| EdDriscoll.com |
|
Saturday, April 17, 2004
Posted
4/17/2004 11:52:19 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 11:40:51 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 11:10:35 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington has returned a $5,000 contribution made to his legal defense fund by an Iraqi-American businessman who has acknowledged financial ties with Saddam Hussein's regime.In a post titled, "The Money's Just A Bonus", Orrin writes, "Does anyone really think Mr. McDermott betrayed his country for the money?" What about the other half of the Democratic duo? Back on March 15th, we posted: In The Journal today, Robert L. Pollock looks at "Saddam's Useful Idiots", and asks, "Did any Iraqi money filter back to American war critics?" [Scott] Ritter is prominently mentioned, along with Democratic congressman David Bonior as having ties with Shakir al-Khafaji, a Detroit-area businessman whose name was included in a recently published list of individuals receiving oil money from Saddam Hussein.And of course Saddam sent ten big ones to this former Democratic congressional staffer as well. And then there are the boys in the UN...
Posted
4/17/2004 09:52:48 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 09:33:30 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 05:46:18 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 05:08:55 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 03:55:20 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Dozens of federal, state and local law enforcement agents searched a warehouse near Oakland International Airport Saturday for weapons including rocket launchers, officials said. The exact nature of the raid, which began around 6 a.m. Friday and continued Saturday, was unclear because the federal search warrant was under seal. But U.S. Magistrate Edward Chen told The San Francisco Chronicle: "The warrant was for a bunch of devices for rockets that could be launched from military vehicles and (for) some M-16s," semiautomatic assault rifles used by the U.S. military. Federal agents denied that the search was part of a counterterrorism operation.(Emphasis mine. Found via Ruminations.)
Posted
4/17/2004 03:35:38 PM
by Edward Driscoll
There's nothing wrong with their gray matter, it's just that it remains virgin soil. They sow it not, and neither do they reap it. It just lies there undisturbed, as fallow as the day it was born, until at last, like other overdue virginities, it loses all capacity for response and you can't do a thing with it. Ignos are the chief crop of Diversity Ed, what sprouts when Western Civ's Dead White Males are eliminated from college curricula and replaced with African oral historians, Aztec vivisectionists, and the diaries of Ana?s Nin. Columnists have made hay with dumbed-down curricula. I've written my share of polemics, but I made the mistake of confining myself to arguments against multiculturalism per se. The narrower but more intriguing subject of Igno psychology is one that I left unexplored until two recent incidents convinced me that we are witnessing the spread of a new kind of stupidity that developed nations have never before had to deal with. The first incident came about when I had to correct a public record involving my Social Security number. I dealt with an administrative assistant, a cordial, seemingly competent woman in her early thirties. She assured me that my problem was all straightened out, but given my natural pessimism, I automatically said, "I can see the handwriting on the wall." That's when she looked at the wall. Turned around and gave it the old up-and-down once-over. Looked back at me with eyes as big as saucers. "It's just a figure of speech," I mumbled.If you've ever felt like there was a forcefield when you spoke to someone you thought should have been a like-minded peer, read the whole thing. UPDATE: Cassandra has an encounter with ignos armed with PhDs.
Posted
4/17/2004 01:25:02 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 12:04:56 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/17/2004 12:16:32 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Friday, April 16, 2004
Posted
4/16/2004 02:12:35 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 01:30:51 PM
by Edward Driscoll
What Sartre actually offers us is a paradigmatic example of the leftist mind, in all its dodgy enthusiasms. Sartre’s early existentialism presents a nihilistic conception of human freedom that still informs some forms of liberal thought; his later political writings seethe with the pathologies of the far left, including an admiration for bloodletting, so long as it targets democrats and capitalists and Westerners generally. Sartre may indeed have been “the absolute intellectual,” but only in a negative sense: His oeuvre stands as an absolute warning about the wrong turns that moral and political thought can take when untethered from nature or any sense of reality. Were Sartre alive today, he doubtless would place the blame for September 11 and Palestinian suicide bombings on their victims — defending, as he frequently did, the indefensible.Read the whole thing; the Pernod and Gauloise are optional.
Posted
4/16/2004 01:16:21 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 12:35:40 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 11:48:33 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 11:31:41 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Kerry had his potential Sista Souljah moment teed up for him and he struck out. Worse, he was fanned looking. Which hardly inspires confidence that he'll be able to get the bat off his shoulders when it really matters -- when, say, North Korea decides to posture with nukes, or when a drunk Teddy Kennedy asks to borrow the town car so he can give a ride home to a young staffer.For some background, follow the links here.
Posted
4/16/2004 10:56:47 AM
by Edward Driscoll
In our report, Life after Living Marxism, page 10, July 8, we referred to the Reason Foundation and said its "leading writer, the syndicated columnist Sandra Postrel, is author of the libertarian book The Enemies Of Freedom and frequently talks at the Hudson Institute". The Reason Foundation points out that no one of that name works at the Foundation or for Reason Magazine. The editor-at-large and former editor of the magazine is called Virginia Postrel. She is a columnist for Forbes and the New York Times but not a "syndicated" columnist. Her book is not called The Enemies Of Freedom. It is called The Future And Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise and Progress (Free Press). The Reason Foundation says Ms Postrel has never been to the Hudson Institute and has no connection with the organisation.(Via Samizdata.net.)
Posted
4/16/2004 10:29:14 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 02:32:45 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 02:25:17 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/16/2004 12:11:50 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Thursday, April 15, 2004
Posted
4/15/2004 09:19:08 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 05:26:13 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 03:25:41 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 02:30:48 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 01:50:35 PM
by Edward Driscoll
"We made a conscious decision, and part of it was under strong pressure from the [victims'] families, to make this commission as transparent and as visible as possible."--9/11 commission chairman Thomas Kean on commission members' repeated TV appearances, quoted in the New York Times, April 15 "People ought to stay out of our business."--Kean, on allegations that commissioner Jamie Gorelick has a conflict of interest, quoted in the Washington Post, April 15(From James Taranto's "Best of the Web Today".)
Posted
4/15/2004 01:33:43 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 12:44:18 PM
by Edward Driscoll
The April 7 Breslin column should have indicated that it was based on a conversation that took place in 1992. And the column did not adhere to Newsday's standard of publishing only direct quotations that are accurate and precise.Maureen Dowd could not be reached for comment.
Posted
4/15/2004 11:39:50 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Most other countries have reduced their corporate tax rates sharply in recent years. The U.S. has not, and the result is that we are now one of the highest tax countries on earth.But Kerry's had almost 20 years in the US Senate. Why has he waited until now to even jawbone some (minor) tax cutting?
Posted
4/15/2004 11:20:10 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 01:43:33 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/15/2004 01:29:22 AM
by Edward Driscoll
If you listen carefully, you can hear something shifting deep beneath the manic surface of American culture. Rap stars have taken to wearing designer suits. Miranda Hobbs, Sex and the City’s redhead, has abandoned hooking up and a Manhattan co-op for a husband and a Brooklyn fixer-upper, where she helps tend her baby and ailing mother-in-law; even nympho Samantha has found a “meaningful relationship.” Madonna is writing children’s books. Gloria Steinem is an old married lady. Yessiree, family values are hot! Capitalism is cool! Seven-grain bread is so yesterday, and red meat is back!Read the whole thing. (Via Joanne Jacobs, who sums it as "Bourgeois is back!") Wednesday, April 14, 2004
Posted
4/14/2004 05:18:27 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/14/2004 04:51:25 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/14/2004 01:10:08 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Tuesday, April 13, 2004
Posted
4/13/2004 05:36:28 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 04:57:37 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 04:35:51 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 04:25:43 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 03:57:32 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 03:47:55 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 03:14:00 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 03:03:03 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 02:34:39 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Except that we've captured Ho Chi Minh, we've taken Hanoi, there's no draft, and the boat people have mostly come back. Not all of the comparisons are, however, to our advantage: It took nine years for the Democrats to be willing to cut off funding for the military then. It took seven months this time.I recently read The New Dealers' War by Thomas Fleming, who is surprisingly negative about how FDR's administration handled World War II. But at no point that I can remember in Fleming's book, other than possibly a fear of nerve gas, did FDR's men try to compare the second great war to the first. Nor do I recall many of President Clinton's military efforts being compared with Vietnam. As Alvin Toffler wrote in War and Anti-War, the American military's tactics were radically changed after the debacle of Vietnam. Maybe Senators Kennedy and Kerry and the rest of the left never got the memo.
Posted
4/13/2004 02:00:25 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 01:30:36 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 01:12:31 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 12:42:05 PM
by Edward Driscoll
This is how Bob Kerrey, a member of the 9-11 Commission and former Democratic senator from Nebraska, opened his questioning of Condoleezza Rice before the Commission last week: "Thank you, Dr. Rice. Let me say at the beginning I'm very impressed, and indeed I'd go as far as to say moved by your story, the story of your life and what you've accomplished. It's quite extraordinary."Prager adds, "Like many people of his political persuasion and in his political party, [Kerrey] saw her as an extraordinary black and female well before he saw her as an extraordinary individual". Read the whole thing. UPDATE: Kerrey's racism is remarkably subtle in comparison with the blatant stuff that Charles Johnson looks at here. In contrast, there was a remarkable sentence that President Bush uttered tonight: "People want to be free. Some people think that if you're Muslim, or if you have brown skin, you somehow don't want to be free. I reject that."God, I love that line.
Posted
4/13/2004 12:27:16 PM
by Edward Driscoll
The world is splitting into two groups: those who want the Americans to win in Iraq, and those who want the Ba'athists and Islamofascists to win. At least we know which side these guys are on.
Posted
4/13/2004 08:52:53 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 08:48:21 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 08:27:35 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/13/2004 08:09:25 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Monday, April 12, 2004
Posted
4/12/2004 05:31:02 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/12/2004 05:24:50 PM
by Edward Driscoll
The Alamo fell for a second time over the weekend, and this time, the scope of the defeat, although bloodless, was no less staggering than the original. The $100-million Disney movie took in just $9.2 million, tying for third place with the $12-million urban comedy Johnson Family Vacation, which played in only about half the number of theaters. (Some box-office trackers were predicting that when the final numbers are released later today, The Alamo will finish fourth.) "I'm shocked, quite honestly, at the number," Disney distribution chief Chuck Viane told USA Today. Analysts had predicted a relatively low figure, but had not anticipated the utter debacle that transpired. They also had not anticipated that Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ would be resurrected in first place again four weeks after dropping out of that position. "That's unprecedented. I've never seen that before," Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations, told the Associated Press. "The Passion is just rewriting box-office history." (However, Dan Marks of the rival Nielsen EDI told the Los Angeles Times that almost the same thing happened in 1996 when Jerry Maguire returned to No. 1 after dropping out for three weeks.) Passion has now earned a total of $354.8 million and ranks eighth on the all-time domestic box-office list. Other new films also tanked at the box office. The Whole Ten Yards with Bruce Willis and Matthew Perry, debuted with just $6.7 million. The girls' flick Ella Enchanted drew a less-than-enchanting $6.1 million, just ahead of The Girl Next Door, which earned $6 million. And in yet another dose of bad news for Disney, the studio's The Ladykillers, starring Tom Hanks, dropped out of the top 10 after just two weeks.Given that the film was originally promoted as a Christmas release, and was then pulled back for four months of additional cutting and possibly reshoots after it bombed in previews, Disney had to know that things did not bode well for their revisionist epic. Also, given the backlash that CBS's attempted smear job of The Reagans received, and Pearl Harbor (another piece of revisionist Disney history) more and more Americans are becoming aware that Hollywood has an increasingly warped view of America and its history, at least when compared to those in the Red States. So when Disney distribution chief Chuck Viane tells USA Today, "I'm shocked, quite honestly, at the number," how honest is he being about being shocked? (Probably about has shocked as Claude Rains was to discover that there was gambling going on at Rick's cafe.)
Posted
4/12/2004 03:18:06 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/12/2004 12:46:12 PM
by Edward Driscoll
When I visited Cuba in 1998, a favorite way of getting beyond the grim, mostly meatless food rations was to raise a pig -- illegally, of course -- in your apartment. The only problem was the squealing, so Cubans would simply cut the little porkers' vocal cords.Workers' Paradise, indeed.
Posted
4/12/2004 10:51:37 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/12/2004 10:33:39 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Sunday, April 11, 2004
Posted
4/11/2004 08:17:17 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 06:33:32 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 05:58:10 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 04:04:34 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 03:34:40 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 03:31:40 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 02:48:27 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 01:00:38 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/11/2004 12:36:45 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Orientalism is sophistry; but one that worked quite well as an ideology, as sophistries so often do. Because the West could not see the East from the East's point of view, it could not judge the actions of Easterners by our own ethical standards. Now there are two ways to take this. One is defensible, and it means that no one in the West has the right to interfere with the ethical standards that the Easterners chose for themselves, when they are on their own lands and around their own hearths. The other is madness, and it means that we are not permitted to judge the actions of the Easterners even when these actions are directed toward us; and even when they are clearly meant to harm us. Does it need to be pointed out that such an ideology dehumanizes the very people whose interests it is supposed to be defending? If we exempt a group of people, like the Palestinians and the Arabs, from normal ethical demands we make on Europeans, Americans, and the Asians, are we respecting their culture, or pitying them for having such a rotten one? To say that we must apply a whole new set of ethical rules to the Arabs implies that they are not fit to be judged by ours. Furthermore, to fail even to bring our ethical standards to their attention, is to imply very strongly that they could not appreciate these standards if we did. Thus Orientalism is racism turned to the advantage of the group that is being discriminated against. You cannot judge us the way you judge yourselves; therefore, you must lower the standards for us -- and continue to lower it until we tell you to stop.As Harris writes, "To refuse to allow others to rise to your standard because you believe that they are inherently inferior to you is simple racism; but to refuse to demand that others rise to your standard for the same reason is also racism -- just a tad less blatant, and far more cruel." (Found via The New Criterion's Stefan Beck. Be sure to read Beck's comments on Harris's article.)
Home |