Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    November 2007
    S M T W T F S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    252627282930  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Archive for November, 2007

Another greenhouse threat

Posted by Richard on November 30, 2007

Recently, Honda began running a TV commercial for their new hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle, the FCX Clarity. The ad touts the fact that the fuel-cell car is completely pollution-free, emitting "only water vapor." That got me thinking.

See, I remember when CO2 wasn't considered a pollutant. In school, I was taught that our atmosphere is made up of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, water vapor, and traces of other stuff. I was taught that carbon dioxide is essential to plant life. Nowadays, we're told that carbon dioxide is a horrible pollutant because it's a "greenhouse gas" fueling dangerous global warming, and that we have to reduce CO2 levels to save the planet.

But CO2 isn't the only, or even the most important, greenhouse gas — that's water vapor. And some atmospheric scientists have been warning us that water vapor levels have risen in recent decades. Their computer models (which are so much sexier than boring old empirical data) blame humans for at least some of the increase.

So I wonder how long it will be before NASA, the IPCC, and Algore demand "serious action" to control water vapor emissions and point accusing fingers at the millions of fuel cell vehicles that will soon be eagerly embraced by the environmentally conscious.

Apparently, I'm not the only one to wonder. Some have raised the question seriously. Others took a different approach:

(Washington, DC) The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking to classify water vapor as a pollutant, due to its central role in global warming. Because water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, accounting for at least 90% of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect, its emission during many human activities, such as the burning of fuels, is coming under increasing scrutiny by federal regulators.

You'll have to read the whole thing before it all becomes clear. 🙂 Check out some of the "MOST POPULAR STORIES" in the left sidebar, too.

Anyway, you might as well just give up — it seems that everything is caused by global warming.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Equal treatment from CNN

Posted by Richard on November 30, 2007

There's a lot of fussing and fuming about the YouTube questioners CNN picked for the Republican debate last night (if you skipped it, read Vodkapundit's priceless drunkblogging of the event: insightful and funny). It seems to me that CNN has treated the Democrats and Republicans just about the same. 

In CNN's Nov. 15 Democratic debate, Democratic activists with easily-discovered ties to Democratic candidates and elected officials were misrepresented as undecided voters. The questions, some of which were planted, largely represented a liberal perspective and were designed to make viewers more favorably disposed toward liberal ideas and candidates. 

In CNN's Nov. 28 Republican debate, Democratic activists with easily-discovered ties to Democratic candidates and elected officials were misrepresented as undecided voters. The questions, all of which were carefully chosen by CNN from among the 5000 submitted, largely represented a liberal perspective of Republicans and were designed to make viewers more favorably disposed toward liberal ideas and candidates.

See? Both parties were treated exactly the same. What could be more fair? 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Clinton rewrites history again

Posted by Richard on November 28, 2007

Stumping for his wife in Iowa, Bill Clinton claimed he'd always opposed the war in Iraq and complained about not paying enough taxes (emphasis added):

On Iraq, he told the crowd that wealthy people like he and his wife should pay more taxes in times of war. "Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers," Clinton said, according to The Washington Post

I suppose for Bill Clinton, whether he opposed Iraq depends on what the meaning of the word "supported" is (emphasis added):

In a June 2004 article in Time magazine, Clinton also suggested that he would have acted the same way Bush did.

"So, you're sitting there as president, you're reeling in the aftermath of (Sept. 11), so, yeah, you want to go get (Usama) bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that. But you also have to say, 'Well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I've got to do that.' That's why I supported the Iraq thing," he is quoted telling the magazine.

As for his resentment for not being "given the opportunity" to pay more taxes: Bill, nobody's stopping you! You can pay more quite easily. For starters, just stop taking all those deductions you usually take (like the used jockey shorts you donate to charity and write off at an inflated value).

If that doesn't increase your tax bill enough to abate your resentment, Bill, you can simply make a voluntary contribution to reduce the public debt (money is fungible, so reducing the public debt is functionally equivalent to buying the Army a Humvee — they can buy their own Humvee by borrowing back what you contributed). The IRS tells you how in most of its tax form instructions: 

If you wish to do so, make a check payable to “Bureau of the Public Debt.” You can send it to: Bureau of the Public Debt, Department G, P.O. Box 2188, Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188. Or you can enclose the check with your income tax return when you file. Do not add your gift to any tax you may owe. See page 60 for details on how to pay any tax you owe.

I suspect Slick Willy won't be foregoing those itemized deductions or making any voluntary donations to the government. He doesn't really resent the fact that he wasn't "given the opportunity" to pay more taxes, he resents the fact that you and I and millions of other Americans were allowed to keep more of what we earned, instead of being forced to turn that money over to the "public servants" who can spend it so much more wisely.

Asshat. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Watcher’s Council vacancy

Posted by Richard on November 28, 2007

It's been a while since I mentioned the Watcher of Weasel's weekly posting of "the most link-worthy pieces of writing around," as voted on by the Watcher's Council. But it's a resource worth a regular visit. The list of winners — even the nominee list — always includes some fine posts that you might otherwise miss.

I mention the Watcher tonight because he's announced a vacancy on the Council. Council members are chosen by the Watcher based on the quality of their blog postings. Each week, Council members submit a post of their own and one by a non-council member for consideration in that week's voting. See the complete Council rules for more details. 

If you're a blogger who'd like to be considered, head on over there and get your nomination in. I'd like to see an LLP member or Fighting Keyboardist fill the vacancy. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Another anti-war bomb

Posted by Richard on November 26, 2007

Four weeks ago, I noted that Hollywood's recent spate of anti-American propaganda films had been singularly unsuccessful:

The bad news is that Hollywood is relentlessly cranking out film after film intended to undermine support for the war against Islamofascism. The good news is that Americans are avoiding these propaganda pieces in droves. Most recently, Babel, The Kingdom, and Rendition have all bombed at the box office.

Add Brian De Palma's execrable Redacted to the list. In fact, put it at the top. According to a NYPost story quoted by JammieWearingFool, it may be the biggest box-office bomb ever. On its opening weekend, it took in about $25,000. No, I didn't accidentally leave off three zeros. Twenty-five thousand dollars. At what — about eight bucks a ticket? That means more people attended your average minor-league hockey game than saw this left-wing turkey.

JWF's post also has the unbelievable story of how De Palma is complaining that he's a victim. You see, his corporate overlords insisted on blurring the faces of dead American soldiers in a "collage of actual bloody bodies at the end of the film." He's been censored! Denied his opportunity to inflict gratuitous pain and suffering on the families and friends of the dead in service of his art (and politics)! Poor Brian!

De Palma is a vile POS, and a pretty sorry director, too — overrated, overblown, and completely derivative. His career should have ended years ago. I remember a great (late 70s?) Saturday Night Live parody commercial for a De Palma film called The Clams — a silly ripoff of Hitchcock's The Birds, complete with clams gathering on a jungle gym. As I recall, the money line at the end was "every couple of years, he picks the bones of a dead director and gives his wife a job."

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Broncos beat Bears, lose to Hester

Posted by Richard on November 26, 2007

I suspect there'll be a lot of special teams work this week at Dove Valley (the Broncos' practice facility). To go along with more work on defense.

Hey, Todd "we're not going to kick it away from him" Sauerbrun: didn't Devin Hester's punt return for a touchdown make you wonder about the wisdom of those words? I guess not, because you guys let him do it again on a kickoff. So Denver outscored the rest of the Bears 34-23, but Hester gave them another 14. Because you thought it would be "chicken-shit" to try to keep the ball out of his hands.

I'll tell you what, the next time you're facing an awesome, record-setting kick returner, I'll chip in a few bucks to help buy you a clue.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

Vols prevail

Posted by Richard on November 25, 2007

Back in the old days, "The Vols beat Kentucky!" would have been met with one of two responses, "Of course!" or "So what?" Not these days. This Wildcat team embarrassed Arkansas in Fayetteville and beat LSU at home in three overtimes. They had their ups and downs this season, but they're a good team, and they were ready for Tennessee.

The Vols were ready, too. Wow, what a battle! Tennessee, 52-50. In four (4) overtimes. So, the Vols will face LSU in the SEC Championship game next Saturday. With LSU losing to Arkansas in three overtimes, they may be two tired and banged-up teams.

I'm really sorry LSU lost. Having seen both teams play several times, I'm pessimistic about how Tennessee matches up against LSU, and I figured if they're going to lose the league championship, I'd just as soon have them lose against the team that went on to the national championship. Oh, well.

Elsewhere in the SEC, after watching another Florida game, I don't see how you can not award the Heisman Trophy to Tim Tebow. The sophomore sensation has almost 4000 yards passing and rushing, and has scored 51 TDs, more than any QB who's won the Heisman. And 22 of those are rushing TDs — a bunch of Heisman-winning running backs had fewer (like Reggie Bush, Herschel Walker, Bo Jackson, …). Tebow is a tremendous talent. And as young as the Gators are this year, they're likely to be just awesome next season.

But that's next year. For now, how 'bout them Vols!?! 

UPDATE: Nobody wants to be #1 this year. Missouri just wrecked the Jayhawks' perfect season. Good game. That's the first Mizzou game I've seen, and QB Chase Daniel was quite impressive. But are you kidding me? Missouri and West Virginia vying for the national championship? Well, too soon to say. The way this season has been going, they'll probably lose to Oklahoma and Pittsburgh, respectively, next week. Then it will be a real mess.

Remember back before this silly BCS system, when people complained that there was no objective, definitive way of determining who was #1? Is this system, with computers crunching numbers based on criteria that everyone disputes, really an improvement?

Anyway, I still believe that, top to bottom, the SEC plays the best college football in the country. That's their problem, really — they're so good from top to bottom that they knock each other out of the running nationally. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

This Thanksgiving, celebrate the producers

Posted by Richard on November 22, 2007

"The first Thanksgiving" by Jean Louis Gerome FerrisUPDATE (Thanksgiving, 2008): Thanks for stopping by. After you read this post and The real Thanksgiving story, don’t miss this year’s funny/sad Thanksgiving story! It’s about kindergarten kids celebrating Thanksgiving. And it features cops and accusations of genocide.

UPDATE (Thanksgiving, 2009): This year, with lots of help from Jim Woods, I again thanked the producers. And remembered the anniversary of the Jihadist attacks on Mumbai. Please check it out.   

Happy Thanksgiving! I hope you have a wonderful day with family, friends, food, and football. But before you leave your PC for the festivities, please read Debi Ghate’s wonderful explanation of what you should be thankful for and who you should thank (bold added, italics in original):

What should we really be celebrating on Thanksgiving?

Ayn Rand described Thanksgiving as “a typically American holiday … its essential, secular meaning is a celebration of successful production. It is a producers’ holiday. The lavish meal is a symbol of the fact that abundant consumption is the result and reward of production.”

She was right. This country was mostly uninhabited and wild when our forefathers began to develop the land and build spectacular cities, shaping what is now the wealthiest nation in the world.

It’s the American spirit to overcome challenges, create great achievements, and enjoy prosperity. We uniquely recognize that production leads to wealth and that we must dedicate ourselves to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

It’s no accident that Americans have a holiday called Thanksgiving — a yearly tradition when we pause to appreciate the “bountiful harvest” we’ve reaped.

What is today’s version of the “bountiful harvest”? It’s the affluence and success we’ve gained. It’s the cars, houses and vacations we enjoy.

It’s the life-saving medicines we rely on, the stock portfolios we build, the beautiful clothes we buy and the safe, clean streets we live on. It’s the good life.

How did we get this “bountiful harvest”? Ask any hard-working American; it sure wasn’t by the “grace of God.” It didn’t grow on a fabled “money tree.”

We created it by working hard, by desiring the best money can buy and by wanting excellence for ourselves and our loved ones. What we don’t create ourselves, we trade value for value with those who have the goods and services we need, such as our stockbrokers, hairdressers and doctors.

We alone are responsible for our wealth. We are the producers and Thanksgiving is our holiday.

So, on Thanksgiving, why don’t we thank ourselves and those producers who make the good life possible?

From a young age, we are bombarded with messages designed to undermine our confident pursuit of values: “Be humble,” “You can’t know what’s good for yourself,” “It’s better to give than receive,” and above all “Don’t be selfish!”

We are scolded not to take more than “our share” — whether it is of corporate profits, electricity or pie. We are taught that altruism — selfless concern for others — is the moral ideal. We are taught to sacrifice for strangers, who have no claim to our hard-earned wealth. We are taught to kneel rather than reach for the sky.

But, morally, one should reach for the sky. One should recognize that the corporate profits, electricity or pie was earned through one’s production — and savor its consumption.

Every decision one makes, from what career to pursue to whom to call a friend, should be guided by what will best advance one’s rational goals, interests and, ultimately, one’s life. One should take pride in being rationally selfish — one’s life and happiness depend on it.

Thanksgiving is the perfect time to recognize what we are truly grateful for, to appreciate and celebrate the fruits of our labor: our wealth, health, relationships and material things — all the values we most selfishly cherish.

We should thank researchers who have made certain cancers beatable, gourmet chefs at our favorite restaurants, authors whose books made us rethink our lives, financiers who developed revolutionary investment strategies and entrepreneurs who created fabulous online stores.

We should thank ourselves and those individuals who make our lives more comfortable and enjoyable — those who help us live the much-coveted American dream.

As you sit down to your sumptuous Thanksgiving dinner served on your best china, think of all the talented individuals whose innovation and inventiveness made possible the products you are enjoying. Debi Ghate

As you look around at who you’ve chosen to spend your day with — those you’ve chosen to love — thank yourself for everything you have done to make this moment possible.

It’s a time to selfishly and proudly say: “I earned this.”

Debi Ghate is Vice-President of Academic Programs at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, California.

Amen.

As for the Thanksgiving lesson to be learned from the history of the Plymouth colony, it’s an economics lesson. I provided a pretty good account (if I do say so myself) last year, with plenty of quotes from Governor William Bradford’s Of Plimoth Plantation. John Stossel wrote a shorter summary of the same lesson this year, which I encourage you to read, too. Even though mine’s better. 🙂

Enjoy your Thanksgiving dinner. And remember to thank the producers who made it possible — including yourself!

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 4 Comments »

National Ammo Day/Week

Posted by Richard on November 19, 2007

Today, November 19, is National Ammo Day. And in deference to those who have trouble keeping to a tight schedule, Nov. 17-25 is National Ammo Week. It's been dubbed a "BUYcott of ammunition," with gun owners urged to buy a hundred rounds:

The goal of National Ammo Day is to empty the ammunition from the shelves of your local gun store, sporting goods, or hardware store and put that ammunition in the hands of law-abiding citizens.  Make your support of the Second Amendment known–by voting with your dollars!

There are an estimated 75 MILLION gun owners in the United States of America.  If each gun owner or Second Amendment supporter buys 100 rounds of ammunition, that’s 7.5 BILLION rounds in the hands of law-abiding citizens!

The gun/ammunition manufacturers have been taking the brunt of all the frivolous lawsuits, trying to put these folks out of business.  Well, not if we can help it!  And we CAN help it by buying ammunition on November 19!

I plan to do better. I'm heading over to Big 5 Sporting Goods in a little while to pick up a 250-round "mega pack" of 9mm Remington UMC for just $49.99, and a box of 525 CCI Blazer .22LR for just $12.99.

That Tanfoglio Witness CO2 BB pistol on sale for $39.99 looks tempting, too. I don't go shooting very often; with a BB pistol, at least I could practice in the basement.

And besides, this one's powered by that evil greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. I like the idea of simultaneously thumbing my nose at the enviro-whackos and the anti-gunners.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Got a small logo?

Posted by Richard on November 18, 2007

Don't put up with that teeny little logo the commercial artist created for your business. Get a great, big, impressive logo in no time with the amazing new Make My Logo Bigger Cream! It's clinically proven logo enhancing formula can make your logo up to 1000% bigger.

But wait! There's more! For your weekend amusement, be sure to watch the video (warning: like the commercials it's parodying, the audio is loud). I especially liked the White Space Eliminator and the Emotionator.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Michael Yon: Come Home

Posted by Richard on November 16, 2007

So you think that the war is lost and Iraqis just aren't ready to live in an open, tolerant, pluralist democracy? Then go look at Michael Yon's new dispatch, Come Home, a photo essay about the mass at St. John's Church in Baghdad yesterday (you might want the tissues handy). You really need to go look at the whole thing, but here's something to think about:

LTC Michael told me today that when al Qaeda came to Dora, they began harassing Christians first, charging them “rent.” It was the local Muslims, according to LTC Michael, who first came to him for help to protect the Christians in his area. That’s right. LTC Michael told me more than once that the Muslims reached out to him to protect the Christians from al Qaeda. Real Muslims here are quick to say that al Qaeda members are not true Muslims. From charging “rent,” al Qaeda’s harassment escalated to killing Christians, and also Muslims. Untold thousands of Christians and Muslims fled Baghdad in the wake of the darkness of civil war.  Most of the Christians are gone now; having fled to Syria, Jordan or Northern Iraq.

Today, Muslims mostly filled the front pews of St John’s. Muslims who want their Christian friends and neighbors to come home. The Christians who might see these photos likely will recognize their friends here. The Muslims in this neighborhood worry that other people will take the homes of their Christian neighbors, and that the Christians will never come back. And so they came to St John’s today in force, and they showed their faces, and they said, “Come back to Iraq. Come home.” They wanted the cameras to catch it. They wanted to spread the word: Come home. Muslims keep telling me to get it on the news. “Tell the Christians to come home to their country Iraq.”

Wow.

Don't forget, Michael Yon's reporting is entirely reader-supported. Please contribute a little something to help support the next dispatch. 

UPDATE (11/17): Two comments from Vodkapundit's 11/16 post about Michael Yon's dispatch:

What makes the picture and the people so moving to me is the background of this cross raising event. St. John's Chaldean Catholic Church was car bombed along with two other churches all within minutes of each other exactely one year ago on November 8, 2006. The congregation took down the cross and bells and put them in storage. They cleaned up the interior of the church, and at an Easter liturgy this year they welcomed a Shiite notable, who spoke movingly of the unity of Iraqis. I am touched by the generosity of spirit of these Muslims. The cross and bells are hated by reactionary Muslims. What a magnificent rebuke is this event of neighborliness. This is an icon of tolerance and mutual acceptance and,yes,love.

Posted by Michael Barger at November 16, 2007 10:56 PM
Again, wow. Thank you, Michael, for the additional background information. 

I am neither a Christian nor a Muslim, but this makes me happy for both. "One foot in front of the other"… that is what it takes. How wonderful it is that those feet are usually walking alongside a strong young American idealist. I am so proud of my country and its young warriors for peace.

Posted by sherlock at November 17, 2007 12:49 AM

Like sherlock, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. But I enthusiastically second his comment. There are, as I said recently, many "decent people of good will" in Iraq, and I'm so very proud of them and of the brave and dedicated Americans who are helping them. The scale is smaller, but looking at Michael Yon's photo essay evoked in me many of the same emotions I felt when I watched the Berlin Wall fall — a tremendous feeling of joy and pride about the greatness and glory that we humans are capable of, and a sense of optimism and hope for the future. 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Missed another debate

Posted by Richard on November 16, 2007

If, like me, you completely missed tonight's Democratic debate on CNN and, unlike me, you really want to know all about it, head over to Vodkapundit, who drunkblogged it to a fare-thee-well.

Actually, head over there for the entertainment value, even if you're as uninterested in what the candidates said as I am. If you're pressed for time, skip or skim the early part and start reading about 7:00 — 6:59, actually, when Stephen Green explained why he began drunkblogging and why he must continue.

It gets progressively more amusing after that, especially after they move to questions from undecided voters, about whom Green said:

Three out of four undecided voters on CNN are pear-shaped middle-agd women with a tendency to ramble, and who want things from the government. Don't blame me if you think that's cruel–I'm just reporting what I see.

Be sure to read the wrap-up at the end. (For the benefit of the scrolling-averse and time-challenged, Green posted the wrap by itself here.) Then congratulate yourself for not watching the damn thing. 🙂 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

General dissatisfaction

Posted by Richard on November 15, 2007

A new Gallup opinion poll found that Americans are feeling "distinctly negative" toward congressional Democrats — as negative as they were about the Republican Congress just before the 2006 elections. In six of seven major issues (the economy, government reform, health care, Iraq, immigration, and the budget deficit), a clear majority (53-68%) said they were disappointed or angry. Only on Democrats' handling of terrorism did a majority (52%) say they were pleased or neutral.

It's actually worse for Democrats than those numbers suggest. Although Gallup lumps the responses into two categories — Pleased and Neutral on one side, Disappointed and Angry on the other — that's quite misleading, because Disappointed doesn't counterbalance Neutral, it counterbalances Pleased.

Gallup's rating scale has two negative responses and only one positive response. Neutral is neither. A more fair scale would consist of Enthusiastic, Pleased, Neutral, Disappointed, and Angry. Maybe they tried that, but the number of Enthusiastic responses was statistically insignificant. 🙂 

On all seven issues, the clearly negative responses (Disappointed and Angry) far outweigh the clearly positive (Pleased). The margin ranges from about 3:1 (47% – 17%) to almost 10:1 (68% – 7%). 

Mark Tapscott warned Republicans not to gloat about the Democrats' "abysmal failure." He thinks these numbers reflect a wider and deeper problem, one for which the Republicans, too, bear responsibility (emphasis added):

We have created a federal Leviathan that promises to deliver something for everybody, with its regulations and taxation directing virtually every corner of daily life. There is no way any government can do that, so failures are inevitable. But over a period of time, as the failures in particular arenas multiply, there comes a point when the many specific failures merge into one general mood of dissatisfaction.

Within the next decade, as the seriousness of the entitlement crisis becomes more evident, it is likely that the general dissatisfaction with government that promises everything and delivers nothing but higher taxes, more waste and policy paralysis is going to grow more intense and deeper rooted.

This widespread dissatisfaction with the inability of Big Government to deliver on its promises presents conservatives with an historic opportunity to refocus public debate to redefine what is expected of government, to slim it down to more manageable proportions so that it can deliver on the most important things.

In short, the coming decade could be the greatest opportunity this generation is likely to see to make the case for a rejuvenated federalism of limited government. We simply have to find new ways to speak the timeless message of Ronald Reagan's first inaugural:

"It is my intention to curb the size and influence of the Federal establishment and to demand recognition of the distinction between the powers granted to the Federal Government and those reserved to the States or to the people. All of us need to be reminded that the Federal Government did not create the States; the States created the Federal Government.

"Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work — work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it."

There is one more lesson of importance here for conservatives and it is one that ought to give us heart. When your political power depends, as it does for our liberal friends, on promising more and more, but doing so assures that you will be able to actually deliver less and less, you sow the seeds of your own downfall.

I think Tapscott might be right about the rising dissatisfaction and liberals' downfall, but not necessarily. After all, liberal politicians have been promising to solve a multitude of problems with government programs for many decades now. On how many of those promises have they delivered? Yet their supporters have generally ignored all those failures because their intentions were good.

The outcome Tapscott envisions will only come about if those who ostensibly desire that outcome do a much better job of "redefin[ing] what is expected of government" and "mak[ing] the case for … limited government" than they've done in the past — better even than Reagan did (or maybe just sustained more consistently over a longer period of time).

To do that, they'll have to make the moral case as well as the practical, they'll have to stop being defensive, apologetic, and half-hearted about the principles they claim to embrace, and they'll have to stop tolerating hypocrisy, cynical pragmatism, and corruption on their side.

The behavior of the Republican leadership over the past few years suggests they're far from up to the task.  

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Examining media bias

Posted by Richard on November 14, 2007

Investor's Business Daily has created an outstanding three-part editorial series, Uncommon Knowledge, that examines different aspects of "what the media misses, misrepresents and ignores completely." Highly recommended. 

Part One looks at a recent study of media bias by the Shorenstein Center at Harvard's Kennedy School. The source may be surprising, but its findings are consistent with every similar study since forever (and with what any fair-minded observer sees as obvious):

The Harvard study – conducted with the Project for Excellence in Journalism, part of the Pew Research Center for People and the Press – examined 1,742 presidential campaign stories appearing from January through May in 48 print, online, network TV, cable and radio news outlets.

Among many findings, it determined that Democrats got more coverage than Republicans (49% of the stories vs. 31%). It also found the "tone" of the coverage was more positive for Democrats (35% to 26% for Republicans).

… Fully 59% of front-page stories about Democrats in 11 newspapers had a "clear, positive message vs. 11% that carried a negative tone."

For "top-tier" candidates, the difference was even more apparent: Barack Obama's coverage was 70% positive and 9% negative, and Hillary Clinton's was 61% positive and 13% negative.

By contrast, 40% of the stories on Republican candidates were negative and 26% positive.

On TV, evening network newscasts gave 49% of their campaign coverage to the Democrats and 28% to Republicans. As for tone, 39.5% of the Democratic coverage was positive vs. 17.1%, while 18.6% of the Republican coverage was positive and 37.2% negative.

Part Two contends that the media are determined to portray everything in a negative light, at least as long as this administration is in office. Iraq, the economy, and global warming are cited as examples. Regarding Iraq, IBD notes how coverage has changed in recent months:

The surge of 30,000 new troops that began in February and peaked in June has been followed by stunning success in Iraq.

Yet coverage of the Iraq policy debate has tailed off since midyear, when the troop buildup that was announced in January was completed. In other words, the better the news has gotten out of Iraq, the less it's been discussed in the U.S. media.

Earlier in the year, the Iraq debate was the top story week in and week out, grabbing from 11% to 15% of coverage, according to an index compiled by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and monitoring 48 mainstream news outlets.

Over the first six months, and until the surge was in place, the Iraq debate averaged 11% of the coverage. Since then, it's averaged about 7% per week – a decline of 36%. The second-half percentage would be even lower if not for a 36% spike in the coverage during the week of Sept. 9, when Gen. Petraeus delivered his long-anticipated progress report.

Part Three argues that the non-reporting of success in Iraq and the relentlessly negative portrayal of the economy have had profound effects on public opinion:

The percentage of news stories devoted to events in Iraq, moreover, has shrunk to 3%, the lowest since September and barely half the 2007 average. In only three other weeks this year has Iraq coverage been so scanty.

All this in a period when word managed to get out through other sources that:

• U.S. troop casualties have plunged to their lowest level since February 2004, as rocket, mortar and suicide bomb attacks have all hit two-year lows.

• Iraqi civilian casualties are down two-thirds from their peak in December 2006.

• Iraq's government and the U.S. military say al-Qaida has been vanquished in Baghdad, as thousands of Iraqi families return to the capital to rebuild their lives.

• Iraq's government has signed up 20,000 Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites to fight foreign terrorists.

• The U.S. has announced it will remove 3,000 troops, with more to follow in coming months, as the wind-down of the surge begins.

But so it goes with anti-war news organizations that aggressively report setbacks in Iraq but give short, if any, shrift to the positive developments.

… the question remains of how Iraq coverage – or noncoverage, in the current context – affects attitudes in the population as a whole.

In other words, how can Americans led to believe the war in Iraq is a "mess" or "mistake" or "quagmire" (to use terms repeated often in media accounts) ever see it differently if they hear or read nothing to the contrary?

The latest IBD/TIPP Poll suggests they can't. … 

Sadly, although the majority of poll respondents are still hopeful about Iraq, more people today believe the war is already lost than six months ago, despite all the positive developments cited above. Most haven't heard about those developments.

I've barely touched the surface with the above. Read the whole series . But if you only have time for one, I recommend Part Two.

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Protecting fragile, delicate Hillary

Posted by Richard on November 14, 2007

Hillary "I am woman, hear me roar" Rodham Clinton, the smartest woman in the world, the idol of feminists, the tough-as-nails broad who makes Republican fat cats quake in their Armanis, sure does seem to rely a lot on planted softball questions, friendly reporters' softball questions, and — on the rare occasion when she's asked a substantive question — scores of outraged supporters rallying to her defense and savaging the ogre who dared to confront her.

Jonah Goldberg:

First the Clinton campaign whines that the other candidates were picking on the girl. Then, standing up to Russert is like standing up to Hitler. Then Bill Clinton compared Russert to the Swift Boat Vets. Now the Clinton campaign is warning Wolf Blizter that he better not "pull a Russert." From Drudge:

CNN's Wolf Blitzer has been warned not to focus Thursday's Dem debate on Hillary. 'This campaign is about issues, not on who we can bring down and destroy,' top Clinton insider explains. 'Blitzer should not go down to the levels of character attack and pull 'a Russert.'' Blitzer is set to moderate debate from Vegas, with questions also being posed by Suzanne Malveaux… Developing… 

Again, can someone please explain to me, how asking the junior Senator from New York state whether she agrees with the governor of the state (and a close political ally) on the question of drivers licenses for illegals is even remotely wrong, never mind some sort of vicious, Nazi-like, personal assault on truth, decency, and Hillary Clinton's integrity? I really, really, don't get it

I don't get it either. Characterizing a simple, straightforward "Do you agree with Governor Spitzer?" question about an issue in the news as a "character attack" is straight out of Bizarro World.

But I've got some advice for Wolf Blitzer, especially if he chooses to ignore the warning and treat Sen. Clinton just like any other candidate: Wolf, if an anonymous source wants to meet with you in Fort Marcy Park, don't go! 

Subscribe To Site:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »