28
Feb
"The battle is long, and this is the first step, this is the battle for freedom, sovereignty and independence," opposition MP Ghattas Khouri told a cheering protest in central Beirut, according to Reuters.
The opposition has raised its rhetoric in recent days, taking its cue from international pressure — led by the U.S. and France — to force Syrian troops from Lebanon following Hariri’s killing.
Earlier Monday, tens of thousands of demonstrators defied a ban and poured into Beirut’s city center Monday to protest against Syria’s military presence in Lebanon.
Things are happening rapidly in the Middle East all of a sudden. There is potential peace between Palestine and Israel. Egypt is moving towards democratic elections. There have been elections in Iraq. Even in more remote places such as Afghanistan and Togo there are democratic movements. And today, the people of Lebanon have forced their government to resign. The primary opposition is speaking of elections there as well. Iraq and Afghanistan are results of direct intervention of the US. Lebanon and Egypt cited US pressure.
I can’t help but think a lot of this is because of Bush’s actions in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan. The people of Egypt and Lebanon know that not only will Bush talk the talk, he walks the walk if they need him to. Up until now the US had a rather fickle policy towards supporting foreign countries. Abandoning the Kurds in the mid 90′s sent a message to the tyrants that the US was not something they had to worry about. Freeing Iraq and Afghanistan has sent the exact opposite message to the world, and look what’s happening!
I was wishing the Egyptians and Togos luck yesterday. Today, I’m wishing the Lebanese luck!
Democrats and liberals in general have lambasted Bush for polarizing the US. Regardless of the long list of very polarized opinions Kerry gave during the campaign, people kept talking about how Bush was the polarizing catalyst. I’ve listed Kerry’s, and a few other issues, in this series. Now, when the DNC chose Dean, I immediately concluded it was a poor choice due to his over-the-top hyperbole. I didn’t have to wait long have that "prophecy" fulfilled:
He doesn’t stop there:
"Moderate Republicans can’t stand these people (conservatives), because they’re intolerant. They don’t think tolerance is a virtue," Dean said, adding: "I’m not going to have these right-wingers throw away our right to be tolerant."
And the coup d’etat:
"This is a struggle of good and evil. And we’re the good."
Yeah buddy, that just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy all over. Different year, same people, same rhetoric. This is not going to bring new people to the party. It will also, IMO, continue to drive people away. When you’re losing, you need a new game plan. This kind of garbage is the exact same script that has driven them from control in the first place.
Kudos to Polipundit.com for the heads up.
27
Feb
Now I know Iran and Russia have been economic partners for some time. And, I know the Iranians have a lot of cash to spend that Russia desperately needs. But, I can’t help but wonder what Russia’s plans for keeping the Middle East stable are. I mean, these nukes the US are protesting are in Russia’s back yard, not ours. Iran has been loathe to totally open up their nuclear program to the UN, so how does Russia know they will be safe in the future? Nuclear proliferation has exploded since communism collapsed. Do the Russians truly think everyone will look the other way at them if a major world conflict arises? I’m stumped. I know cash rules, but usually people have enough sense to not sell someone a gun to someone aiming at you.
27
Feb
I was browsing my RSS reader and came accross this article on Polipundit. They cite an article by Robert Novak where he cites research by Polidata that shows that changing demographics will likely lead to Red states picking up six electoral votes at the expense of blue states, making it harder for the Democrats to make any gains in the 2010 elections. You can pay Polidata to send you their research.
Or, you could have gotten it here for free. I made this very same observation a while back. I bet by 2010, it will be more than six votes.
Here’s a refresher:
Each state is listed with their 1990-2000 growth percentage ( red is over 10%, green is 5% to 10%, pale green is 0% to 5%) and how they voted in the 2004 Presidential race:
|
Alabama |
10 | r |
| Alaska | 14 | r |
| Arizona | 40 | r |
| Arkansas | 14 | r |
| California | 14 | d |
| Colorado | 31 | r |
| Connecticut | 4 | d |
| Delaware | 18 | d |
| District of Columbia | -6 | d |
| Florida | 24 | r |
| Georgia | 26 | r |
| Hawaii | 9 | d |
| Idaho | 29 | r |
| Illinois | 9 | d |
| Indiana | 10 | r |
| Iowa | 5 | r |
| Kansas | 9 | r |
| Kentucky | 10 | r |
| Louisiana | 6 | r |
| Maine | 4 | d |
| Maryland | 11 | d |
| Massachusetts | 6 | d |
| Michigan | 7 | d |
| Minnesota | 12 | d |
| Mississippi | 11 | r |
| Missouri | 9 | r |
| Montana | 13 | r |
| Nebraska | 8 | r |
| Nevada | 66 | r |
| New Hampshire | 11 | d |
| New Jersey | 9 | d |
| New Mexico | 20 | r |
| New York | 6 | d |
| North Carolina | 21 | r |
| North Dakota | 1 | r |
| Ohio | 5 | r |
| Oklahoma | 10 | r |
| Oregon | 20 | d |
| Pennsylvania | 3 | d |
| Rhode Island | 5 | d |
| South Carolina | 15 | r |
| South Dakota | 9 | r |
| Tennessee | 17 | r |
| Texas | 23 | r |
| Utah | 30 | r |
| Vermont | 8 | d |
| Virginia | 14 | r |
| Washington | 21 | d |
| West Virginia | 1 | r |
| Wisconsin | 10 | d |
| Wyoming | 9 | r |
27
Feb
First we had this headline a while back:
Although predicted to totally destabilize Afghanistan, everything went remarkably well. The Afghanistanis embraced their freedom voted in numbers that should embarass the US. One year before, they were ruled by a ruthless tyranny.
Then, this happened:
The Iraqis did the same thing. They embraced democracy while most of the world was proclaiming it would rip Iraq apart.
Then, this happened:
Democracy in Egypt? One of the most vocal opponents to the US efforts in Iraq is embracing democracy as well?
And now, there’s even more:
The people of Togo supporting democracy have ousted their leader. It is seen as a move for democracy supporters to install a democratic government.
Things are looking good all over the world right now. That sure wasn’t a feeling I had one year ago. Hopefully all will go well for the new democracies in their infancy. Every success is just an enticement for those that haven’t done so. Good luck Egypt and Togo!
24
Feb
-
BELGIUM: Offered five to 10 military driving instructors for a German-led training mission for Iraqis in the United Arab Emirates. Will contribute $261,000 to a trust fund to help cover costs of the NATO mission.
-
BRITAIN: Eleven soldiers now serving with the NATO mission, $330,000 in funding.
-
BULGARIA: Pledged to send five instructors to Iraq, $40,000 in funding.
-
CANADA: Offered up to 30 instructors to train outside Iraq, probably in Jordan, $810,000.
-
CZECH REPUBLIC: Five instructors.
-
DENMARK: Offered 10 trainers, seven soldiers for force protection. Sent pistols, radios, binoculars and other equipment for Iraqi forces.
-
ESTONIA: Plans to send one staff officer to Iraq, and $65,000.
-
FRANCE: Will send one officer to help mission coordination at NATO headquarters in Belgium. Has offered to train 1,500 Iraqi military police in Qatar outside NATO’s mission.
-
GERMANY: Offered to train Iraqi military in United Arab Emirates, contribute $652,000 to funding, airlift.
-
GREECE: Will contribute $400,000 to funding.
-
HUNGARY: Sixteen officers departed Monday for Baghdad, through NATO base in Naples. Offered up to 150 troops for next stage of mission in late summer. Donated 77 Russian-made T72 tanks to Iraq.
-
ICELAND: Has public information officer on the way to serve with NATO mission in Baghdad. Offered $196,000 to fund training outside the country and help transport equipment to Iraq.
-
ITALY: Now has eight officers with the mission in Baghdad. Considering sending up to 16 more soon.
-
LATVIA: Plans to host Iraqi soldiers next year for bomb disposal training. Contributing $65,000 to trust fund. Sending equipment to Iraqi forces.
-
LITHUANIA: Two trainers on the way to Iraq, two more expected to go soon. Also considering training in Lithuania.
-
LUXEMBOURG: Offered $196,000
-
NETHERLANDS: Sent 10 military police, 15 trainers for the mission. Considering sending more.
-
NORWAY: Sending 10 trainers to Iraq. Hosted training of 19 Iraqi officers at NATO Joint Warfare Center.$196,000 in funding.
-
POLAND: Plans to send up to 10 trainers, and a transport platoon of about 30, force protection unit.
-
PORTUGAL: Sending up to 10 soldiers to Iraq to help in training.
-
ROMANIA: Has two instructors headed to Iraq, five more planned. Will take 25 Iraqi officers on training course in Romania in July, 25 expected to go later this year.
-
SLOVAKIA: Sending two instructors to Iraq, $53,000 in funding.
-
SLOVENIA: Offered to help training outside Iraq, probably in Jordan, $132,000 in funding.
-
SPAIN: Plans to train groups of 25 Iraqis in mine clearance at a center outside Madrid, $530,000 in funding.
-
TURKEY: Two officers serving in Baghdad; offered to train outside Iraq
It’s about time. I like the way a few countries like Spain are doing. They are contributing as importantly as anyone else, but doing it in a way that doesn’t offend the people of Spain. It is possible to assist the Iraqi people without necessarily supporting the US war effort. I don’t care how these countries do it so long as they contribute to stability in Iraq. Europe has more to lose due to the ramifications of a destabilized Middle East than the US. Maybe they are finally starting to realize that.
Nobody knows how much I hate these "unidentified" sources. 99% of the time they don’t pan out. The Bush administration has stated repeatedly it will not negotiate with terrorists, of which these insurgents are among. No one is willing to put their name behind a statement to the contrary. Who do I believe? I think it’s pretty clear. The part I’m having a hard time getting past here is why the insurgents would negotiate with the US at all. We are their enemy, according to them, not the Iraqis. When the Iraqis stabilize, we leave. The source of their opposition is then gone. I would believe in a heartbeat the Iraqis were negotiating with the insurgents, but not this report. Just another wasted headline for the sake of advertising IMO.
From MSNBC:
In two days of testimony this week, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan offered plenty of support for President Bush’s plan to overhaul Social Security and partially replace it with a system of personal accounts.
There’s the message, then they promptly shoot the messenger:
Even though Greenspan is a recognized authority on Social Security, given his work helping to engineer the current system of taxes and benefits in the early 1980s, he has lost some of his credibility on fiscal issues in recent years, especially with his endorsement of President Bush’s 2001 tax cut program. At the time he expressed concern about the potential danger of growing federal budget surpluses – a concern that in retrospect appears to have been badly misguided.
I’m not sure who at MSNBC has the experience and expertise that allows them to deem Greenspan misguided, but we’ll just go with what they offer.
This is what USATODAY reports:
Greenspan said private accounts funded with a portion of the 12.4% Social Security payroll tax would not address the program’s solvency. But they could move the program to a pre-funded basis while providing a sense of ownership, and possibly transferable wealth, to individuals lower down the economic ladder "who have had to struggle with very little capital."
And, this is the only opinion they offer:
Rep. Melvin Watt, D-N.C., slammed not only Greenspan, but Bush’s argument that private accounts will benefit black Americans. "When I hear you use as a major justification for private accounts that you are somehow trying to look out for poor people, it makes me nauseous," Watt said.
Greenspan appeared ready to reply, but Watt moved on. Critics of private accounts have said they will undermine a program that has cut elderly poverty in half.
One gives an opinion, one quotes an opinion. I prefer to just get the story and make my own opinion. Why does every news source feel compelled to stick something inflamatory into every news story? You wanna know what keeps the US "polarized". Let me ask you this, how do think the US keeps from being polarized? I mean, if every news story has an opinion, you’re immediately creating a charge just by printing it. If the news media would do their job and just report the damn story, there wouldn’t be nearly as much polarization because 95% of the US won’t research a story to form their own opinion. If there is no opinion at all, there is no polarization.
So, here I’m gonna go and polarize some more. If Congressman Watt had any semblence of a clue at all, he’d understand the very simple logic that the presumption of the argument is keeping Social Security solvent. The failure to do so would mean there is no Social Security. If there is no Social Security, the poor are screwed a lot more than the rich. Now, Congressman Watt, take the argument from that perspective and come up with a solution to make sure the poor don’t get screwed. That was the point of Greenspan’s presentation. That is the point of Bush’s argument. For Congressman Watt to be so indignent that figuring out the most basic precept of Social Security makes him nauseous tells me he really doesn’t need to be tackling the complicated stuff like how to keep it going. And, considering Greenspan was actually supporting Watt’s position only to have Watt insult him is a rather poor performance by Watt. I think North Carolina can do better. I take that back, I know a lot of people from North Carolina. I KNOW they can do better than this.
I think Social Security needs reform. I don’t think personal accounts are the cure-all. I want higher tax rates for people making more than $200,000. I want those tax rates offset by personal income rates. I want personal accounts to be additional to existing whithholding, but not in lieu of. As usual, per my norm, I believe in personal responsibility. It’s not the government’s job to pay for it, it’s ours. It’s our money, not the government’s. If we think we need more money in it, we’re the ones that will have to put it in there. Just putting the same amount in a different place ain’t gonna do it.
– Moon
19
Feb
This doesn’t set too well with me. I don’t buy Exxon gas any way, but when travelling, I’ll go out of my way not to as well. This is just more evidence that there is no need for the price of gas to be what it is. We can’t just blame the Arabs.
19
Feb
I was hoping to get the video, but apparently there is none. So, text will have to suffice. But I do get comical visions whenever I read this:
Thirty-five Greenpeace protesters got more than they may have bargained for when they stormed the International Petroleum Exchange in London on Wednesday. According to "The Times" of London, they slipped into a closing door and then roared onto the trading floor, blowing whistles and sounding foghorns.
They were hoping to paralyze oil trading at the exchange. But the traders, most of them under 25 years old, rushed the protesters, pushing filing cabinets on top of them and kicking and punching them until they retreated. Twenty-seven protesters were arrested. Two were hospitalized, one with a broken jaw and the other with a concussion. One protester says, "I have never seen anyone less amenable to listening our point of view."
OK, you guys scare the lights out of me with foghorns and try to deprive me of my income to support my family, all for the sake of advocating something I may not support, and see how amenabble I am. I guarnatee you, it will be a lot less. You pass out flyers in the parking lot and I might be a little more amenable.
OK, now, outside of the political grandstanding by Greenpeace and myself, I just can’t help but picture this as a Monty Python skit.
