Waxman voted with the AFL-CIO 100% and the ACLU 95% of the time. Waxman voted against the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act, against the formation of the Bipartisan Katrina Committee, and against 527 Reform.

Rep. Waxman “would compete with Mr. Conyers to see who could issue the most subpoenas to the Bush Administration.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

Intelligence Committee Chairman Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.)
Elected 1992, 7th term
Rep. Hastings voted with the AFL-CIO 92% of the time. Hastings voted against declaring that the U.S. will prevail in the Global War on Terror, against the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act, against Supporting Terrorist Finance Tracking, against the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization, and against Border Protection and Immigration Reform.

Rep. Hastings “who, should Ms. Pelosi succeed in pushing aside current ranking Member Jane Harman, would take over the House Intelligence Committee. Before he won his Florida seat in 1992, Mr. Hastings had been a federal judge who was impeached and convicted by a Democratic Congress for lying to beat a bribery rap. He would handle America's most vital national secrets.” (WSJ, 08/31/06)

*Group ratings are from 2004. Key votes are from the 108th and 109th Congress. Wall Street Journal quotes are extracted from “Back to the Congressional Future” editorial, August 31, 2006.

Part II: How NOT to treat a soldier

Comments on the previous post from a friend of mine...

Having lived in the UK and used the NHS I can attest that it is every conservative’s poster child for what can go wrong with a public health care system. In addition there is a huge south asian population in the UK, many of whom do not feel part of British Society. The war in Iraq in particular, but Afghanistan as well, is tremendously unpopular, so much so, that Blair is being forced out by his own party (ya gotta love parliamentary democracies). So it’s not surprising that the squatties (English for grunt) are being harassed while they languish in a squalid hospital. Still it’s appalling and will no doubt result in yet another backlash against British Muslims, further alienating the young and disaffected creating more opportunities for them to become radicalized.

Here in Canada we have followed a similar path. The Defence Medical Centres were closed over a decade ago. The rational was to save money by eliminating “duplicate” publicly funded health care systems (Canada, famously has a nation wide publicly funded health care system). At the time the rational made sense, spend millions on dedicated medical centres or on bullets and boots. We had beaten the godless commies and the probability of an all out war with anyone seemed highly unlikely. Now that we are in a real shooting war again we are getting a lot of seriously injured soldiers being returned to public hospitals. Since the brigade currently deployed in Afghanistan is based not far from Ottawa (where I live) most of the injured are being returned to a local hospital. By all accounts they are receiving excellent care. Though there has been controversies about how reservists (which make up about 30% of our combat arms formations) are treated if they receive disabling wounds. (i.e. they are screwed). The casualty rates would have overwhelmed our paltry military health care system anyways. Furthermore they would have lacked the expertise especially in specialty areas like Neurology.

Only the US has the resources to warrant such an excellent dedicated and parallel system.

As an aside my Regiment (The Royal Canadian Regiment) has just returned from a 3 week standup fight with the Taliban. They report that they now have wire guided AT missiles, mortars, crew service weapons and are not afraid to fight in the open and during the day. It’s getting ugly out there.

How NOT to treat a soldier

From National Review Online

Looking After the Troops [Andrew Stuttaford]

Via the Daily Telegraph:

A paratrooper wounded in Afghanistan was threatened by a Muslim visitor to the British hospital where he is recovering.Seriously wounded soldiers have complained that they are worried about their safety after being left on wards that are open to the public at Selly Oak Hospital, Birmingham. On one occasion a member of the Parachute Regiment, still dressed in his combat uniform after being evacuated from Afghanistan, was accosted by a Muslim over the British involvement in the country. "You have been killing my Muslim brothers in Afghanistan," the man said during a tirade. Because the soldier was badly injured and could not defend himself, he was very worried for his safety, sources told The Daily Telegraph... Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, called the treatment of wounded troops "an absolute disgrace". "They should be in completely separate wings even if this means shutting down entire NHS wards. It is a betrayal of our troops having them treated in mixed and open wards. Those who have been injured on operations must be with those who understand their predicament in a secure environment. "The Defence Secretary should be having urgent talks with the Health Secretary to do this otherwise this Government's commitment to our Armed Forces is nothing but talk." There is also resentment among serving troops unhappy about being treated in a NHS hospital that they believe is unsuitable for military patients. Soldiers on operations say they would rather receive a more serious injury and go to the top American military hospital in Ramstein, Germany, than end up in a NHS hospital. They now half jokingly refer to getting "a Boche rather than a Blighty" in reference to the wounds that would send them home. Ramstein has an outstanding unit for brain surgery, and neurological intensive care beds in Britain are in short supply. "The blokes see it that if you are unlucky you get wounded and go to the UK at the mercy of the NHS, but if you get a head wound you get sent to Ramstein in Germany where the US has an outstanding medical facility," said an officer serving in Afghanistan. "It also does not do morale much good knowing that within 18 hours of being wounded you could wake up in a NHS hospital with a mental health patient on one side and an incontinent geriatric on the other." ...In the past decade the seven military hospitals in Britain, Germany and Cyprus have been closed. The remaining military hospital at Haslar, Portsmouth, is expected to be sold to developers next year.

Incredible.

National Airborne Day

TO ALL WHO READ THIS:

Say "thank you" to a paratrooper today...those who are willing to jump out of perfectly good airplanes. What are they thinking?

A DAY FOR U.S. PARATROOPERS [W. Thomas Smith Jr.]

Today is National Airborne Day, honoring all U.S. paratroopers and military parachutists (from all services) since the first American soldier leapt from a plane over Fort Benning, Georgia on August 16, 1940.

What's interesting is that all soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines who earn the wings of a "military parachutist," must first attend jump school, which is still located at Fort Benning and still conducted by the U.S. Army.

In his 2002 National Airborne Day proclamation, President Bush said, “Airborne combat continues to be driven by the bravery and daring spirit of sky soldiers. Often called into action with little notice, these forces have earned an enduring reputation for dedication, excellence, and honor. As we face the challenges of a new era, I encourage all people to recognize the contributions of these courageous soldiers to our nation and the world.”

Hat-tip: National Review Online

Terror plot while Bush and Blair on "vacation"

As we learn more about the terror threat that has been discovered in Britain, I think we can discount (further) the kooks that complained about "we're at war, and Bush is GTT (Gone To Texas) for a vacation". Tony Blair is also on "vacation"; I suspect they wanted to get out of the spotlight, throw off the NYTimes and the other traitorous MSM who would tell (sorry, "report responsibly to") the terrorists about what we're doing to fight, and get to secure locations so that they could coordinate the take-down of the bad guys.

Some sensible precautions on the part of our gov't (and I'm not being a conspiracy kook when I observe these):

1. Bush and Blair are away from their respective capitols
2. Succession-planning seems to be working fine (as POTUS and VPOTUS are now split up)
3. US Gov't has raised the Terror Level warning
4. Tomorrow is 8/11, so we probably had our antennae up anyway

Interestingly, I have a plug-in to Firefox that displays the current threat level from DHS. It's still showing "Elevated (yellow)". Looking at the DHS website, they have NOT updated the website yet. The announcement of the Threat Level being raised was made about 20 minutes ago now, and DHS still hasn't raised the notice on the site to Orange.

Oh well...just tells you that, in spite of it all, the gov't moves slowly.

More dumb stuff from the NYTimes

Jeez...they get the first 2 paragraphs right...then fall apart with their socialism. I swear you could offer a million bucks for just ONE sensible economics writer over there, and no one could collect the money!

Editorial

Lessons From Prudhoe Bay

Published: August 9, 2006

No sooner did BP announce that a corrosion problem was forcing a shutdown of its pipelines serving Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay than prices again shot up, with oil temporarily gaining more than $2 a barrel, to nearly $77, and gasoline rising five cents a gallon in some cities. Consumers are understandably rankled. But there’s nothing necessarily predatory about what’s going on — this time.

Refineries and gas stations that are not well stocked rush to buy when there’s a sudden shortage, provoking an immediate price increase. Meanwhile, BP and the other oil companies that share in the Prudhoe Bay oil field stand to lose more from the shutdown than they will reap from a spike in prices.

What is predatory is some politicians’ attempt to use the shutdown to realize their drilling dreams. Pete Domenici, the Senate Energy Committee chairman, was quick off the mark pronouncing BP’s travails as yet another reason to drill more at home.

That’s backward, for two reasons.

First, even all-out drilling won’t vaccinate the market from unexpected shortages because there simply isn’t enough potential domestic supply to dent Americans’ demand. The United States holds only 3 percent of global oil reserves, yet uses 25 percent of the world’s oil.

Until we have marketable alternatives to oil, the only thing that will truly reduce Americans’ vulnerability to oil shocks is reduced demand. According to the nonprofit National Environmental Trust, if Americans had started a 10-year phase-in of 40-mile-a-gallon driving standards in 2001, they would already be saving 267 million barrels of oil a year. That’s nearly twice the amount produced annually at the Prudhoe Bay field.

No matter what Mr. Domenici and other oil company cheerleaders say, the BP fiasco also reminds us why we should not put the fate of America’s wilderness in the hands of the oil companies.

BP has a lot of explaining to do, starting with why the ragged condition of its pipelines went undetected for so long. But it has already reinforced one lesson: True energy security does not entail more drilling, especially in Alaska.

Wars past and present, and the Media

In the bigger picture about our chicken**** media, check out this story...my wife's father was in this battle (RIP TSgt Leonard):

"During World War II, U.S. and German forces fought the battle of Hurtgen Forest. It began Sept. 19, 1944 and ended Feb. 10, 1945. That was one battle in a strategically insignificant corridor of barely 50 square miles east of the Belgium-Germany border. The Germans inflicted more than 24,000 casualties on American forces, while another 9,000 Americans were sidelined due to illness, fatigue and friendly fire. Had live TV beamed this battle to America, there might have been an outcry that the policy was failing and somehow a cease-fire and an accommodation with Hitler should be achieved.

America won that war because the objective wasn't to understand the Nazis, or to reach an accommodation with them; the objective was to win the war. Anything less in this war - against an equally evil and unrelenting enemy - will mean defeat for the United States and for freedom everywhere. That's what Rumsfeld was getting at when he said, "We can persevere in Iraq or we can withdraw prematurely, until they force us to make a stand nearer home. But make no mistake: They are not going to give up, whether we acquiesce in their immediate demands or not."

Rumsfeld is right." -- Cal Thomas

Hat-tip: Rightwing News

Support your local Businessman

I'm working on a Firefighter and Police Appreciation Day for our local cops and firemen. In making calls to a number of businesses in the area to solicite their support, I met with a sales manager for a big insurance company (you'd know the company if I told you the name). I'm a sales guy, and have been a sales VP, so I'm pretty good at spotting classy salesmen vs. the "all hat and no cattle" type. Here's a guy who's the same age as I am, rock-steady, calm, cool, collected, and ready to help with his company's resources in support of the community. I bitched a bit about how hot it was in the restaurant we were meeting in. I complained about this and that, just normal nits and nats. Then I asked him if he had ever worked around cops.

Turns out he's a Lt Col Military Policeman in the Army Reserve. He's already served 2 tours in Iraq. Now, he didn't say a word about my bitchin' and moanin', just said he'd been over there and was glad to be back. See what I mean about the classy and rock-steady part?

Let me tell you -- I was embarrassed. I apologized to him for complaining about a 75 degree indoor restaurant when he'd had his butt on the line sweating it out in 115 degree weather, humping it. I thanked him for his service and for not kicking my tail, and we continued our work.

Does anyone have a crowbar to get the foot outta my mouth? TGFOS (Thank God for our Soldiers). Perspective, folks, perspective.

TGIF's

Thank God it's FOOTBALL Season.

Rush Limbaugh quote

Drugged or sober, ya gotta love Rush...

Overheard [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Rush Limbaugh today, reacting to the poll that says 1/3rd of Americans think 9/11 was an inside job: "When Elvis hears this it'll kill him!"

Posted at 2:16 PM


Hat tip: National Review Online

The Economy and Taxes

For all of the sneering at "trickle-down economics", as well as the criticism on the left about tax rates and the rich not paying its fair share, Karl Rove is lucid and succinct regarding how the tax burden is born by high-income taxpayers. Read the entire article (by Mr. Buckley, in which he quotes Mr. Rove).

Excerpt From William F Buckley, copyright United Press Sydicate.

The charge that only the rich were the beneficiaries of the tax cuts? Rove answers: "If this were true, then logic tells you that the percentage of federal income taxes paid by the wealthy would be falling after the tax cuts." That did not happen: The top 1 percent of the nation's earners, those making more than $317,000 per year, saw their share of the nation's income tax go up (by 1.5 percent), not down. The top 3 percent (making more than $200,000) paid a 5 percent larger share of taxes. Rove quoted a finding of The Wall Street Journal: "For every 100 Americans today, the wealthiest three are paying taxes equivalent to the other 97 combined." (Emphasis mine)

Here's a link to the full article.

Economics Lesson about Oil

Please read this great post from a Senior Lecturer in Economics at Northwestern University.

http://www.knowledgeproblem.com/archives/001709.html


Then, please, read my comments below:

Dear Prof Kiesling:

As a traveling salesman with an economics degree, one of the hardest things to listen to (and keep the ole trap shut) on the rental-car shuttle bus is the price of gas...what people pay for self-service, and what they have to pay the greedy Hertz-Avis-National monopoly (ok, oligopoly, but that's lost on them). Folks DO have choices in price; look at $3.19 for self-serve in Wisconsin, vs $6.00 if Hertz fills the tank for you. This would seem to be the easiest example of how competition could drive pricing down...but NOOOOOO. It's all about greed on the part of Pick-a-Rental, right?

In fact, people make a conscious choice to be LAZY and/or let the employer pick up the price differential in the gas from the rental-car company. "What do I care? It's not coming out of MY pocket." Here is where the old example of employer-paid health insurance comes into play. If your company pays the insurance premium, and you only have a small deductible, what incentive do you have to ask about the price of the MRI when you've only strained your knee? Similarly, what incentives are there for rental companies to lower the price of gas if people pay the going rate, and the employer gets stuck with the bill? I would argue that it is not the oil companies or the rental firms that are being uncompetitive; it's the CFO and Sales VP that approve of the expense who are the real enemies of competition.

Oh well, have to run to turn in the rental car and catch a flight. $6.35 here...but, not my problem...

Meanwhile, back at Camp Inelastic...

Regards,

Texan in Wisconsin

HAT TIP: National Review Online and Knowledge Problem

NYTimes using moral equivalence again

Will they ever stop being traitorous?

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, July 21 — The Bush administration is rushing a delivery of precision-guided bombs to Israel, which requested the expedited shipment last week after beginning its air campaign against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon,American officials said Friday.

The decision to quickly ship the weapons to Israel was made with relatively little debate within the Bush administration, the officials said. Its disclosure threatens to anger Arab governments and others because of the appearance that the United States is actively aiding the Israeli bombing campaign in a way that could be compared to Iran’s efforts to arm and resupply Hezbollah.

Just...freaking...unbelievable. We sell munitions to a democratically-elected government that is DEFENDING itself. And the NYT equates that sale with the Iranians supplying a TERRORIST group with weapons that are used to kill and frighten civilians. The Times tries to soften it with the word "appearance". Ptui.

Getting Citizens out of Lebanon Part 3

All are home and safe...if a bit frazzled.

Thanks for your thoughts and prayers.

Doug