Nightly Ramble: Of Rope, Snow, And Skin

So, where’s the betting pool for exactly when Saddam Hussein gets to wear his new necktie?

And before you anti-death penalty nut cases start getting ramped up, (Yes, that’s what I said….) as far as I’m concerned Saddam Hussein disproves your pet theories about how cruel and inhumane the death penalty is.  There, certainly, if anywhere, lies the proof of the concept. Regardless of how you slice it, this animal’s death, will be a major victory in terms of the reconstruction of Iraq.

Of course, he’s trying to spin this his way….  He released an open letter on Wednesday that said he’d go to the gallows as a “sacrifice” though a sacrifice to WHAT, he doesn’t specify… and called on his erstwhile countrymen to unite against their enemy.  Well, gee, Saddam, seems to me, they’ve already done that. Apparently it seems the same way to a number of Iraqis who are signing up for the privilege of being your executioner.

Ace, who I find myself reading quite a bit of lately, points up something rather amusing;

… an Italian Senator says “A democracy cannot be established with hanging.” After the jump, Italian fascist Benito Mussoli offers his thoughts.

And the catch here, is that Mussolini, was being hung by his heels at the time, to which Ace provides rather graphic evidence, and thus also providing evidence of just how the Italian democracy got started. Its always amazing how far these people are, from reality. It would have been interesting to watch the reaction to such a reminder.
One of Ace’s readers provides the suggestion that instead of using ropes, perhaps they should use pig intestine to hang the bastard.  A worthy suggestion, but only if he KNOWS what it is he’s being hung with.
And yes, America, I call that justice. The sad part of that is, that the pigs will never know the kind of public service they have performed.
-=-

I was going to have a comment about Gerry Ford in this Ramble, but I’ve decided against it, having said what I wanted to say on the subject earlier today, as an addendum to David’s post.

-=-

More snow apparently for the ranges of Colorado,(video) where they’ve already had quite a bit of it.  Good. The skiers can use it.  Not that the folks around here couldn’t use it as well, the ski areas hereabouts are in a real hurt at the moment.  But before we start blaming global warming, you might wanna give this a listen. (WuMP, Sorry)

Supposed to be snowing around here this weekend, by the way, which likely nixes our annual Niagara Falls trip. (Shrug). Figures. Of course, if you listen to that WuMP feed, you’ll hear we’re supposed to be up against it around Valentine’s day, anyway. Donnas been complaining she got the Escape for the snow we get around here, usually. She’s not had the chance to try it out, yet.
-=-

I’m playing with a double… or even triple theme arrangement for this blog. You can skin the thing. It works OK, but there’s a few things I’ve gotta nail down first. Perhaps this weekend, since I’m likely not leaving town.

-=-

The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal has an op-ed on the fake rape case in Durham, North Carolina.   That is not news.  The case has  been getting a lot publicity sinse it fell apart.

The article’s authorship is interesting,  Stuart Taylor, Jr. and K.C. Johnson.   Taylor is lawyer and heavy weight legal analyst.   Johnson is the blogger of record for the case.   In Taylor and Johnson, you combine an excellent understanding of both the law and the history of the Duke faux rape case.

Yes I find the authorship impressive, yet that is not one of my  major impressions of the piece.  What strikes about the Taylor-Johnson piece is it one reads like libel.   That the authors make repeated disparaging comments about the Durham district attorney, Mike Nifong.   It seems to me, that Taylor and Johnson are willing to impugn Nifong and do not fear the consequences.

Two, the Taylor-Johnson piece reads less like an op-ed and more like an inditement.   I don’t know which author wrote what portions of the piece, but the prosecutorial tone is clear.

When the case broke, Mike Nifong was the hunter.  Nifong is now the hunted.

Read the entire piece, here.

Ok, Baghdad is a Hell hole, but Baghdad is not Iraq.  In the New York Post, Amir Taheri, writes about, “The Boom Outside Baghdad:”

WHILE the American political elite is using Iraq as an ex cuse for fighting internal political wars, a different reality is taking shape in parts of this war-torn nation. Wherever some measure of security is assured – that is to say in more than 80 percent of Iraq – towns and villages long left to die a slow death are creeping back to life.

As Yogi Berra would say:  When you come to fork in the road, you take it.   It seems we can either let freedom do for all of Iraq what has done outside of Baghdad or let tyranny do what is has done for Baghdad.

More:  Don Singleton:

Amir Taheri wrote in New York Post When the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank reported two years ago that the Iraqi economy was heading for a boom, skeptics dismissed it as misplaced optimism. Now, however, even some of those who opposed the toppling of Saddam Hussein admit that many Iraqis share that optimism. Newsweek has just hailed the emergence of a booming market economy in Iraq as “the mother of all surprises,” noting that “Iraqis are more optimistic about the future than most Americans are.”

Go and see

John Hawkins notes Paul Krugman doing his usual double standards:

“[Robert] Rubin was one of the ablest Treasury secretaries in American history. But it’s now clear that while Rubinomics made sense in terms of pure economics, it failed to take account of the ugly realities of contemporary American politics.

 

“And the lesson of the last six years is that the Democrats shouldn’t spend political capital trying to bring the deficit down. They should refrain from actions that make the deficit worse. But given a choice between cutting the deficit and spending more on good things like health care reform, they should choose the spending…”

 

In other words, when the Democrats were out of power, they complained about the deficit. Now that they’re in power, it’s, “Screw the deficit, let’s tax and spend!”

Now, is this really a big surprise given that the Democrats customarily pretend to be moderates while planning to immediately veer way off to the left once they get in office? No, but the brazenness of Krugman’s on a dime turn on the issue is noteworthy — and oh boy, is this a 180 degree shift for Krugman.

After about 5 minutes of Googling, I was able to pull up all of these previous quotes from Krugman:

 

“The trouble with railing against the deficit is that it’s hard to get people completely enraged. They ought to be, because this is world class irresponsibility, and one day it’s going to take its toll.” — Paul Krugman on Nov 10, 2005

 He has more of course. Now, granted, using Krugman for target practice is hardly a challange.  But someone’s gotta do it.

?

Stanley Kurtz makes an important point about Clinton and Obama, in the upcoming election in ’08, in light of the death of Gerald Ford, and the retrospectives that spring from it….

It’s clear in hindsight that Ford would have been tougher than Carter, based on party affiliation alone.  In 1976, however, we were not that far from the days of bipartisan foreign policy.  Kennedy may have raised a phoney “missile gap” in his debate with Nixon, but at least that tactic accurately indicated that Democrats and Republicans alike shared a tough Cold War stance toward the Soviet Union.  Back in 1976, there was no good reason to assume that Carter’s answer was anything other than proof that, like Truman and Kennedy, he would be as tough as any Republican.  After all, both the Democrat Johnson and the Republican Nixon had been targets of the anti-war left.  The McGovern nomination notwithstanding, it was not yet clear in 1976 that Republicans and Democrats had fundamentally different approaches to foreign policy.  It took the contrast between Carter and Reagan to show us that difference.  At the time, however, Carter was an ex-military man from the South, and his quick reply to Ford’s error seemed proof that he would stand up to the Soviet Union.

So are we now beyond the possibility of being fooled by superficial campaign positioning?  I don’t think so.  Hillary has been posing as a foreign policy moderate for some time now.  Obama is apparently as left as left can be, yet he covers this stance with soothing moderate rhetoric.  In a way, Obama is the new Carter.  Carter won, despite his relative obscurity and inexperience, because he was the breath of fresh air needed by a country exhausted by Watergate.  Carter’s religious convictions and seeming moderation were emotional balm for a traumatized nation.  It never occurred to anyone that Carter’s foreign policy might make the first serious break from America’s Cold War toughness.  Best keep all this in mind when listening to Clinton and Obama.  They’ll jump through campaign hoops to prove their toughness.  But in the end, we’ll get a Jimmy Carter foreign policy from either one of them.

The problem is, not many… indeed, very few,  have that historical perspective… either simply not knowing it, such as young moderates, or those in denial, such as Carter/Clintonite Democrats, who figure letting down our guard to be a good thing.

I am unconvicned of Obama being as Kurtz calls him, “The New Carter”, but certainly his foreign policy, what we know of it, is similar, as would be the disaster that would result from it. But Krurtz gets it correctly…in a choice between Clinton and Obama on such matters, I’m unclear on our ability to fit water between them.  Their policies would be equally disasterous, and we as a nation, cannot afford either of them in the big chair.

?

Jim Angle, last night:

Iran’s status as a Persian Gulf power fueled by oil revenue could collapse without any push from the U.S. or other nations. That according to a new study from the National Academy of Sciences which says restrictions on foreign investment, a focus on short-term profit and just plain mismanagement could eliminate Iran’s oil exports by 2015 — costing the country an estimated $50 billion a year. The report concludes that Iran’s hard-line politics have driven away many potential investors and that the welfare state has siphoned off oil profits that should have been reinvested in production. In the standoff over Iran’s nuclear program — which it claims is for nuclear power not weapons — the analysis suggests Iran might be increasingly vulnerable to international pressure and have less money to devote to radical Islamic groups abroad.

Well, clearly the actions of Iran, in the NAS’s view, don’t make sense in light of the money they’d lose.  And I guess the idea here is that money motivates everyone.  Indeed, if you consider that money is a motivation for ANYTHING regarding Iran’s government, it DOESN’T make sense.

But what if money isn’t what’s motivating their actions?  If world domination by radical Islam is the goal, the actions that don’t make sense in the light of the money lost, start making an alarming amount of sense.  As an example, if they gain Nuclear weapons prior to money becoming a serious issue….

I mentioned a few days ago that Hillary was using Obama as a sheild, that the two of them were going to take all the air out of the Democrat primary races… but that she was going to need some means of controlling Obama, eventually.

Looks like she may have found it.

CHICAGO (AP) – An intern in Sen. Barack Obama’s office last year was recommended by an Illinois Democratic fundraiser later indicted for seeking kickbacks on government deals.

Obama has denied doing any favors for Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges brought against him. The internship was one of 98 Illinois spots filled from a pool of 350 applicants.

John Aramanda, a 20-year-old student, served in Obama’s Capitol Hill office from July 20 to Aug. 26, 2005, and was paid an $804 stipend, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs told the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times in reports published Sunday.

Gibbs said Rezko recommended the intern to Obama but contended that the internship did not contradict Obama’s statements about not doing any favors for Rezko.

And I promise I’ll respect you in the morning. In fact, I’ll respect you even more.

Just use more whipped cream.

Former President Gerald Ford has died:

RANCHO MIRAGE, Calif. (AP) – Former President Gerald R. Ford, who declared “Our long national nightmare is over” as he replaced Richard Nixon but may have doomed his own chances of election by pardoning his disgraced predecessor, has died. He was 93.

A good man, who did his best to heal the nation.

Addendum:(Bit)

Just so, David. Whatever else might be said about his presidency, good and bad, one must, if one is fair, include that.

Gerry Ford walked into a totally impossible situation.  He did so because he thought he could do some good.  And, because his country called.

Given the political factors of the time, some of which David addressed, there was no way that he could walk out a political victor. He knew this going in.  But, because his country called, and he was needed, in he went.  He faced down an angry electorate, and an even angrier and extraordinarily partisan mainstream media, that, having made its first kill in a number of dry years, was now searching for fresh meat.  A logical first stop on that hunt was the new President, Gerry Ford.  After all, he was one of those hated Republicans. Thus it was, in the short term, that his reputation was less than he deserved.
But, Gerry Ford was that rare political individual… someone who saw that there was value in something beyond the political.   Not only saw it, but sought it out and attempted to bring it out in others.  Even his political opponents.

That quality is all too rare today.

Bruce has been playing this Predictions game for couple of years now, and it’s mildly amusing so I’ll give it a shot, again.

*Iraq- Direction:

Now that the Democrats have their way and have power to enforce their misbegotten policies, this has no place to go but down, assuming it moves at all. I actually think that it will end up being pretty much a stalemate over the next two years. What improvements happen will be relatively offset by the Arabs in the region mistrusting America and whether not it’s left wing is going to take over completely the government and the policy that affects their lives so greatly. If we hadn’t tried to placate them in the first place this would even be an issue. As it is …

* Iran – Become nuke power? Will sanctions be enforced and if so to what effect?

* North Korea – Will they try to sell nukes? Outcome of 6 party talks?

Unquestionably Iran will become a nuclear power. And because even if we manage to take out thier refinement ability, we will find that North Korea has been selling them to Iran. The six party talks will work exactly as North Korea designed them; as a distraction from it’s other activity… such as weapons production for rouge states such as Iran and Syria.

* Afghanistan – Heading toward collapse or will it survive the threat of a resurgent Taliban?

Afghanistan will survive, but whether not they thrive depends on early on what happens in Iran. How much money, and muscle Iran can bring to keeping the Islamo fascist movement going in Afghanistan, remains to be seen. Without any major change in the power structure and Iran, Afghanistan will survive but won’t make much progress.

* China – Continue to grow economically or run into growth problems?

Even as they’ve been growing they’ve been running into growth problems. The two rather go hand in hand, particularly for a centrally dictated economy. What’s keeping them going at the moment and historically over the last twenty years are so is the huge influx of western cash. The question is whether not they would survive that cash being cut off either by a policy change, or by recession here in the west, or both.

* Russia – Continue its drift toward totalitariansim? Why?

Yes. As to why I would think that to be blatantly obvious; its centralized government is being threatened by freedom more so, even, than the Chinese at the moment. Totalitarianism is a knee jerk reaction for such governments.

* Europe – Take steps to curb muslim immigration and influence? What?

They will try, but I fear it to be too late for them. I said so a year ago during the riots in France. I see nothing to change that perception.

* Middle East – Any radical changes foreseen? Alliances?

This one’s difficult; Iran, certainly has the possibility of coming to grips with itself and an almost livable government. I suppose that a transition from what they have now to almost livable is an improvement. That having been said, there’s still Syria to deal with. The real issue though, is not whose running each country, but the cultural dynamics involved. Those trends send alliances , and for that matter just about any other governmental influence . Which is a nice segue to:

* Islam – Changes? Moderation? Increased radicalization? changes?

In the religion itself? I don’t think so. In the how the religion is perceived by its adherents? Well, that, perhaps is another matter. My read is that it’s about an even split between those who will become more moderate, and those who will become more radical. And unless the ones that are more radical will become more desperate and more violent, while the ones who were becoming more moderate will be less so. Guess who’s going to win that battle?

* UN- UN able to enforce sanctions on Iran? Will it remain ineffective or will new Sec Gen be able to change that? Darfur? Somolia?

A change at the head isn’t going to change a damn thing. There is too much in the way of incompetence spread through the organization, to say nothing of corruption, for it to be useful. I call it about a 50/50 shot that they will be able to enforce sanctions on Iran, but it’s a sure bet that either way it’s not going to bring that errant dog to heel. They will be equally effective elsewhere in the world.

* Environment – Any movement in the international environmental movement?

Since the concept of global warming is every bit as much a religion as Islam is, look at my answer above about Islam and make the translation. The religion won’t change, how that religion is perceived by its adherents is another matter, and it will be about an even split between those who will become more moderate and those who will become more radical the ones were more radical will probably end up become more violent than they have been, and start burning live things down as opposed to simply burning down buildings and SUV’s.

* Economy – see the world economy growing, shrinking, stagnating? Why?

Shrinking. As to why… the increased reliance on socialist policy.

* Immigration – Any answers this year? Bush team up with Dems? Fence?

There is an unquestionable historical pattern, here.  The last thing the Democrats want to do is actually solve a problem. To do so is to allow the horse to eat the string carrot… at which point, the horse stops moving. Or in the case of Democrat rank and file, the Democrat voters stop supporting Democrats. They know they can maintain power longer, if they simply mollify the right noises at the proper times, and be completely ineffective in solving the problems they claim to care about so deeply.

*Health Care – Any movement toward a more consumer oriented system or a single-payer government system?

Same answer as above. Oh, the democrats will be making significantly more noise about it now that they have the bully pulpit. But that’ll be about the size of it.

* Social Security – Continue to ignore it or actually confront its problems?

Same answer. In this case, the fact remains, that the only way the democrats can see to solve the problem is to spend more money on it, which is certainly going to lose them votes. Meantime, the republicans are going to be playing the part of the little Dutch boy plugging the holes in the dike.. as I pointed up Jeff Sessions as doing. This isn’t going anywhere.

* Environment – Any progress on environmental agenda?

Since this global warming thing as a total farce, one would hope not. But you know as well as I do that they are going to lay additional regulations on already beleaguered American automobile manufacturers. After all, it’s “for the children”

* Congress – Predictions about the Democratic control of congress? Budget and Spending – More? Less? About the same? Laws, investigations and various other possibilities? Real ethics reform in Congress or lip service.

Are you kidding? These are Democrats, after all. Budget and spending cuts? Forget about it, unless you’re talking about the military. Let’s remember the only thing they cut under the Clinton administration was in fact, the military. Carter, too. Yes, they will try to investigate and possibly impeach Mr. Bush. As for real ethics reform, come and ask me that question after they remove John Murtha from office. (And, just as a toss in, no I don’t think the democrats are going to try to remove John Murtha from office. Nor will they, without some serious help from republicans. But I don’t see that happening, either. The obvious answer is, there are any simply paying lip service to ethics. And I don’t expect that to change.

* Supreme Court – Any new nominees? How many and who? Chances of getting out of committee?

New nominees, depends on who decides to kick in the next two years. As to getting out of committee, see also: snowball, hell. Unless of course, Lincoln Chafee or someone of the like decides he likes robes.

* ’08 Presidential contenders – See anyone begin to emerge from the pack? Who?

The only guarantee I can make you here, is that the current frontrunners, will be by this time next year.

* Economy – Growth, recession? Which sectors are going to be strong? Housing going to collapse?

A recession… which will be directly tied to a Democrat tax increase. By the facts, not by the news media. And certainly, (chuckle) not by the Democrats, or their supporters.

* National Security – Changes? Threats?

American interests will be attacked over the next two years. You can count on it. *

* Blogging: Consolidation? Commercialization? Improvements?

Blogger will be folded up into some other org, possibly connected with YOU Tube.

Final protections:

1: after one year of Democrat rule of Congress, one one, mind… America will wonder how the hell they manage to get themselves into that mess, and will start working their way out for day reversal of fortunes in ’08.

2: The price of oil will remain fairly steady, and perhaps rise marginally, once the world oil suppliers realize that with the democrats in power, our chances of actually getting on a serious drilling binge are about zero.

Well, yes, for a large part, that’s kinda what it feels like. we just kinda slap it into the deep freeze until needed, sometime in November of next year, sorta like Austin Powers.

A short one, tonight, I’m not really up to this.

Picture yourself driving down any freeway… and you’re watching the mileposts, as you drive along. You see them coming up, and you prepare youself fro the event of passing them.  You can see it from half a mile away and more, as you approach. Then then you’re on top of it, and boop…. it’s gone in a flash.

Holidays are mileposts in your life. Christmas is merely one of them; you can see it coming up, even when you’re in the middle of June. For the next six months and longer you watch it approach…. and boop…. it’s by you.

Perhaps I’ve allowed myself too much mellodrama, but it seems to me the boops are coming up a bit faster, and I feel myself wanting to slow down.

Neil Peart, (whose playing I find flat out astounding, but whose politics I find flat out abysmal), did get it right when he wrote:

Summer’s going fast, nights growing colder
Children growing up, old friends growing older
Freeze this moment a little bit longer
Make each impression a little bit stronger
Experience slips away
Experience slips away…
The innocence slips away

I find that song ringing in my head, as I clean up the decorations.

-=-

You’re right, Billy…   she’s not a genius.

OTOH, since both DavidL and myself have been saying the same thing for months now, perhaps Coyote will call US Geniuses, as well? The Blog could use the publicity…. (Chuckle) I mean, for the moment, I’ll take nothing away from Jane… but it doesn’t take much to get the reality of it… just a sense of history.

 It’s what I said recently… the change of power in Washington means that this blog has become much easier to write… it basicly writes itself with these idiots having the reins. All one needs to be in that situation, is a decent observer. The rest, at that point, takes care of itself. I made that statement based on the history of all, and I have seen nothing yet to change my perception of the situation. I doubt I will.

When a firebrand liberal judge makes pronouncements about those he or she sees as being to the right of him, the usual suspects will laud him or her as a ‘visionary’ and a ‘person of courage’.  THey’ll have no problem with their personal feelings becoming entangled with the law. But watch the pants get wet when some judge expresses tendencies toward the right, such as this article from the St Louis Dispatch:

A liberal-bashing book by a veteran St. Louis judge is to become available publicly this week, but it is already causing a stir in political and legal circles — and prompting some to say it could cost him his job.

Chapter 1 of Circuit Judge Robert H. Dierker Jr.’s book, “The Tyranny of Tolerance: A Sitting Judge Breaks the Code of Silence to Expose the Liberal Judicial Assault,” has circulated via e-mail since last month and been widely read in legal circles, lawyers and judges say.

The sentiments expressed in that chapter, which frequently uses the term “femifascists” and is titled “The Cloud Cuckooland of Radical Feminism,” have already prompted a complaint with the state body that can reprimand or remove judges.

Other judges and lawyers have said that Dierker may have violated a state rule against a judge using his or her position for personal profit. One judge said it would be surprising if Dierker was not removed, calling the book “professional suicide.”

An example of that bedwetting:….(Beyond what the writeup from the news staff of the St Louis dispatch… will they ever use the term ‘Conservative Bashing”?) comes in the form of a mindless wail from Kevin Drum:

In a disclaimer at the end of the book, Dierker writes that the views in the book are “personal, and should not be construed as any indication of how I would rule on any case coming before me.” No, of course not. Just because he spent nearly 300 pages explaining his beliefs that liberals and “femifascists” are wrong about everything is certainly no reason to question his judicial independence, temperament, and impartiality, right?

Ummm.. Kevin?

Let’s recall the words of John Kerry, Shall we? From a write up, by all people, Cass Sunstein, we get:

 During their recent confirmation hearings, John Roberts and Samuel Alito insisted on the importance of “following the law,” and of distinguishing between a judge’s personal moral commitments and his views about the Constitution. In drawing this distinction, both nominees recapitulated a discussion in the presidential debates of 2004, when the candidates were asked what kind of person they would appoint to the Supreme Court. President Bush replied, “I would pick somebody who would not allow their personal opinion to get in the way of the law. I would pick somebody who would strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States.” Senator Kerry agreed. He said, “I don’t believe we need a good conservative judge, and I don’t believe we need a good liberal judge. … I want to make sure we have judges who interpret the Constitution of the United States according to the law.”

So, Kevin, how is it that Roberts, Alito and, heck, even Sunstein agree.. and correctly… with Kerry, that the concept of judges being able to seperate their own belief structure from the law,  is a workable one, how is it the whole thing seems to have gotten right past YOU?

It is a vast conspriacy. 

On Christmas Eve, I blogged about the “Female pay disparity :”

Fact, there is a pay disparity between males and females.  On average men earn more per hour than women. 

Myth, this disparity is the result of some sort of discrimination and the state ought to take action to remedy it.

Dispite what I thought to be the last word on the subject, the Master of Classic Economics, Thomas Sowell, decided to weigh in on the subject.

If you cannot understand something as simple as making a lead pencil, why should you be surprised that you don’t understand why someone is making a lot more money than somebody else?

Imagine, a classic economist using a classic example.

Falsication:  this claim will be falsified by simply explaining how to make a simple lead pencil.   Good luck.

And here, dear reader, is why we fight; It’s the only thing they understand.

MOGADISHU, Somalia -AP- Islamic fighters attempting to wrest power from Somalia’s internationally recognized government retreated from the main front line early Tuesday, witnesses said, a day after Ethiopian fighter jets bombed the country’s two main international airports.

Troops loyal to the Council of Islamic Courts withdrew more than 30 miles to the southeast from Daynuney, a town just south of Baidoa, the government headquarters.

The Islamic forces also abandoned their main stronghold in Bur Haqaba and were forming convoys headed toward the capital, Mogadishu, residents in villages along the road told The Associated Press by telephone.

“We woke up from our sleep this morning and the town was empty of troops, not a single Islamic fighter,” Ibrahim Mohamed Aden, a resident of Bur Haqaba said.

On the northern front, government and Ethiopian troops entered the town of Bulo Barde, where just two weeks ago an Islamic cleric said anyone who did not pray five times a day would be executed.

I hold no illusions about the Ethiopians being our freinds or even uncorrupted. But still, credit where it is due…. So… Congrats to the Ethiopians. They’ve discovered that the way to lasting peace is to defeat the enemy. Would that our own left have figured that out.