Friday, August 31, 2007

One Comment on Sen. Larry Craig: Leave Now

When he was arrested and he and the officer were going over the reasons, toes touching, hand showing, etc., how did Senator Craig know what the hell the officer was talking about?

Would you have? I suspect not. I suspect this sort of thing is not known by those who do not practice bathroom cruising.

I cannot imagine a single person I know well who wouldn't first ask what is going on, and then after having it explained, go into a 100% indignation mode, ask to see a superior, refuse to sign anything, call for an attorney on the spot. In other words, go absolutely berserk.

That's not what Senator Craig did. He didn't ask what's going on. He didn't ask what the various signs meant. He didn't go nuts. He just argued how far his toe had gone wandering (without his knowledge), and whether it was his left hand or his right hand under the stall.

Whether innocent or guilty (of the non-crime!) matters less than that his judgment is too peculiar for him to remain in the Senate. His effectiveness is destroyed. He must leave.

Republicans and conservatives have different, higher standards than do those who maintain the likes of Teddy Kennedy.

Senator Craig must go.

The behavior of the police officer was every bit as strange, and the legal standard that was applied is a joke, except when it ruins a life.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Want to Meet a Wealthy Farmer?

If you've ever wanted to meet a well-to-do farmer, here's the spot: Manhattan Island.

Of the million or so Americans who currently receive annual farming subsidies, a fair number live in Manhattan.

Some of the largest subsidies, those for more than $250,000 per year, flow to the folks reflected by the larger circles.

This chart, created for Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, speaks volumes about what's wrong not only with our farm subsidy programs, but most every other transfer program as well: too much flows to those for whom the subsidy was not intended.

The Bush Administration had hoped to cut 40,000 from the 1 million currently receiving funds. Just 4%, the top 4%, but it isn't going to happen.

Remember this when the Senators from New York talk about being shortchanged by Washington.

I'm just a poor cowhand
from the upper east side.
I got my tractor
and I got my guide.
Corn, soybeans, wheat and peas
Here on the upper east side we aim to please.


H/T National Review Online

Katie to Iraq! CBS Looking for a Long-Term Deal?

In a search for ratings, CBS has announced that Katie Couric will travel to Iraq in September.

I wonder if it has occurred to Ms. Couric that she may be worth far more to CBS if her trip is, hmm, troubled? After all, with a successful conclusion to her travels the ratings will only sink again. On the other hand, should she become a "guest" of one of the fighting factions that unfortunate circumstance would could be milked for months.

Katie needs to ask herself if the suits at CBS ever saw the 1986 film Ruthless People with Danny DeVito and Bette Midler, where the husband has no interest in the return of his kidnapped wife as life is sweeter without her.
Dan Rather used to know some pretty unscrupulous folks over there. Perhaps he'd make the call?

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Ten Years Later, It's True: After Guns Have Been Outlawed, Only Outlaws Have Guns

In the largest, best controlled and least watched social experiment of our time, it's been ten years since this densely populated island nation, fearful of increasing crime, banned private ownership of guns.

The result ten years later? Just as the bumper sticker warned, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

England, which once bragged a violent crime rate substantially below that of the U. S., has seen violent crimes skyrocket and finds itself now leading both the U. S. and Europe in nearly all categories. In fact, according to Dave Kopel, criminal violence is now 50 times as prevalent as it was a century ago, when England had no laws restricting guns.

Has a century of increasingly strict laws and a decade-long outright ban removed guns from English society? Yes and no. While more than 160,000 legally registered guns were turned in during a voluntary amnesty following enactment of the law (remember, these guns were all registered, so "voluntary" may not precisely apply), police estimated 300,000 illegal guns were still on the street, dwarfing the number of American guns used criminally.

Four years after passage of the law, English researchers estimated that 3 million illegal firearms were in circulation, this in a country with a total population of 60 million. While police estimate that fewer than 200 legal firearms remain on the island, criminals' access has not been impeded. Sawed-off shotguns sell for as little as £50, or about $100, while used handguns can be had for less than £200, or $400.

That is a very serious imbalance in available forces: honest citizens, 200; murderers, rapists, thugs and thieves, not to mention terrorists, 3 million.

It wasn't always so.

England's initial gun registration scheme was put in place not for crime control but as a political bulwark, to prevent early communists and labor firebrands from taking up arms against the government in the social unrest of the time. Only those responsible citizens who could "prove" both their character and their need were allowed to own a handgun. Generally, the right was restricted to homeowners. Prior to the 1920 Firearms Act, English laws on guns matched those of the U. S. There were none. London, the largest city in the world at the time, had no crime, in an average year there were fewer than four robberies in all the city. England, with a population of more than 30 million, typically experienced one homicide a year.

Over the next 60 years the law remained the same but the rules governing ownership and possession, which were classified "Secret" by the Home Office, were tightened repeatedly without the knowledge of the English people. As early as 1937, ownership by even qualified individuals was being discouraged under a revised rule. In 1964, applications by security personnel and even guards for banks were being denied. Five years later, by secret order of the Home Office no form of personal protection qualified as a reason for ownership.

Finally, in 1997, in response to the massacre of 16 students and a teacher by a pedophile with a license, the law was revised to match the rule. Private ownership of a handgun became illegal.

The rule is so strict that even its Olympic shooting team is required to travel to a foreign training camp in order to reclaim their guns and practice for competition. Rules are so tight that the team receives no funding or other support from their home government because what they do is illegal in their home country.

Within two years nearly every legal handgun on the island had been turned in or confiscated.

And crime skyrocketed.

The decline of self-protection

While many scholars look at criminal usage of illegal guns as a primary issue, the larger story lies with the gun that isn't there, the gun that isn't available for use by a potential victim. When criminals know with absolute certainty that the risks of criminal behavior have declined, the amounts of criminal activity are certain to increase. England's experience proves the point.

By 2000, just four years after passage of the 1996 Prevention of Crime Act, CBS News was describing Great Britain as "one of the most violent urban societies in the Western world." In the ten years since guns were banned, violent crime has doubled. Early on in the decade, London passed New York City in terms of personal risk, which has continued to grow without relief so that the chances of a mugging or robbery are now four times as great in London as in New York.

Home robbery, theft by use of force in the victim's home, is nine times as frequent in England as in the U. S. The reason? American criminals cite the possibility of an armed citizen as their foremost concern in planning a theft. They most often avoid that crime for fear of being shot.

England is the textbook example of a laboratory environment for enlightened and effective gun control. It is a largely homogenous island, a pillar of western civilization, with a generally obedient population. 70 years of firearms registration followed by confiscation should have worked.

It didn't. As a consequence, innocent citizens have been robbed, beaten and raped with no possibility of an adequate defense.

The same lesson, that "gun control" increases the risks facing society is taught elsewhere. Australia is caught in a decade-long crime spiral that began with its decision to confiscate civilian firearms. Canada's crime problem has only increased with its strengthened emphasis on guns rather than criminals. Even the U. S. proves the point. While crime has generally declined across the country—even as the number of guns in circulation has doubled—the leading areas have been those states that have most aggressively encouraged their responsible citizens to arm, train and protect themselves. It's worked.

Perhaps a new slogan is appropriate, "More guns, less crime"?

The great philosophers seem to agree that one truly unalienable right is that of self-defense. In fact, nearly all describe self--defense as a duty that cannot be delegated to others.

RELATED LINKS: The Most Important Gun Rights Court Decision... Ever!
Terrorists in America Switching to "Plan B"?
Disarm America: Two Easy Steps, 90 Days to 'No Guns'!

Thursday, August 23, 2007

There Are Only Three Reasons to Explain Why These Men Haven't Come Forward

These are the men the FBI would like to talk to concerning their "unusual behavior" on Washington State Ferries the past two months or so. They are not accused of any crime. All the FBI would like to do is have a conversation.

They have not yet come forward to identify themselves.

There are three reasons they might not have come forward:

  1. They have left Seattle and live and work outside the web of modern news and are unaware of any interest in them in spite of wall-to-wall coverage by American and international television, print media and web. Their photographs are now almost everywhere in the world, with perhaps one exception.
  2. They have chosen, for whatever reasons, some of which may be completely innocent, to not talk with the FBI. There are people who prefer not to.
  3. They live and work in Seattle but get all their "news" from the Post-Intelligencer, which has chosen to not print their photos. Readers of the P-I are apparently the only people in the world who have to be satisfied with the paper's decision instead to describe the two as "what look like two Middle Eastern-looking men," a description which may not fit the facts.
In the most fully self-aggrandizing comment of the week, the managing editor of the P-I described the paper's role as,
we get to decide what is news and what isn't, and what is fair and what isn't.
Wow, I thought his role is to decide what to print in his paper in the hope that his customers would find it to be news.

Of course, if your readership is in the tank, and potential customers treat your paper less as a serious purveyor of news and more a source for bad poetry, well…

That's news.

RELATED LINKS: MSM Refuses to Help FBI; Paper Refuses to Publish Photos of Two "Unusual" Ferry Passengers


Wednesday, August 22, 2007

New Season TV Premier: "24: The Reality Edition"

In an effort to capture a larger audience, Fox announced today the premier of its newest show, 24: The Reality Edition.

24: TRE melds the drama and tension of 24 with the realism of Survivor.

Starring: You, yes you, as one of three audience participants chosen at random by Roger Ailes.

Setting: Islamofascist terrorists have smuggled into this country three Soviet-era tactical nuclear warheads. Though with a yield of only 100 kilotons–small as such things go–each warhead can nevertheless destroy the downtown core of any American city.

They have chosen your city as one of the three. They will detonate the bombs within 24 hours.

Preface: You've called CTU, Los Angeles for help. They've explained that Jack Bauer is busy, but that Division will send you help.

Plot:
Division sends over Harry Reid (D-Ritz Carlton), Senate Majority Leader, to help you out. Harry's never operated in the field before, but he's got years of experience doing slimy things. Division hopes he can help.

Your Role: Decide what path this reality show should take, keeping in mind that the terrorists and their bombs are 100% real and that at the end of 24 hours up to three U. S. cities will vaporize, yours amongst them.

Your Choices
(rule: pick only one, then stick with it!):

  • Work with Harry to understand the terrorists and your role in creating their unhappiness. Ask him to negotiate with the terrorists in order to dissuade them from choosing your city.
  • Flee as fast and far upwind as possible, keeping in mind the loss of friends and relatives, job and home that will result from the detonation. Also keep in mind that you don't know which two other cities are at risk and where that fallout may land.
  • Call Dick Cheney, apologize for each bad thought and every nasty joke about him you ever entertained and beg for his help to intercept the terrorists before they kill you. You hope and pray that all the bad things you've ever read about him are true.
  • Call your doctor and ask for a fresh prescription of sleeping pills for immediate delivery. Go back to reading The New York Times.

This is not a test. This is real. Armed terrorists really are coming for you and they're bringing every weapon they can. It's only a question of when the clock stops. Your life and the lives of your family depend on your choice. Good luck.

Welcome, Freepers. While you're here, scroll down the page to review a selection of interesting items.

Ask yourself, which politicians take most seriously the war we're fighting? Is it more likely that you'll die from a terror strike, or global warming?

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

THUMP! Congress Hits All-Time Low Job-Approval Rating

That sound you heard was that of Congress hitting the floor, an all-time low for job approval ratings from voters.

While much has been made of President Bush's recent slide, recently improving from a six-year low, little has been reported about the free fall of the legislative branch, currently operating under the management of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Our legislative branch has just matched the all-time low, last reached 15 years ago in the midst of the penny stamp scandal, when congresscritters were routinely kiting checks and cashing stamps at the House post office.

Now comes Henry Waxman, the poster child of the "oversight rules!" cheerleaders running the peoples' House this term.

Waxman, who Patrick O'Connor at Politico.com reports

has a history of issuing 'letters' on the heels of stories his staff planted in the news,
has just tagged Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a letter that requests
a list of all of the events with federally elected officials or candidates for federal office that you or your predecessor attended outside of Washington, DC, during 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006. For each event, please provide the date and location of the event, a brief description of the purpose of the event, the identity of the elected officials or candidates for office attending the event, a statement whether taxpayer funds were used to travel to the event, and whether you or your predecessor attended the event in an official capacity.
Not satisfied with making demands, Waxman makes impossible demands
Please provide these materials to the Committee by September 7, 2007.
Congress has opened 300 investigations and held more than 600 "oversight" hearings just in the past seven months. The results? Got me.

Apparently, they have nothing better to do.

Perhaps there's a relationship between what they're doing and what voters think of what they're doing?

MSM Refuses to Help FBI; Paper Refuses to Publish Photos of Two "Unusual" Ferry Passengers

The FBI has taken the somewhat unusual step of requesting assistance from the public to identify two men photographed recently observed "behaving unusually aboard several Washington state ferries."

Washington state ferries are generally regarded as a "high potential" terrorist targets, both for the possible economic disruption as well as for the terroristic potential of a strike against a Pacific Northwest icon.

The FBI has been trying to identify the two men for weeks, using normal law enforcement channels, to no avail. The FBI is not accusatory, it says there is no specific threat and that it only wants to identify these men in order to clear things up.

Special Agent Robbie Burroughs acknowledged "that the FBI rarely publicizes information from an investigation, unless investigators are seeking a suspect wanted for a crime," and she added that the decision to publish the photos came from "an abundance of caution." Passengers and crew members have reported the two as "overly interested in the workings and layouts of the ferries." The FBI would like to identify the men as quickly as possible and by doing so, resolve whether or not any threat exists.

But Seattle's Post-Intelligencer has chosen not to publish the FBI-supplied photographs of what the paper described as "what look like two Middle Eastern-looking men."

The paper defends its decision not to publish the photographs because "neither man is considered a suspect nor has either been charged with a crime."

Now that's helpful. The same could be said for participants in the Sea-Fair parade, the crowds at the baseball games, or the dozens of other photos the paper runs each day.

While it might be difficult to drive a truck onto an airliner, it happens a thousand times a day on the Seattle ferry system. An explosion on a ferry in Elliott Bay would be visible from the P-I's editorial offices. In fact, the paper's writers might find it prudent to stand back from the windows until this is resolved, one way or another.

The P-I retired from the battlefields of the war on terror a long time ago. Now it refuses to help, even at its own front door.

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Here Now: Kevlar Vests for Elementary School Students

The headline in the Daily Mail is a grabber:

Stab-proof school uniforms go on sale to protect pupils from knife attacks

Parents are sending children to school in stab-proof uniforms to guard against knife crime, it has emerged.

They are paying a firm which makes body armour to line blazers and jumpers with a stab-resistant material called Kevlar.

The precautions are aimed at protecting pupils from knife attacks as street crime spills over into schools.
According to a spokesman for the manufacturer, BladeRunner
From what I can gather and from speaking to parents it's just peace of mind for them.
I spoke to a lady yesterday whose son was mugged on a bus coming home from school. She has also got two daughters, but she always sends them to school with no money on them and no jewellery.
Further
Teachers are also demanding to be equipped with stab-proof vests to protect them from attack as they frisk pupils for knives and guns.
Just a regular day in another Gun Free Zone, where everyone is equal or at least equally safe. This time, though, its England, where possession of firearms is banned, as is public possession of a knife, and where the violent crime rate now exceeds that of its former colony.

We should be assured, however, that
The reality of course is that crimes involving knives are proportionately very very low
according to the spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, whose name is almost indescribably fitting, he being one Alf Hitchkock.

Of course, these are not kitchen paring knives.

No, they are the "assault weapon" version of your typical bread slicer, just the sight of which is enough to push a pretty heavy load of adrenaline through one's system.

While reported street robberies have increased from 25,500 in 2005 to more than 64,000 in just the first four months of this year, the constabulary is clueless. Enver Soloman, deputy director of the London-based Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, who may be living in a different universe entirely, said:
“There is no doubt there are more kids carrying knives but it is not clear why.

“Much of it is for personal safety rather than for putting it against someone’s throat.”
Others suggested increasing the penalty for carrying a knife in public "without a good reason" from two years to four.

We seem to have difficulty understanding that by "tooling down" society, we weaken the law abiding and strengthen the lawless.

The outcome is both natural and unpleasant to contemplate.


You really can't make this stuff up.

Heck, instead of Kevlar, let's just issue everyone—the good, the bad as well as the ugly—a Glock and let God play His role.

The Odds? 13 Million-to-1, but Somewhat Higher in Canada

The quadruplet sisters, Autumn, Brooke, Calissa and Dahlia, born to Mr. and Mrs. J. P. Jepp began life with the odds stacked heavily against them. First, successful delivery of naturally conceived identical quadruplets occurs only once every 13 million births. According to Dr. Jamie Grifo of the NYU Fertility Center in New York, there are only 50 living sets of such twins in the entire world.

More daunting, the Jepps are Canadians.

That Karen and J. P. Jepp lived with their 2 year old
son Simon in Calgary, Alberta presented a potentially life-threatening challenge Friday night when Mrs. Jepp began labor. For months, the couple had planned their high-risk delivery—all multiple births are by definition high risk—with the medical team at Calgary's Foothills Hospital. Unfortunately, when the time for delivery arrived, dictated by intrauterine stress affecting one of the babies in the 31st week of pregnancy, there was no room at the hospital for the Jepp family.

Foothills Medical Centre is one of 12 hospitals run by Calgary Health Region, the Canadian governmental agency responsible for medical care to the 1.2 million residents of southern Alberta, including Canada's third largest city. It employs a staff of 23,000 with an annual budget of more than $2.3 billion and in an average year delivers 15,000 babies.

But like all such agencies in Canada, Foothills Medical Centre manages health care costs by managing health care access and on that Friday night in August, there was to be no room for Mrs. Jepp and her soon-to-be four daughters. Foothills' Neonatal Intensive Care Unit was full up.

Not to worry. Under the Canadian system of managed care, described by several American politicians as the very finest such system in the world, such things happen frequently enough that there are protocols for emergencies like this. The medical team at Foothills reached out to the other hospitals with NICUs spread out across Canada, only to find that "no other Canadian NICU had space for the Jepp's four babies. There wasn't space anywhere in Canada," population 32 million, "so we had to turn to our friends in Montana," according to Lynda Phelan of Calgary Health Region.

Specifically, Great Falls, Montana, with a population a hair over 56, 000 and home to Benefis HealthCare Center, a relatively small religiously-oriented community hospital, a hospital either (able) or (forced) to compete for consumers' health care dollars within the American system.

Calgary Health Regional chartered the medevac flight from Calgary, Canada's third largest city, to Great Falls, the 356th largest in the U. S., a 40 minute trip. Calgary Health will pay the Jepp's hospital and doctors' bills during their stay in Great Falls. It also paid for the two charter flights back home when the babies could travel and after the Calgary hospital created room for them. The three flights alone will run about $45,000.

According to Toronto's The Globe and Mail

Ms. Jepp's case highlights the increasing tendency for Canadian women with high-risk pregnancies to be sent to the United States to give birth, a development some attribute to an increase in the number of premature births, a nursing shortage and a stretched health-care system.

With no beds available in their home province or nearby, expectant mothers going into labour before 32 weeks gestation (when babies need the highest level of neonatal intensive care) are often sent by air ambulance to hospitals in Washington, Montana, Michigan and New York.
So far this year, Calgary has evacuated five delivering mothers to Great Falls, a city one-twentieth its size.

Canadians today say what many only thought privately in earlier years: The Canadian single-payer medical system is terrific as long as one is in a position to use the emergency backup system, if necessary.

Where will Americans turn for backup when our system becomes Canadian?

RELATED LINK: Mr. Jepp is an analytic sort who estimates the family will need 14,600 diapers the first year. For more on the Jepps, go to The Jepp Family.

You might also appreciate Don Surber's pointed analysis at No Room at the Inn, where he observes "After all, they didn’t fly Mrs. Jepp to Cuba, did they?"

Friday, August 17, 2007

Why Democrats Need Carl Rove

Without the "evil genius" to kick around any more, who will the Democrats blame for the actions of the Bush administration with which they disagree?

The horns of their dilemma:
1. If Bush Administration becomes less effective with Rove's departure, it makes the administration a less persuasive target of criticism, provides less ammunition to its critics and decreases the ability of candidates to motivate the Democratic base

This path, the Flight of the Boogeyman, endangers the Democrats march to the White House.

2. If the Bush Administration remains as effective as it is presently, the description of the President as merely a dimwitted pawn of others, flattens.

This path concedes history to the President as a man of his own. While it might seem to be the less painful approach, it may be a path that Democratic elites cannot stomach and, on a level with admitting that a communist killed JFK, beyond admission even secretly to oneself.
The reality: Democratic political leadership is more comfortable with reactionary Republicans than with activist conservative Republicans. They were born and bred in the '50's, 60's and 70's, years when the proper and accepted and only role for responsible Republicans was to object to the progressive leadership of enlightened Democrats.

The intellectual revolution amongst conservatives, instigated by Bill Buckley and supported by an extraordinarily deep bench of like-minded political insurgents, captured the Republican party in 1980 and remains the core of the party today. It is a change with which the leftist leadership of the Democratic party has never become comfortable and one which it is incapable of accepting.

As a consequence, the self-image of the liberal elites require they be the more intelligent, the more moral, and the greater the foresight they bring to any table. They are superior to Republicans in every regard. They lead, while Republicans follow dragging their feet.

Their dependence on that self-image trumps even political expediency.

They cannot acknowledge a peer in the form of George Bush, an illegitimate and therefor unelected rube from Texas, without abandoning their superiority. There must be an unseen force, a puppet master.
His name is Karl Rove, he who sold his soul to the Devil decades ago in return for insights into the manipulation of the average (not very intelligent) voter.
The worst of all worlds for these politicians: The Administration continues its activist course, a portion of which succeeds without Karl Rove. How is that possible?

We can expect to see the Democrats bring Karl Rove back to Washington, at least through the 2008 elections. Already, Senator Leahy has promised to call citizen Rove as the star witness in a whole series of Senate chamber hearings.

They need Karl Rove. Without him, they are lost.

Perhaps it's Dick Cheney, after all.

Greenspan: The Pot Calling The Kettle Black?

Among Alan Greenspan's most memorable sound bites as Chairman of the Federal Reserve was his description of the stock market as a symptom of "irrational exuberance." His 1996 warning was a bit pre-mature, the stock market correction didn't begin until four years later.

However, it should now be obvious that Mr. Greenspan was looking the wrong direction, as well as barking up the wrong tree, with his warning.

Rather than pointing to a market where the Fed's influence is indirect and its responsibility diffused, as it is with equities, the Chairman should have been paying a little more attention to the nation's credit markets, an area of direct influence and responsibility.

During his tenure, the flood of dollars into the banks flowing from Mr. Greenspan's printing presses sought its own level and almost immediately began floating the nation's real estate markets to levels never before dreamed.

The fuel that drove the historic inflation in residential home prices was debt, easy debt, encouraging investors to throw apparently unlimited amounts of paper dollars at tangible assets in the expectation of eternal increases in dollar values.

Just as the founding Rockefeller is said to have bailed from stocks when he received a hot tip from his shoe-shiner, so prudent investors should have limited their exposure to real-estate and real-estate lending when stories first appeared of school custodians in southern California qualifying for $500,000, no cash-down home mortgages.

As economist Robert Shiller's numbers make clear in the accompanying graph (click to enlarge), the real estate markets have a long way to go for correction. The eventual return to normal will be a matter not of days and weeks but of months and years. Every dime of that nearly $1 trillion correction will be wrung from the banks, investment banks and hedge funds—and their individual investors—that greedily lapped up the high-rates of return offered by the too-high octane mortgages.

Unfortunately, Mr. Greenspan's error is not the only cause of this difficulty, perhaps not even the largest. While the Federal Reserve provided the fuel, others set the course for the good Rocket Ship Credit using all the tools at their disposal, including cooked books and crooked applications. Investors haven't yet realized the depths to which they have been screwed by the chain of mortgage brokers, aggregators, packagers and investment houses, all of which were focused solely on their short-term profits, for which they have forfeited their reputations and long-term stability. The weaknesses deliberately baked into the subprime and Alt-A portfolios created and sold at ever-increasing velocities will not become apparent for some time yet. When they do, recriminations will follow.

While the bodies of some of the corporate small fry are beginning to litter the landscape, the carnage will include some of Wall Street's largest players before it is done.

The corrections and punishments that Congress or the regulators will eventually dish out will be too little, too late and probably, misguided. The marketplace will do a more accurate, more precise job correcting the errors as well as a delivering devastating punishment to those who lied and cheated their ways to commissions, bonuses and market capitalizations on the backs of those who now face the loss of a home.

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Elite Media Wins Against Unwashed, Unskilled… by 2%

According to a recent story in the Wall Street Journal, 18% of the American people express high confidence in the national news media. That's down from 37% fifteen years ago.

Fewer than one out of five, then, put stock in the combination of education, experience, observations and credibility of professionals put together by companies designed to gather and disseminate news.

In contrast, 16% voice high confidence in Internet media.

Similarly to a NFL franchise playing the neighborhood pickup team, a 2 point spread isn't much to show.

While the Wall Street Journal describes the Internet's showing as "slightly worse" than the MSM's, the Journal didn't report comparable trend numbers for the 'net.

I'll bet the trend slope is just a tad different.


How many people are going to continue to pay for a product that fewer than one-fifth believe?

Sulzberger: "Look Ma, I Shrunk The Times!"

The New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. is preparing for the coming battle with Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal by shrinking the paper's physical size and news content, both by about 10%.

He's also retreating from the Maginot Line called Times Select, built two years ago to add electronic subscription revenue while shielding The NYT's first-tier opinion columnists from the rough and tumble of blogosphere discussion on the 'net.

Perhaps The Times knew that its core subscribers are not tech-savvy, perhaps it was an unintended consequence; either way, the paper's stable of opinion columnists, accustomed to be at the center of elite discussion of the news of the day, were effectively benched from the brawl. The opinions of Maureen Dowd, Tom Friedman, Frank Rich and Paul Krugman, with a bounty on their heads of $50 per year, became less accessible, and being so, have grown less consequential to the great debates roiling the country.

Mr. Sulzberger has made every choice wrong and he needs to go.

It's past time for the once-proud Grey Lady to fire the owner, recapture the credibility the paper has mislaid and attempt to re-establish its franchise of trust and value.

Cartoon courtesy NY Post, h/t OESY.

RELATED LINKS:"Progress in Anbar" – No! It Can't Be. Not the NY Times!
NY Times Shareholders to Mgmt: "Can You Hear Us Now?"

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Liberal Media: Dropping Like Flies

Can the Second Coming be far distant? Given the glimpses of truth beginning to filter through the pages of darkness typically published by the Main Stream Media, one wonders.

First, in April, The New York Times surprised all several hundred of its remaining readers with a major news story reporting the developing sense of peace spreading across the battlefield that was Anbar province.

Anbar, for nearly three years it was regarded as the most hopeless space and people in all Iraq. It was hopeless. A year after putting into effect the strategies developed by General David Petraeus, Anbar knows evenings, days and weeks without gunfire. Sunni and Shia cooperate in keeping the peace. The American footprint in the province is shrinking while that of Iraqi forces grows.

Anbar is news but its not the biggest news.

The biggest news is that the story appeared in The New York Times.

Then it was the Los Angeles Times, reporting American progress in Iraq being achieved "slowly and subtly," but also acknowledging—in a news story!—that "it is not a message many politicians in Washington want to hear."

A few days later, The New York Times opened its editorial pages to two liberals of impeccable credentials, allowing Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack to deliver an intellectual improvised explosive device, the explosion of which has done substantial damage to the politicians and pundits who can neither see nor hear the progress being gained on the field of battle in Iraq. Their 1,361 words resonate across the rhetorical battlefield in Washington, adding to a "fog of battle" on the left, further confusing the confused.

In late July The New York Times sponsored a routine national survey designed to measure public support of American efforts in Iraq. The newspaper was so surprised by the results—it showed an increase in public support—that it insisted on a do-over. The retake produced the same results, later confirmed by a survey in USA Today. American voters are more optimistic about Iraq than they were a few months ago.

Even the Associated Press has joined the parade, as it allowed veteran reporter Robert Burns to write "The new U.S. military strategy in Iraq, unveiled six months ago to little acclaim, is working."

Even a little good news is enough to potentially tilt the political table. It is only once absolute certainty is lost can real discussion begin. That certainty is slipping and the resulting vertigo is very disconcerting to those who were once so sure.

That must frighten the heck out of those who are so heavily invested in an American failure.

Related Links: "Progress in Anbar" — No! It Can't Be. Not The NYT!

Is Barack Obama the Richard Nixon of Our Days?

Senator Obama doesn't accept the efficacy of killing terrorists as they land on the flypaper that is Iraq. He prefers to allow them safe harbor there, while attacking them across the border into Pakistan from our bases in Afghanistan.

There is a word for the latter strategy: incursion.

Incursion, as in Richard Nixon's 13 incursions into Cambodia in the summer of 1970.

Who would have thought? A leading Democratic presidential candidate looks back almost forty years to the foreign policy/war making practices of Richard Nixon to guide his thoughts in our current war.

Is he serious or does he just not care about what he doesn't know?

Can college protests be far away?

Monday, August 06, 2007

Where Was Patty?

Friday night's Senate vote on the amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was, according to the Democrats who spoke so forcefully against it, a repeal of the Fourth Amendment even while striking damage to a number of other constitutional provisions from which our country will never recover. They argued that the vote was the most important of the year and of the country's history. A number of them argued that it empowered the devils incarnate—Bush, Cheney and Gonzales—to ride roughshod over a fearful populace.

Given its overriding importance, I was amazed to see that Washington's senior senator (now that's hard to write!), Patty Murray, was absent from the vote.

I wonder what took her attention away?

There was a time when Washington could boast two fairly impressive senators. Even when the pairing was reduced to Slade and Patty, we could at least comfort ourselves that the two averaged out somewhere near a median Senate IQ. Now, however, the less said about IQ the better. Even as the invisible rheostat has dimmed the
Senate chandelier generally, our two bulbs lead handily in the race to dimness.

The New York Times: Self-Perception Approaching Reality

The New York Times is a smaller newspaper today.

The publisher of The NYT this morning reduced the size of the pages printed in the paper edition, thereby reflecting the paper's reduced stature amongst current readers and those who once were.

It may also be somewhat prophetic, given the intentsity with which Rupert Murdoch promises to increase the competitive stance of The Wall Street Journal, the nation's second largest paper in terms of circulation.

No word yet whether NPR will reduce signal amplitude or MSNBC will shrink the size of its screen.
One unstated but possible reason: A smaller paper should reduce the opportunities for errors.

Friday, August 03, 2007

Tommy Makem, R.I.P.

Tommy Makem, known as the Godfather of Irish Music for more than 50 years, has died.


Tommy moved to the United States from Northern Ireland in 1955 and in 1961 shared honors with Joan Baez at the Newport Folk Festival as the most promising newcomers on the folk scene. He particularly enjoyed the Irish ballads and was equally comfortable playing a banjo, a tin whistle or signing a capella. Among his best-known songs are Four Green Fields, Gentle Annie, Will You Go, Lassie, Go (above), Red is the Rose.

Though he was best known for his teamwork with the Clancy Brothers, he spent nearly half his career as a concert soloist. Kevin Cullen, formerly an international reporter for the paper, has written an extraordinary reflection of Tommy's life, The Green Fields of Tommy Makem, in the The Boston Globe

But Tommy Makem was an Irish soul singer, and souls don't die. His music is preserved, on the old vinyl LPs he made with his pals, the Clancy Brothers, more recently on CDs, more intimately in memory, in the hard drive of any brain that heard his basso profundo voice.

To hear Tommy Makem sing "Four Green Fields" was to hear Enrico Caruso sing "Vesti la giubba," or James Brown sing "I Feel Good." He was for Irish traditional music a great ambassador, and a consummate performer.

President Mary McAleese of Ireland led the tributes to Makem after his death. "Always the consummate musician, he was also a superb ambassador for the country, and one of whom we will always be proud," McAleese said.

Among Makem's favorites was The Bard of Armagh, set to the tune later adapted for Streets of Laredo:
Oh list' to the tale of a poor Irish harper
And scorn not the string of his old withered hands
But remember those fingers they once could move sharper
To raise up the strains of his dear native land.

It was long before the shamrock, dear isle's lovely emblem
Was crushed in its beauty by the Saxon's lion paw
And all the pretty colleens around me would gather
Call me their bold Phelim Brady, the Bard of Armagh.

How I love to muse on the days of my boyhood
Though four score and three years have fled by them
It's king's sweet reflection that every young joy
For the merry-hearted boys make the best of old men.

At a fair or a wake I would twist my shillelah
And trip through a dance with my brogues tied with straw
There all the pretty maidens around me would gather
Call me their bold Phelim Brady, the Bard of Armagh.

In truth I have wandered this wide world over
Yet Ireland's my home and a dwelling for me
And, oh, let the turf that my old bones shall cover
Be cut from the land that is trod by the free.

And when Sergeant Death in his cold arms doth embrace
And lull me to sleep with old Erin go bragh
By the side of my Kathleen, my dear pride, oh place me
Then forget Phelim Brady, the Bard of Armagh.


Go n-éirí an bothar leat, bard and Irisher.

Many thanks to Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters for the Gaelic translation of the old Irish blessing, "May the road rise with you."

Thursday, August 02, 2007

Apple iPhone: "Can You Hear Me Now?"

It is beginning to appear as though Apple's iPhone, on the market for just over a month, is changing the future of cell phone manufacturers and carriers.

A stunning new report from ChangeWave highlights the carnage:

  • In its first month, iPhone has already captured 1% market share.
  • Of those consumers who intend to purchase a cell phone within the next six months, 16% specify iPhone as their intended purchase, putting Apple in the number one market position among all manufacturers for intended purchases. Conversely, Motorola's share of intended purchases has fallen from 33% a year ago to just 14% today.
  • iPhone registers the highest consumer satisfaction from its owners, an "astounding" 77% of its owners described themselves as very satisfied with their phone. RIM holds down second place, with 50% describing themselves as very satisfied. The rest trail.
  • Finally, and perhaps even more importantly in the long run, ATT may be gaining carrier share on the back of its new handset. ATT's share is up 1%, while most of its rivals are down a point. This in spite of ATT's relatively lackluster satisfaction ratings.
It continues to amaze how so few experts in so many fields fail recognize the enormous value that consumers ascribe to singular plug & play solutions. Play with an iPhone for an hour, and "buttons in a clamshell" looks dated. Use an iPhone for a week and you'll never go back.

Early punditry pointed out that the iPhone does little more than do many competitive smart phones on the market. 'Tis true. The key point is how much more the consumer does.

Easy is good. Intuitive is better. "No brainer" is best.

That's a lesson Apple is teaching from which we can all learn.