Berkeley propaganda class
Okay, well maybe it's not advertised as such, but according to Happy Fun Pundit, UC Berkeley is offering a class entitled "The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance" in its English department. HFP dissects the course description, and I particularly like this comment:

"My personal favorite line out of this pile of steaming crapulence is this one: '[Israel] has systematically displaced, killed, and maimed millions of Palestinian people'. First of all, it's a lie. But it's a common propaganda tactic to include one lesser, but widespread charge with much more serious (but rare) ones in order to blur the distinction between them while skating the truth. Consider this statement: 'Under George Bush, millions of Americans have gone to work, eaten dinner, and have been executed by the American government'. Not exactly a picture of the truth, is it? And yet, only under a very strict parsing of the sentence can we call it a lie."

HPF concludes with an original poem that I believe is highly worthy of consideration for inclusion in the course reader.

Don't miss this flag parody
Tom Bell spoofs the new EU barcode flag with four creations of his own that better reflect Euro-reality.

"The Globaloney of International Law"
I couldn't have said it better myself.

Making light of an extremely bad situation
Mark Steyn's latest piece is disturbingly funny. I would've laughed harder, except it's so true.

Duck!
Warning: politically incorrect humor. Larry Miller's new appellation for the Palestinians: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." What do they want?

"Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course--that's where the real fun is--but mostly they want Israel."

Sometimes, the comedian says it better than any political analyst from CNN could.

Derbyshire, flying falafels, and the wretched state of the Palestinians
Consider this another introductory piece to my coming post on AC Douglas' post.

Hiatus
My posting will be more infrequent and irregular this weekend due to the fact that I am graduating from USC tomorrow, partying hard (cue lame-ass Andrew W.K. song) for the next few days after that, have family in town visiting with whom I must interact (while drunk and sober, presumably), and need to move stuff home. However, I am working on a couple long responses--one to AC Douglas, the other to OxBlog's Josh Chafetz--which I will post upon completion. The one concerning Chafetz, btw, is going to be an open letter (it started as a bitch-ass long email and I'm going to convert it so it's bloggable).

Middle East solutions
Blogger after commentator after armchair pundit have written responses to the situation in the Middle East, proposing their own solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. Unfortunately, the vast majority of them miss what I think is the key aspect of the whole problem. Yes Arafat is a terrorist and must go, but he's just a symptom of the problem. Read my article from April 2001 and tell me I am wrong for believing that what we are witnessing is a conflict that at its roots is grounded in the destabilizing effects of modernization. Islam and Arab culture must come to terms with Western values before there will be true peaceful coexistence between Israel and her neighbors.

Please note, this is not an exercise in self-aggrandizement here; I plan on responding to AC Douglas' thoughts on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when I have a bit more time, and what I say in my article is a major precursor to that. If you're interested though, the reason I don't post much original thought and analysis on the conflict is because most of my articles from last spring (when I was living in Israel) dealt with that subject. My personal favorite is the "No Peace for the Middle East", which netted me scores of letters to the editor from pissed-off Muslims on campus (thanks to the USC Muslim Student Association coordinating a letter-writing campaign). Also check out the media angle.

Remember crop circles?
How about pipe bomb smiley faces instead? At least the psycho has a sense of humor.

"An exercise in bias"
cut on the bias has an excellent dissection of the Zen TV Experiment all wrapped into a discussion of Adam Curry's The Big Lie and media bias in general. She says,

"This is a crucial point in understanding how media bias occurs; it's not that it is explicit, but rather that many times it is implicit in the structure, the word usage, the story selection, the photo selection - an admission made tangentially by the NY Times in this apology...."

"One of the difficulties in combating media bias is that the practitioners can rarely see their own practice of it."

"I do agree with Curry and Adbusters that the point is not to turn off all media and all outside voices. The point is to be a conscious and logical consumer of information, using your own internal hermeneutic to arrive at The Big Truth through wide reading, an open mind and a refusal to 'connect the dots' without support for doing so other than juxtaposition or isolation of detail."

Read my links under Essentials over on the left for yourself, and come to your own conclusions. I agree with Curry and cut on the bias that unreflective consumption of TV media is ultimately harmful. That's why you're better off getting your news from newspapers, magazines, e-zines, online publications, and blogs. Even then, it's important to always keep in mind that nobody is unbiased, nobody is objective; every writer has his/her own perspective and that is going to feed into the story somehow. Know that going in and you'll gain a better comprehension of the world around you. If you access your news sources with a critical eye/mind, you will gain in understanding and wisdom, won't be deceived into swallowing programmed truths and ways of seeing the world, and will develop your own views coherently. Then you can act on your convictions--political, religious, whatever--with the confidence that is necessary to persevere in the intense public battle over ideas.

Former Clinton adviser gets it
Dick Morris correctly diagnoses the Jewish political calculus in America and explains to Jews that their best friends are conservatives (specifically hawks and evangelicals). This is obvious and has been pointed out before, but when Dick Morris actually knows what he is talking about, it is a good sign.

Hey neighbor, trim your bush!
Some Santa Cruz residents are angry about this tree that looks like a penis. You be the judge.

Goldberg on Fortuyn
The NRO editor writes in the Washington Times,

"One can disagree with Fortuyn's view of Islam or Muslim immigrants or the threat either pose to Dutch culture. But you can't say that he was an enemy of tolerance; instead, he was a martyr to it."

This, simply, is why labeling Fortuyn a far-rightist and comparing him to fascists and Le Pen just doesn't fit the facts.

Bush shows leadership in dumping ICC
In contrast, his critics exhibit intellectual dishonesty and advocate "followership" of other countries' flawed policy.

Don't blame the Europeans
Most of them are peace-loving, tolerant people. The problem, says John O'Sullivan, is the minority comprised of influential public intellectuals and immigrants from Muslim lands.

Argh
The truth:

"So, to all the college students out there I say: Enjoy the Carnival while you can. Before you know it, it's back to the old grind of parents, siblings, burger-joints, or babysitting, and, in short, summer."

More fact-checking on Fortuyn coverage
Patrick Ruffini takes Brian Williams to task for his skewed coverage of Fortuyn's assassination.

To the EU: Don't adopt that flag just yet
It won't accomplish what you want it to.

Attention visitors following links from Andrew Sullivan, Instapundit, and other websites
You can find the post they are referring to here. Thanks for reading, and (in my best pretend southern drawl) "Y'all come back now, y'hear?"

Ick, ick, ick!!!
All hail the new logo for the European Union!

It looks terrible, it has more in common with a barcode than a flag or national symbol, and worse, its unveiling at this time serves to make one wonder if the EU has its priorities straight. After all, shouldn't securing free speech and violence-free politics come before designing chic (read: lame) new symbols of undemocratic authority?

MTV VJ on Fortuyn
Former MTV VJ Adam Curry lives in Holland and has a blog, and he has some great stuff to say about the assassination of Pim Fortuyn and what it possibly means for The Netherlands' political future.

Which man or woman of royalty are you?
Stupid, worthless, meaningless, adolescent, but altogether amusing royalty quiz. Find out whether you're a King, Prince, Duke, or on the female side, a Queen, Princess, Duchess, and so on.

My only question: If you're gay, which test do you take? I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual guys out there who'd prefer to be a Queen or a Princess than a Duke or an Earl. But then, supposedly a few of those royals actually were gay, so I suppose one could swing either way (unfunny pun intended).

FYI I was a King (neener neener!).

Lefty loonies of the week
Yes, the award goes to none other than Media Whores Online, a watchdog group that takes up the right calling--exposing fraudulent, biased journalism and commentators who toe the establishment line--but instead ends up becoming little more than an ideological hit team. Seriously, their "A-list Whore Roster" and "Media in Exile" lists are exactly backward.

Would would a journalist do?
Thanks to Newsweek, we know the answer to that: Distort Scripture to argue that Christians should accept modern secular values on sex and morality unquestioningly. Tim Swarens nails it.

Bush and California
Okay, Bill Whalen is right: President Bush doesn't need California to win reelection. Statistically, mathematically, electorally, whatever--we all know that. But, for one thing, California Republicans really need Bush to help them out if the Golden State is ever to escape the inane political morass it finds itself in. We CAGOPers can not move forward if our own popular president abandons us because he doesn't think he can win here and therefore we're not worth spending time and money on. What kind of compassionate conservatism is so mean that it ignores fellow conservatives who want to advance the same Republican agenda on the state level of the Union's most populous state as Bush is doing in DC? Also, for all this talk about it not being necessary for Bush to take California, we're missing the fact that if he did lock up our state, the Democrats would have absolutely no chance whatsoever of winning a presidential election. Yes, California is a tougher electoral block to conquer, but it's worth the money and the effort to fight for the votes here. What would it say about a president who smugly acts as if he can ignore the votes of America's most populous, rich, and economically important state and still be reelected--even if he is right?

"Adding Russia to the Anti-Saddam coalition"
Is Ariel Cohen right about Russia and Iraq? Will we see American troops marching alongside the Red Army (or whatever they call themselves these days) into Baghdad?

Dreher gets it
Since I spent countless hours researching and writing a term paper discussing Europe, nationalism, and immigration, I like to pretend that I really do understand what the real issues are in Europe. Rod Dreher, however, gets it exactly right in his NRO column today--presumably without needing to do all that hard work. Here are Dreher's words at the end of his article, and I agree with them:

"The fact that that anodyne opinion — that freedom of speech is an acceptable part of democratic society — is enough to get a man killed in today's Europe should shock the conscience of the continent. Fortuyn may or may not be a martyr in the war against fundamentalist Islam, but he is almost certainly a martyr in the war on political correctness. European populations are aging, and cannot maintain their welfare states without massive immigration; immigration from Islamic countries threatens to change European values inalterably. Fortuyn said Europe cannot avoid confronting these realities. He may be a more powerful force for change by the way he died than he would have been had he lived."

"'The clock is ticking in Europe, and is ticking in a democratic way,' says [John] Hulsman [of the Heritage Foundation]. 'Maybe now is the time to begin real dialogue about immigration, crime and culture, because if a real one isn't begun, these impulses that can't be processed through democratic institutions are going to have ugly manifestations. This is the problem in Europe: nothing of real significance is ever discussed by the political elites.'"

The questions that are not being discussed in Europe, yet should be, are questions that go to the core of European identity. They involve sensitive questions of race, ethnicity, culture, language, religion, and civic values. After the Holocaust, which was a direct result of Europe not dealing with these exact same issues of identity, culture, and assimilation in regards to the internal Other of the Jew, Europe collectively decided that going back to ignoring the deeper issues and clouding discussion in the terms of political correctness would be the only fixes needed. Dreher is right that Europe needs the immigrants to keep their bloated welfare states going, but Europe also needed the merchant-class Jews (read: bankers and money-lenders, who were and still are disproportionately Jewish) to survive economically, and look at what happened there. Now Jews and Muslims are in danger because Euro-elites are too afraid to talk openly about what national identity is and should encompass.

Thankfully, in America, we don't have this problem. Since we are an immigrant nation whose elastic national identity is based solely on our civic values given to us by our Founding Fathers, we can embrace newcomers of all races, ethnicities, religions, and nationalities. Multiculturalism, however, is preventing peaceable integration of our immigrants precisely because it presupposes an American identity that is more "white" and "Eurocentric" than it really is. American civic values really are universal values, not European civic values, and that's why people from every corner of the globe believe fervently in the American dream.

It's still an open question whether Europe can adopt American-style immigration policies and survive, keeping her cultures and traditions intact. But this open question is exactly what's been kept from being discussed, and this supression is what drives Le Pen, Haider, and (yes, even though he's in a completely different ideological class) Fortuyn to gain massive public support and popularity to the dismay of Euro-elites. If the elites don't want to discuss the matter fairly and openly for fear of being labeled "racists" or "xenophobes," then the peoples of Europe will speak democratically and through other means of expressing popular will, and will make their opinions heard. Such vulgar popular expression might not end up being very pretty.

More wisdom on the coverage of Fortuyn
Charles Paul Freund argues in Reason Online that "the process of straining political events through the standard journalistic narrative templates -- especially the right-vs.-left narrative -- can simplify a story so greatly that it emerges as a different story, perhaps even the wrong story." Freund thinks political correctness is also at work:

"For now, appeals to diversity, gender equality, etc., are reserved for groups that, in contemporary journalistic discourse, are given 'oppressed' status. When such groups use these appeals, or when these appeals are used on their behalf, it's legitimate. But when the same appeals are used to argue against the apparent interests of such groups, it's a category violation. In other words, you can't allow the villain any of the good lines without either raising the status of the villain or lowering the status of the lines, and that in the end that is one of the most revealing aspects of the Fortuyn story."

And one of the most disturbing.

Ozzy just wants dual citizenship
In some advice for the president, rocker (and MTV reality TV celeb) Ozzy Osbourne says he should be allowed to have dual citizenship. "I want to be American," states Ozzy, because "America is the coolest place on the face of the Earth." My dad, also a native Brit (although thankfully not quite as much of a freak as Ozzy), held off applying for citizenship for years (he came in the '60s and didn't become a citizen until after I had voted in my first election) because he wanted to retain citizenship to the crown. Now, in this day and age I think Congress, President Bush, a dismissive Lynne Cheney, et al should look into allowing dual citizenship with certain--if not all--countries. Still, the one thing that has always perplexed me in regards to dual citizenship for the UK and the US was this: Our very founding was a revolt against the English crown, so isn't the very foundation of our American identity based on official disloyalty to the monarch of the UK? If the anti-loyalists back during the American Revolution were right, you can't be both a subject of the crown and a US citizen. So what does that mean for British-Americans who want dual citizenship now?

Thanks guys
Thanks to Andrew Sullivan and Instapundit for the referrals.

Note to Andrew Sullivan
You may want to avoid traveling to Holland in the near future. They don't seem to be taking too kind to gay social libertarian conservatives as of late. Oh wait, we don't like those in our own country either. Oops!

How character assassinations by journalists work
If you want to understand why Dave Kopel and others have been upset with the media and the way they portray conservatives (more accurately, non-liberals), read this New York Times article on Pim Fortuyn's murder. In one medium-length column, we have both the truth about the man and the blatant obfuscations that help develop within the reader perceptions that are directly contrary to the truth. Let's begin our examination.

Okay, what does the headline say?

"Rightist in Netherlands Is Slain, and the Nation Is Stunned."

Now, look at these lines:

"Pim Fortuyn, a maverick right-wing populist who was a leading candidate in national elections scheduled for next week, was shot and killed tonight, deeply shocking a country that sees itself as peaceful and egalitarian, and raising the specter of violence stalking European politics."

"Mr. Fortuyn, 54, was a former sociology professor who said he wanted to become the country's first gay prime minister. He carried the same strong anti-immigrant message that has helped propel a resurgent far right to political triumphs in Austria, Denmark, Belgium and, through Jean-Marie Le Pen, France."

Okay, we've now established that he is a "rightist," a "maverick right-wing populist," and someone in the mold of the "resurgent far right" that is evidenced in such places as "Austria, Denmark, Belgium and, through Jean-Marie Le Pen, France." The fact that he was a "former sociology professor who said he wanted to become the country's first gay prime minister" should normally give the impression that this is not your ordinary right-wing populist (after all, how many professors do you know who aren't obviously "elitist", and how many gays have you heard of that can be described as "xenophobic right-wing extremists"?), but we'll deal with ill-fitting details such as these down the road. What's important for the moment is that: A. he is like Le Pen and B. his views are populist (and hence discreditable) and far right-wing in nature.

At least, that's the impression one gets from reading these first two paragraphs, no?

But later on, The Times says,

"Mr. Fortuyn, a former Marxist who defended an eclectic mix of ideas of both left and right, had become the most hotly debated Dutch politician because of his frankness, his passion and his starkly anti-immigrant platform, directed particularly against Muslims, who he said posed a threat to cherished national values like giving full rights to women, and to gays."

So, wait a minute, now they are saying he was "a former Marxist," that his policies were "an eclectic mix of ideas of both left and right," and that he despised Muslims because they don't believe in giving "full rights to women [and] gays." But I thought this guy was like the previously-mentioned Le Pen, who hates Muslims and Jews and presumably wants to see gays back in the closet and women back in the kitchen (one would easily come to that conclusion after reading any of the popular press's description of the Front National's political platform)? I mean, I thought Le Pen was all about restricting rights, not expanding them. Fortuyn, however, "abhorred being compared to Mr. Le Pen and Mr. Haider, for he said that unlike them he was not a racist and was staunchly anti-Palestinian and pro-Israel." Apparently the similarity is in "his frankness, his passion and his starkly anti-immigrant platform" and that he "talked with the confident bombast of other European far-right politicians."

So then, any politician who speaks frankly, passionately, confidently, and opposes liberal immigration policies is herded with the "other European far-right politicians"? This is absurd!

Incidentally, the article's bizarre mixture of truth and demonization also carries a hint of the real crime here:

"In Rotterdam, Mr. Fortuyn's hometown, some of his followers put up banners outside the town hall, saying, 'Killed by the goading of politicians and the hounding of the press.'"

Now if that's not the truth, I don't know what is. But back to our assignment. Here are some more accurate depictions of Fortuyn:

"'He had come to symbolize people's wide unhappiness with the political establishment,' said Ben Knapen, a publisher at one of the largest Dutch media conglomerates. 'I wouldn't have voted for him, but he played a very useful role because he had made the elections interesting for the first time in years with his mix of irony, mockery and vitriol.'"

"Mr. Fortuyn was unrelenting in his attacks on the political class, which he said had become interested only in its own wheeling and dealing and had been virtually paralyzed by forever seeking political consensus."

So how does "the newspaper of record" contextualize this information?

"This message — again similar to the speeches of Mr. Le Pen, Mr. Haider and other resurgent European populists — appeared to resonate with many Dutch. Across Europe, many voters apparently feel disoriented and not represented by the traditional political parties, and consequently a substantial number — roughly one in five in France, or one in four in Austria — have cast their lot with politicians who paint themselves as anti-establishment."

That's right folks, there's no longer any doubt--he's one of those guys, one of the bad, Hitler-esque demagogues who should be kept off the political stage at all costs because of their fascistic policies and agendas.

Later, the NY Times softens their portrait of the man, quoting his Catholic confessor, who calls Fortuyn "a religious man with a warm heart who cared about vulnerable people." More accurate information follows (we're near the end of the article, which is why they're being so fair to him now, in case you're wondering):

"Mr. Fortuyn, although new as a candidate, has written about politics for the past decade, both in books and as a columnist. Yet he was hard to define according to traditional labels. 'He is more a protest-maker than a policy maker,' said Loes Pernot, who said she had not been sure whether she would vote for him."

"During a recent interview, Mr. Fortuyn talked freely on a wide range of subjects, including his homosexuality, the ingrained bureaucracy, the liberal Dutch social policies dealing with abortion, same-sex marriages and tolerance of soft-drugs, and the need to denounce the self-satisfied political class."

"During the interview he was asked why he was so critical of Muslim immigrants. He said he found it shameful that foreign Islamic clergy here used offensive language against gays in this country, and that Muslim men tried to impose medieval rural customs in the Netherlands. 'How can you respect a culture if the woman has to walk several steps behind her man, has to stay in the kitchen and keep her mouth shut,' he said."

Thus, the picture we are left with at the end is a man who "was hard to define according to traditional labels," who "talked freely" of and disagreed with the established political consensus on many issues, and who opposed Muslim immigrants who "used offensive language against gays" and practiced a culture in which "the woman has to walk several steps behind her man, has to stay in the kitchen and keep her mouth shut." This is the real Fortuyn, and yet the image we are given of him from the beginning of the article is of some European right-wing extremist whom we should be at least somewhat repulsed by--if we are to call ourselves good, tolerant people.

And that, folks, is how character assassination works. No, you don't have to lie (although you can get away with it). You don't have to be one-sided (even though that's the norm these days anyway). You can even tell the truth somewhere in the story, like this article did. The result, whether intentional (most likely) or not (highly doubtful, as the intelligent journalists working for the "paper of record" or undoubtedly the most highly coveted in their field), is an insidious form of sludge-slinging that works to exterminate the voices of those who dare to disagree with established opinion.

Well media, mission accomplished.

Why I loathed paying my student activity fee at USC
The money used to bring speakers and artists to campus isn't spent fairly at American universities. Here is more evidence of that. I suppose I could despair, but I prefer to look on the bright side: as a graduate, I don't have to confront that sort of bullshit anymore. And my friend Brendan wonders why I opposed an activity fee increase.

Did he see it coming?
Dave Kopel decries the media's character assassinations of right-wing politicians, but did he presciently realize the real world consequences such attacks can generate as evidenced by Fortuyn's murder?

The Jenin manufacture, er, I mean, massacre
Props to Daniel Gordon of The Jewish Journal for so deftly exposing the fraudulent reporting of journalists who have written of the massacre in Jenin.

"The crescent on the French hexagon"
Some words of advice for France:

"Now France must look inward and change its ingrained patterns. Toward this end, the government will have to overcome its tendency to whitewash reality. The immortal values of the Republic have worked to the country's detriment - in the name of all-embracing Frenchness the country has isolated an entire population...."

"The time has come for the Republic to openly confront its demographic identity, to ask itself what kind of a nation it is, and what kind of a nation it wants to be...."

"France has no choice. It must reassess its relations with the large Arab-Muslim community in its midst, and no less importantly, its relations with the long-standing Jewish community. The Republic may need another revolution to become a pluralistic, multi-cultural country - a country that resembles America more than it does Austria, constructed of flexible yet sturdy materials in the finest traditions of governance. If it fails, Europe and the whole world will have been struck a mighty blow."

Well, Hanoch Marmari gets the analysis right, but I am not sure France should follow his advice in this exact form. I think multiculturalism is exactly what has failed, but pluralism is still (and always) an important ingredient to a fully functional democracy. France--like the whole of Europe in general--needs to do a better job of listening to its citizens' concerns and stop dismissing opposition to immigration as knee-jerk xenophobia. The issues are much, much deeper than that, and go to the core of French national identity. If the French elites keep ignoring these sentiments that fuel both Le Pen rightism and Muslim immigrant (anti-Semitic) hooliganism, the problem will keep degenerating into a morass of violence perhaps not incomparable to what we've seen in South Africa, Indonesia, India, and other places where the papering over of questions related to national identity have led to massive rioting and bloodletting.

Some good articles in Ha'aretz
There are some great articles in Tuesday's Ha'aretz op-ed pages, including a long excerpt from a speech by Sen. Joseph Biden given on the Senate floor recently, wherein the liberal chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee attacks the Arabs for their wild claims that there was a massacre in Jenin.

Also, Ari Shavit says Bibi Netanyahu has a vital test before him coming this Sunday, when the "Likud Central Committee convenes to discuss the draft proposal that would rule out the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River...."

Amir Oren sees an advantage for Israel in some of the logistical restructuring going on in the Defense Department, as Arabs will lose some influence over American military strategy because of the shift of the European Command to include Russia and Central Asia.

Finally, the main editorial advises Sharon and his diplomatic lackeys to avoid falling into the trap of thinking that the Bush administration buys into the dead-end goals of the Israeli right (see the Bibi-related article above for further information on these dead-end goals).

How blogs affect your Google search
Check out this story.

Why handguns are good
If you had any doubts that America's more liberal laws on guns were better than Europe's strict gun control regulations, this story should clear them up for you.

Drawing the right conclusions
On European gun violence, John R. Lott had this to say:

"Gun-control advocates frequently ignore another inconvenient fact: Many countries with high homicide rates have gun bans. It is hard to think of a much more draconian police state than the former Soviet Union, with a ban on guns that dated back to the communist revolution. Yet newly released data show that from 1976 to 1985 the U.S.S.R.'s homicide rate was between 21% and 41% higher than that of the U.S."

"Many French politicians complained during their presidential election that the shooting in Paris meant 'it's getting like in America, and we don't want to see that here.' Americans may draw a different lesson from the evidence, and hope that they don't become more like the Europeans."

That's more good good sense from the author of More Guns, Less Crime.

More on Fortuyn, Le Pen, and the European media
Instapundit and one of his readers have some wise observations on the type of character assassination and demonization widely used in the left-leaning press that leads to unfortunate events like Fortuyn's murder. Check it out here.

Humo(u)rless isle
A Tory minister has been sacked because she told a racist joke. Now, her remark may have been off-color and ill-advised, but this smacks of political correctness gone way, way bad. I mean, she already apologized if she offended people; why be so ruthless by labeling the woman and forcing her out of the shadow cabinet? I suspect one of two things: Iain Duncan Smith had some previously unknown grudges against Ann Winterton, or he's pandering to minority voters with his anti-racist posturing. If it's the latter, I'm disgraced to be a Tory supporter.

Repercussions of Fortuyn's assassination
Hell is already breaking loose.

Brouhaha in the Defense Department
I'm not sure what to make of the latest flap between Sec. of Defense Don Rumsfeld and Army Secretary Thomas White, as detailed Yahoo news story, but I don't think cancelling the Crusader artillery system is a good idea. From what little I know about it, the new system would be more efficient and effective than what we have now, which will pay dividends in both future military costs and saving our soldiers' lives. Also, it will put us far beyond anybody else in artillery capabilities. Why are we canceling this program? To buy more C17s and smart bombs? I'm sure there's a way we can have both if we'd just become a little smarter with our appropriations in other budget areas--in defense spending and elsewhere.

Shocking, horrifying, sickening news
Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn has been shot and killed. Andrew Sullivan has more info on the man and what he meant for The Netherlands posted on his page (although I wish he would get his archiving and post-linking fixed up).

Fortuyn was an extraordinary leader for Holland and was just beginning to shake up the political inertia there. As an openly gay man, a social libertarian, fiscal conservative, and a person who opposed more immigration until current immigrants could be more integrated and assimilated into Dutch society, his enemies were many and came from all sides. Nevertheless, he had a unique standing that disturbed the ideological consensus (perhaps "stalemate" is a better word there) and his ideas represented the best, most legitimate threat to the undemocratic policies forced on the continent by the EU political hegemony. His party was polling 35% going into the coming elections and he was poised to affect the European scene as dramatically as did Margaret Thatcher when she ascended to become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in 1979. Fortuyn's death is a great step backwards; I sincerely hope somebody in his party can take up the slack and propel his cause forward. Unfortunately, I think much of the dynamism has been lost with Fortuyn's murder. Truly sad.

Bush did the right thing
We'll be criticized by many in the world for pulling out of the war crimes tribunal treaty, but it was the right move to make. Such a court was perfectly designed to hound and persecute American forces by illegitimate regimes who wish to oppose us at every turn. The court's standards of justice do not even come close to what we have under the Constitution and I wouldn't have been surprised if the Supreme Court eventually overturned a decision to become a full party to this international court.

This is absolutely fascinating
Stalin's Forgotten Zion: An Illustrated History, 1928-1996; Birobidzhan and the Making of a Soviet Jewish Homeland.

Proof of bias in American journalism
Okay, so my source is Dave Barry, but you can't argue with his following observation:

"Another reason why newspapers are in trouble is that the public perceives journalists as being more liberal than the average American. This view is based on a survey showing that in the 2000 presidential election between Al Gore and George W. Bush, 86 percent of newspaper journalists -- a much higher percentage than the general population -- voted for Stalin."

Case closed.

Christian cover-up at the Church of the Nativity?
Nah, this couldn't be true, could it? (sarcasm)

Sullivan on America's attitude towards Israel vs. our attitude towards France
I finally got around to reading Andrew Sullivan's article in the Sunday Times, and I wanted to post it here because it explains a whole lot about the American cultural psyche in a relatively few amount of words. Not only that, but he managed to squeeze in some very good digs on the French, too. By the way, if you're interested in seeing the SNL commercial spoof he cites, scroll down below--I have it linked here.

Beloved Dreher
I don't know how I missed this, but conservative Catholic apologeticist Rod Dreher backs up my comments from earlier regarding the problem of clericism in the Catholic Church. Commenting on a Bill Keller essay in the NY Times, Dreher says,

"For aging Boomers like Keller, there's nothing wrong with the Church that more doctrinal liberalism wouldn't solve. This is exactly wrong. Excessive doctrinal liberalism is a big part of the problem in the American Church, but the greater fault belongs to clericalism, which is a phenomenon of right and left."

I applaud Dreher for not being afraid to bring up the real issue, as solving the problems would require changes in the Church far more radical than merely altering a few of the Church's teachings on sexual morality or installing more conservative (or more liberal, depending on your view) bishops, priests, cardinals, etc.

Why there is no British Le Pen
Thanks to Instapundit for the link to this piece.

Too good to pass up
Instapundit points out this Swedish study which shows that residents of the Scandinavian democratic-socialist utopia have a lower standard of living than African-Americans in the United States. Huh??? Well, how about that! Even the losers and the "oppressed" in a "racist" free-market economy like America's do better than those living in the paragons of culturally and racially homogenous European socialism!!!

Quote of the day
Steve Lopez writes in the LA Times,

"If there is a greater collective failure in American society than the state of public education, it has not been brought to my attention."

School vouchers anyone?

The Gilded Age II
If there was any doubt left that the leaders of AARP are still hopelessly liberal in their political orientation in spite of the interests of the millions of moderate-to-conservative baby boomers who are now retiring and joining AARP, their latest Bulletin should clear that up. In the May 2002 issue alone (hey, what can I say, this literature is more easily available when you're living with your grandparents), AARP takes a swipe at the pharmaceutical industry for gouging American consumers, downplays the real problems behind Medicare in its article focusing on doctors who are leaving the program, and endorses Sen. Ted Kennedy's more liberal, anti-corporate pension reform bill. I guess it's too much to ask an organization that purports to represent senior citizens and retirees to not be so overtly political, but must they be scaremongers and propagandists as well? The piece about the drug companies is particularly, well, wrong. The pharmaceutical industry is not the villian here, government coercion is. It's depressing to watch one of the few American industries left that is far and away better than any of its global competitors come under so much domestic political attack for the very reasons that have made it successful in the first place. Really, I want drug companies to increase their profits and focus on that "bottom line" (oh, how evil!), because then there will be more new, effective drugs when I'm older and in need of them. I say, let them exploit the one free market they have left; if you want to complain about high drug prices, maybe we should exert pressure on foreign countries to quit their coercive pricing tactics so we don't have to pay so large an unfair share. Using government regulation and coercion to lower prices will destroy the incentive for pharmaceutical companies to take the risks inherent in researching and developing new drugs. Progress is worth paying for, people.

Other great articles from today's LA Times
The drug war in Colombia isn't working, says Sen. Patrick Leahy. I agree.

Sharon as the New Comeback Kid.

Any invasion of Iraq must me thought out more thoroughly than has been so far, William M. Arkin, a senior fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies and an adjunct professor at the U.S. Air Force School of Advanced Airpower Studies, argues convincingly.

Newt Gingrich has been saying it since day one (9/11): the head of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, needs to be a Cabinet-level official. The LA Times agrees.

The California State GOP is courting disaster by Bill Simon running on a blatantly conservative platform. I agree with some of this analysis; Simon is not going to win highlighting his social conservatism. But I don't think any pro-life candidate in a statewide race is de facto doomed to defeat in California. The trick is to focus on taxes, the economy, and the environment (and immigration, although that's a hot potato due to the millions of immigrants--legal and illegal--in the state) in a way that will appear to the moderate, swing voters who are largely fiscally conservative and socially libertarian.

Jack W. Germond pens a totally unconvincing attempt to prove that it'd be a bad idea for Bush to use his immense popularity to stump for GOP candidates this fall. Sorry, I don't buy it. Of course voters won't vote for a Republican just because they like President Bush, but Bush can still link his foreign and domestic priorities to the legislative priorities of fellow Republicans and accuse Democrats of being obstacles to his success. If he can paint the Democrats as obstructionists at a time when Americans want--above all else--action, then the GOP has a very strong chance of picking up some key seats in both houses of Congress. This is not at all like the '90s, when the country by-and-large preferred Washington gridlock because it meant neither party could do much damage. Now, citizens are anxious to see things get done, and as long as the Dems control the Senate, that won't happen very quickly.

That was, like, so right on!
High school teacher Matt Johanson has an amusing piece in the LA Times today on the subject of, like, the inability of people, like, my age to speak in sentences that, like, don't have the word "like" sprinkled throughout them. I confess, growing up in Southern California, I used to have this problem, but my English teacher junior year of high school successfully weaned me off deliberately misusing the word. I pray Mr. Johanson has similar success with at least some of his pupils. Otherwise, I can imagine future press conferences sounding like this:

Reporter: Mr. Bush, like what do you want to do to like help the Israel-Palestinian conflict to, like, you know, get better and stuff?

Bush: Well, like, I have some ideas, like, Condi had some good ones for me to like think over, ya know? But it's a tough issue to solve. The Israelis, like, need to stop, you know, like going into the West Bank and stuff, and Mr. Sharon needs to like stop the settlements, or something. And Mr. Arafat needs to like rein in the terrorists. He needs to announce, like, clearly--in, like, Arabic, or whatever it is they speak, that violence is not an answer, and that, like, a better solution would be to, um, I dunno, like maybe deal and stuff--you know, have like negotiations.

Peace is, like, possible, and stuff. Just give it a chance, k?

Excellent war article
The LA Times had a wonderful, excellent, magnificent article on the front page today about the Special Forces working together with local Afghans to topple the Taliban. This is an absolute must read.

Also, the Air Force needs a lot more C-17s. I know a lot of people down in Long Beach who will be glad to hear that.

Gratuitously delectable Spurrier-bashing
I can't stand TJ Simers of the LA Times. Of course, disdain for the man who takes every opportunity to malign my university becomes second nature when you work for the Daily Trojan for four years (or four weeks, take your pick). Nevertheless, I must admit Simers occasionally expresses a clever thought. He says,

"The Redskins, the team that had fans paying to watch training camp practices, are now going to have rotating advertising signs behind Coach Steve Spurrier every time he has a news conference. One of the sponsors is Budweiser, which will make a great photo opportunity when Spurrier has to talk about one of his players being arrested for drunken driving. It will happen."

And you know it will. That's the NFL for ya.

Prince Philip is in trouble again
Yep, the hubby of Queen Elizabeth II got in the news for making a tasteless joke. Reuters records,

"Speaking to the blind Susan Edwards, wheelchair bound and accompanied by her guide dog, he remarked: 'Do you know they have eating dogs for the anorexic now?'"

That's the problem with being royal in England--you're not allowed to have a sense of humo(u)r. Her Majesty et al are always being derided for being stiff and proper, but ol' Philip regularly gets himself into trouble for trying to be funny, too. I guess we should chalk this one up to the overzealous republicanism of the British press. I don't know why they are so unkeen of their monarchy; everyone else in the world is fascinated by it.

Slow news day?
How else to react to this headline:President Attends Church and Jogs?

We have a visitor
My grandpa's sister on my dad's side has flown halfway around the world to come see me. Okay, so maybe that's not completely accurate, but she will be here for my graduation from college this coming Friday, and then she's road-tripping with my grandparents in their RV across the Western US for a month. I've got one more final to go tomorrow night, so the posts should become a bit more rare in the next 32 hours or so.

By the way, maybe I should move to Australia--I already seem to be on their time zone, what with my sleeping habits as of the past few weeks (okay, semester).

No news is good news?
Did a quick review of the major papers online today, and none mentioned that Kentucky Derby winner War Emblem's trainer, Bob Baffert, is a Huntington Beach resident. Even the Orange County Register didn't bother to trumpet the fact that Baffert is an OC resident. Unusual, considering the last few times around (I particularly recall when Silver Charm was dominating the circuit) the news stories seemed to revolve around, Who is this upstart from--Huntington Beach, CA?? They have horses out there in California?? I guess the lack of Baffert's residence being an issue is good news and signals that we're getting a little recognition out here for our diversity of strengths. I'm just a little reflexive since LA and particularly OC have such negative connotations to a lot of people, when in fact I think So Cal is a glorious region to live, work, and play in. Heck, I think it's cool that Baffert lives within a couple miles of me, and that Dennis Rodman and Kobe Bryant also call OC home (that brings up the black population to, what, six people?).

Incidentally, Kobe married a girl from my rival high school, Marina HS. Now the two young'ns reside in Coto de Caza--aka "If you ride your skateboard in here, you'll be shot on site." I think sneezing outside of your home is also a violation of a community noise ordinance, although it probably helps that most of the women living there probably have that super-high-pitched sneeze that sounds more like a mouse squeak than anything else.

Why there is no peace in the Middle East
A picture is worth a thousand words.