Hounds for Bush 2004

Riley


Brie


Finney


Orion

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has sent a letter to President George W. Bush, accusing him of using the painful topic of Vietnam for his "personal political gain". Alrighty then, what does one say to that? The word ass-clown leaps to mind...

RHAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHHH ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

I am F-U-R-I-O-U-S ! ! ! !


Friday February 20, Belgium Parliament’s Lower House passed a bill granting non-EU immigrants the right to vote in local elections! Can you understand that? It means Moroccans, Algerians, Tunisians et al who reside here but show no willingness to assimilate whatsoever HAVE-THE-FUCKING-RIGHT-TO-VOTE for the town and city councils where they reside WITHOUT bEING A BELGIAN!!! I-AM-MAD-AS-HELL! ! ! ! ! ! !

Oh yes, smooth-talking socialists and greens from both Flanders and Wallonia were quick to point out that there are some conditions:

*the immigrants have to reside here at least 5 years
*they have to register as voters
*they have to sign a document that they will respect Belgian law


Respect Belgian law, my ass. Now already they are trodding Belgian law wherever they can find it. Hell, they trod on law-enforcers. Belgian law forbids ritual slaughtering of sheep at home at the time of the Ramadan or the Hajj. Oh, but this year it was found out that actually only some 10-15% of Muslims abide by that law and slice those nice little fourfooters’ throats in one of the designated official slaughterhouses? The rest still happily do the butcher’s job in their backyard? Oops, so much for the respect for Belgian law. And I could give you example upon example of more such things.

People, it’s a Sunday afternoon here and I want to cut a long story short. The point is: over here in Europe we face a day-by-day increasing problem of especially Muslim immigrants who, instead of assimilating and integrating in our society, and thus contributing to our welfare, MAKE A NUISANCE OF THEMSELVES. You know what the net effect of the passing of this law will be? It means that in the very near future Muslim parties will spring up in, say, Brussels suburbs, that Muslim mayors will become a real possibility and that when funding is needed for, say, an opera house and a mosque, the money will go to the mosque. Now already there are large parts in Brussels where you better not venture as a Belgian. Don’t park your car there, you tires will be cut up. In Schaarbeek there’s ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS POLICE harassing Muslim women if they don’t appear pious enough or don't wear the veil!!!!

No racist speak Ladies and gentlemen. From over the Atlantic a reasonable citizen talks to you, a citizen who would like to shake hands with and help any red, yellow, brown or green immigrant – provided they don’t see our country as a playground where they think they can impose their backward society model after having just fled such an environment, like dwellers who flee an apartment to spoil another one because they are too lazy to clean up their mess.

You will ask how this is possible, how such a law could ever pass whatever claims to be our House of Representatives. I told you: the Socialists (SP – Socialistische Partij – in Flanders and the PS – Parti Socialiste – in Wallonia) along with the greens forced it down our throats. Scott, this WAS a Deliverance moment and the Cavalry did NOT come!

Flemish Socialists were in favour because… because, you know, they have this weird mindset that the West is guilty of every sorry issue on God’s Green Earth and that we should be compassionate and that if the Muslim community shows no fucking sign to integrate it’s because we are not welcoming enough. The Wallonian Socialists are in favour because they think the Muslims, who are largely ignorant of the Dutch language but generally do speak French, will bolster their ranks. The Greens are just as mad as my backdoor.

Well Ladies and Gentlemen, in the Netherlands they DID authorize, a couple of years ago, immigrants to vote for municipal councils. Twelve years ago already, the respected Dutch politican and former Minister of Defense Frits Bolkestein warned that the Netherlands' Integrating Policy, (in)famous for its coddling of foreigners, granting them everything without asking something in return, had failed TOTALLY. He was nearly crucified for it by the well-meaning Politically Right. And where have the Netherlands come today? Oh, for example some nice facility in Eindhoven as well as desperate measures to turn back time.

Well, I guess I’m through with my party Membership of the VLD, Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten, literally translated “Flemish Lberals and Democrats”. Put that grin off your face Scott. You, Kerry, that air of amazement and horror. Tom, what are you gonna do with that baseball bat? Put it away!

We got us this naming thingy on both sides of the Atlantic people. For instance, what you call “High School”, which is translated as “Hogeschool” in Dutch, are two different things. In the US it means education between, say, ages 12 and 18 if I’m not mistaken. Well, over here we call something like that “secondary school”, whereas “Hogeschool” means any education/formation after age 18 that is not related to University.

So when I confess now that since I was 19 I have been a member of the Flemish Liberals and Democrats, this BY NO MEANS is indicative of my political inclination to, well, US Liberals and Democrats. The VLD was what you would call soft-spoken Republicans – promoting free entrepreneurship, free markets, the well-being and personal development of the individual, tax cuts etc…

Over the years the party absorbed an influx of left-leaning or malcontent s*ckers from other or dissolved parties. The net effect of this was a gradual shifting of the VLD to the center-left, to my utter horror and dismay.

Well, Friday came the drop that made the bucket flood over. I’m through with the VLD. They betrayed me and many others. I just sent my application for membership to the Vlaams Blok (Flemish Bloc), a right-wing party which the others, VLD included, love to hate and cast pretty names on, such as “extreme right”, fascists etc… Never mind it was the Vlaams Blok that last year came up for the defence of Jews in Antwerp, who like Jews all over Europe are experiencing a frightening increase in Antisemitism at the hands of – oooooooooooooooooohh, this is soooooooooo politically incorrect – Muslim youths.

Tom. Maybe you should make sure these Green Cards don’t get lost you know. Oh, and when the first turbans show up in Maine, BEWARE. Let’s just cut the crap and call a spade a spade, ok? Also, keep an eye on that Nader guy. He's more dangerous than you'd think.

This would be a great way to reform our ridiculous social security system. Unfortunately, it just makes too much sense to ever make it past the socialists.

If this story is true, John Kerry should be drawn and quartered.

This post from NRO pretty much sums up why I love Rummy:

Just when I think I like Donald Rumsfeld a little too much — that I've gone a little bit overboard — something occurs that makes me think, "No, actually — I may have undervalued him."

One of the beautiful things about him is that he refers to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as "the so-called occupied territories." (For all I know, he uses "Judea" and "Samaria" when doors are closed!) But I'm thinking now about something else. At the recent conference in Munich, Rumsfeld was asked why the United States doesn't make a fuss about Israeli nuclear weapons. We're supposed to be against nukes, right? Why don't we go after Israel?

Replied the secretary of defense: "You know the answer by yourself, and the whole world knows the answer. Israel is a small country with a small population. It is a democracy, but exists among neighbors who want to see her in the sea. Israel has made it clear that she does not want to be in the sea, and as a result, over several decades, has organized in such a manner as not to be thrown into the sea."

Savor it now, ladies and gents, for we will probably never — ever — see the likes of this fellow, in an office this key, again.

Here's something to make you feel nice and secure.

If one of these babies can "slip through the system" it makes you wonder what else is floating around out there. Note: A suitcase nuke is much smaller than an F-18.

Here's the best list of potential talking points for the Bush campaign to use against John Kerry that I've come across so far. I particularly like the fact that this list relies mostly on Kerry's performance as a Senator. We can only hope that the debate rises to the point of discussing actual pertinent issues.

If this is true I'll be glad to help take care of business with my Glock 23.

Hat tip to the inimitable Kim du Toit.

This will make the fiscal conservative in you want to hurl. (Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan)

Perhaps this is all part of a shrewd plan by Karl Rove to have Bush propose all kinds of crazy spending programs to get democratic votes, and then have the Republican congress actually cut spending while nobody is looking. Or, perhaps we're all getting the Deliverance treatment.

Dick Morris was on Hannity and Colmes last night, and he's pretty sure that Hillary is in line for the VP spot. It seems she would make for a strong ticket, but she brings a lot of baggage that could be exploited by the Bush campaign as well. I suggested this a while back, and I still think it's going to happen.

It makes sense if you think about it. If she turns down being Kerry's running mate, she risks being shut out of the presidential spot until 2012 if Kerry wins. If Kerry loses, she's still in the Senate, and can come back strong in 2008 without going up against an incumbent president. The only way I see her turning this post down is if the Clinton machine feels they can sabotage the Kerry campaign and insure a Bush victory in November (I know, big time conspiracy theory, but we've seen worse.) This way she makes a bid in 2008 without the taint of being defeated alongside Kerry four years prior. Either way, this is going to be very interesting.

So much for horrible human rights abuse charges at Gitmo.

The shredding of John Kerry has begun. This will be fun to watch after months of democratic candidates taking pot shots at the president. I don't think this photo will sway many lefites though, since their philosophy allows for fleeing to Europe and protesting against your country during a war (Bill Clinton) but vilifies joining the National Guard during a war (George W Bush.)

Hey, is that Jason Lee in his Almost Famous garb behind Jane Fonda?

Thanks to Andymatic.com for the amusing graphic.

This post is just to say that people who don't agree with me can go to hell. That is all.

Kerry bringin' the heat!

Yeah, I too have an American SUV (Ford Escape) and a European car (VW Passat). Sure, the Escape is kind of a wussie SUV, but that didn't stop an enviro-weenie from trying to put an "ask me what I'm doing for the environment" bumper sticker on it once.

That outrage against SUV's has more to do with the relatively affluent part of the population that they are associated with (wrongly) rather than any actual merits of the vehicle. Full size pickup trucks get equally bad mileage as big SUV's but you won't hear the Sierra Club complaining about those. Why? They are viewed as "working class" vehicles, and therefore it would be politically incorrect to criticize them.

The so called environmental movement is just a thinly veiled anti-capitalist movement, and should be treated as such.

The "made in USA" crowd can eat it too. I'd actually PREFER to buy an American car, as long as the American offerings are equal or superior to their imported counterparts. I know my cars, and I do a lot of research when I buy. When I bought the Passat, the closest American competitor was the Ford Taurus. Anyone who has ever driven these cars knows there is no comparison between the two. I'm not going to buy a piece of crap just to support one of the biggest leeches on the US economy, the UAW. Thankfully, American cars are getting a lot better, but so are the imports. Their fortunes will improve as a direct relation to the quality of their vehicles.

Does anyone really care what these clowns think, eh? The lower that number the better in my book.

Our boy Kim lays down a lovely rant on religion.

Man, I want to go drinking with this guy.

This is another obscene abuse of American tax revenues. We better charge Mafia style interest on this loan. You know that this debt will end up being "forgiven" or we'll cave and make it interest free.

The lack of a fiscally conservative candidate in the coming election is truly maddening. This is why people don't vote. I'm thinking of writing myself in on the ballot in November.

‘lo all. In case you somehow managed to chew through my Sunday Feb 1 entry here’s a little update on the story.

Well, in case you didn’t make it Sunday, the People’s Republic of Wallonia (Belgian inbred frogeaters) granted Ryanair, in exchange for using its starving Charleroi airport the following:

• a 50% reduction in landing fees
• a 1EUR/passenger fee on ground handling assistance
• a 4 EUR/passenger fee to help Ryanair finance its advertising costs and ticket prices
• grants worth several (4?) millions of euros as start-up benefits

So now the European Commission has ruled that Ryanair has to repay up to 4 million euros of the support it got from PRW. Note that throughout Europe other cheap airliners are harming flag carriers and “serious” carriers with insanely low prices made possible through state-funding and that the Ryanair case may be a precedent for ending this kind of practices. Note too, that two other low fair companies, Bransons Virgin and Easyjet, who do not benefit from sugardaddies, carry banners on their planes with “no subsidies” on it. As it should be.

Now you guys, I guess the article on the EU’s Competition Branch suing Microsoft for the embedded Media Player probably got you shaking your heads again on the EU, and you know what? You’re probably right, in that case the EU's Competition Branch is likely overreacting. But the Ryanair case shows that it’s not all that bad, IMHO. There are worse things, e.g. spending on a Fruitcake Lab in Anchorage, heh heh. Or was it in Maine??? Memory is resembling an Emmenthaler cheese these days....

We've hit this one pretty hard here at DowneastBlog, but here's another look at the Bush administration's out of control spending policies.

We need to stop this insanity now, because this stuff won't go away once it gets passed. I've been hammering our Maine congressmen and senators over this. No replies yet, and no surprise either.

Here's Thomas Sowell with a look at special interests. I'm especially glad to see that Sowell points out the effect that exorbitant jury awards are having on the cost of health care.

Ironically, (unless you're a Democrat) John Edwards believes the cost of health care in America is too high, but spent the majority of his career making it that way as a trial lawyer.

I saw this on The Corner:

To All Kucinich Supporters: New York City Friends of Kucinich will be holding a group meditation and visualization for the Dennis Kucinich campaign. This will occur at 8:15pm on Wednesday, January 28th.

The intention of the meditation will be to create the energy pathways needed to give the Kucinich vision and everyone who aligns with that vision a voice in America and the World and to attract the prosperity and resources to do so.

At 8:15pm EST find a quiet space alone or in a group...Place your hands over your Heart Center and align your Heart and your Voice with the vision of the Kucinich campaign. Set an intention to reach out to others, especially possible supporters of the campaign. Spend five to ten minutes in this space. Close the meditation with a statement of gratitude.

If you are unable to participate at that exact time, then find a time as close as possible to 8:15pm that evening and set your intention to tune into the group, sending your thoughts and energy either forward or backward in time.

We hope as many people as possible can participate. Remember Dennis' belief in the interconnectedness of all living beings. So be it.

ok - that is it - I'll wait to hear back from ya...

peace and blessings,

Kim

Kim Brooks Wei
New Jersey Coordinator,
Kucinich for President
NJ website: www.njforkucinich

This is all I have to say to the Carolina Panthers.

On Kerry's post on the EU's Competition Branch's proposed fines on Microsoft:

I read it Kerry. I was actually unaware that this case was going on. I understand the EU Commission?s Competition Branch argues that because Windows supplies its OS with an embedded Media Player, software suppliers of other Media Players have trouble competing. So basically it?s the Microsoft Explorer/Netscape Navigator story again. Since that litigation battle was fought within the US I don?t think the EU?s Competition Branch can be criticized on its principal grounds to open up a similar case in the first place. But, since for as far as I know, and apparently Scott is of the same opinion, other Media Players have no problem operating under Windows. And so it looks to me that maybe the Competition Branch shot itself in the foot.

Even so, since I assume that this particular EU body has brighter minds on its payroll than your servant it might be interesting to hear their story on the compatibility issue. In short, I don?t think the EU?s Competition Branch in this matter acted no different from the US Justice Department a few years ago in the browser case ? but yes, it may be overreacting.

However, don?t throw away the child with the bathwater as they say over here. The EU Commission?s Competition Branch IS generally doing a good job. And honestly, when it?s mentioned in the newsreels over here it?s typically because it is scrutinizing some deal between a national government and a company where gross state-subsidies are involved: actually the Competition Branch is fighting these practices ? which are diametrically opposed to free market mechanisms, and which have been so common in Europe over the past decades.

Let me give you just one example: the Ryanair/Charleroi airport case. Ryanair is an Irish low cost carrier offering inter European flights at incredible prices; I think you could compare it with ValuJet in the US (does it still exist?). Anyway, they offer flights like Brussels/London for, say, 9.99 EUR (I kid you not!!!). Well, since 1997 they operate the airport at Charleroi, 45 minutes to the south of Brussels. Charleroi, a former industrial town which has one of the highest unemployment numbers (and crime rates) in the country, was so eager with the prospect of additional jobs that it sought the Wallonian Region?s support in persuading Ryanair to invest heavily in its underused airport. The Wallonian Region and BSCA (Brussels South Charleroi Airport) awarded Ryanair a 50% reduction in landing fees, a 1 EUR/passenger fee on ground-handling assistance, substantial (millions of euros) financial support in start-up benefits as well as 4 EUR support per passenger to reduce Ryanairs advertising costs and ticket prices?. A typical example of how socialist (communist?) Wallonia is running its business. For an excellent article on the subject click here.

And a somewhat more digestible article can be found over here.

Well now, the European Commission' CB is expected to announce its findings on the Ryanair/Charleroi deal on February 3.
If the Competition Branch has its way, Ryanair will have to repay at least part of the unlawful support from the Wallonian Region. Really, mostly the CB acts in favour of fair competition. I may keep you updated on the ruling.

For those of you with a fair share of time, find out more on similar 2003 cases here.


...........Tom, what kind of dictionary are you using? I checked out "BWEEEEUUUUUAAAAARRRRK" in my Dutch/English dictionary and in English it should read "BRROOOOOOOOOAAAAAAARROOOOOOOORRRK! Splash!!!"


To be fair, I thought another EU enormity would have caught your attention: namely, the EU Commission?s willingness to end the weapons embargo against China.

How ?bout that? Can I now quote Mr. F*cking Human Rights Champion Pr?sident Jacques Chirac, He Who Cared So Much For The Welfare Of The Iraqi People: "Respect for human rights is a necessary condition for the development of modern societies and economies. I know that this is one of your priorities." Adressing Hu Jingbao on hist state visit to France, a brightly red lit Eiffel Tower in hte background. Click here, if you please.

His conscience thus silenced, Mr. Chirac will now do his utmost best to weigh in on the European Parliament (read the CNN article: Parliament is opposed) to lift the arms sales ban come Spring. I must say that I was rather disappointed with President Bush?s harsh remarks against the Taiwanese government when President Chen Shui-bian suggested the referendum on independence and against hundreds of Chinese missiles pointed at the tiny island state. I guess that's what they call Realpolitik. This Chirac however bakes the cake brown? Never mind that the majority of Chinese is living in appaling conditions... HR are violated on an unsurpassed scale... the commie Chinese are violating virtually every accord made with the British on the existence of democracy in Hong Kong... I can now really understand your fears of a France-dominated EU. I can only hope the soon-to-be entry of 10 new member states will dilute France?s influence even further.

And now back to the Super Bowl! Have a nice Sunday yet!

I watched a re-run of David Kay's testimony before the Senate armed services committee on CSPAN yesterday. I came away very impressed with Kay and the manner in which he conducted himself. Of course, this hearing was just an opportunity for the senators to try and squeeze a soundbyte out of Kay to further their respective agendas. In the segment I watched, Kay deftly handled attempts from Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton to get him to repeat various anti-Bush mantras, without ever losing his composure. It was fun to watch a group of career politicians try to crack someone who was smart, confident, and apparently devoid of a political agenda. Kay is a scientist, so he lives in the world of facts. Since many of these senators aren't interested in facts, it was as if they couldn't even hear him when he repeatedly corrected their assertions. The attempts to shape his testimony were so impotent that it made me wish that there were more people like Kay representing us and fewer people like Kennedy and Clinton, who's intellects are so tied up in their own political agendas that they never get applied to solving the actual problems of society.

John Kerry had better get used to this sort of thing. He equivocates and triangulates on everything and it is going to come back in the form of a media induced ball-kicking.

Here is slightly rosier take on the NEA issue. While I am fundamentally opposed to government involvement in this arena, it looks as if the NEA is shaping up under current chairman Dana Gioia and pandering much less to the " repellent "transgressive" freaks" of the recent past.

Here's another point regarding the National Endowment for the Arts: I went to an art school back in the days where the NEA was under attack. There was much concern about this at the school and many students and faculty members were talking about an organized response. Their solution (never implemented) was to produce a show who's intention was to offend what they saw as traditional sensibilities. In other words, they wanted to shock, offend, and piss off the people who were looking to get rid of the NEA. Instead of creating a show that would prove the value of public funding for the arts, they wanted to show how impetuous and irresponsible they could be with taxpayer money, as if that would help their cause. While they were furious about the potential demise of the NEA, they also showed great contempt for the funding at the same time. Those who used NEA funding to produce work that didn't carry a controversial leftist political message were considered patsies for the Republicans.

On principle, I oppose the NEA because I do not believe it is the government's job to subsidize this sort of thing (I would be equally opposed if the money were going to a group of churches.) After seeing first hand the mindset of the potential recipients of this grant, I oppose it even more. People like Andres Serrano, who used NEA money to produce such juvenile works as "Piss Christ" (I refuse to link) are viewed as heroes by anti establishment artists, but if the NEA is abolished they will still blame conservatives. American citizens, no matter how ignorant or knowledgeable they are about the arts, deserve accountability when their money is being spent. Better to leave artists to their own affairs than to piss away money on Piss Christ.

Taking a break from the primaries...

Our man Walter Williams takes a look at the silly sweat shop paranoia that's so popular in liberal circles these days.

Of particular interest in this piece is the observation that minimum wage laws imposed on impoverished nations do a lot more harm to the "exploited" work force than the act of hiring them at a rate lower than the average western worker could ever hope to. Of course, minimum wage laws have the same effect in America and everywhere else.

Again we see the alleged compassion of the left exposed for what it is: Socialists (unions in particular) protecting themselves from Capitalist competition. Setting up price and wage controls is great for the short term interests of western workers who already have jobs, and for the politicians who are looking to buy their votes. Unfortunately, this tactic always harms those whom it is purported to protect, the unemployed and impoverished citizens of the world, who would gladly take a low paying job over no job at all. It also has the backlash effect of slowing economic growth, as corporations struggle against artificially high labor costs. Of course, this leads to the coddled western workers getting laid off. Once this happens, the left will scream for MORE protectionism, which is exactly what caused the problem in the first place.

Why Dennis Kucinich must be elected the next President of the United States. These are actual reasons for which people support "Dennis". I am NOT making this up:

She explained how it is important that the United States focus on helping the world's poor, such as keeping people in the Himalayas who have calluses on their feet from walking barefoot all the time.

"Our goal is to raise the issue of youth politics and music."

"I love Dennis because he shows me how we can have a world where I can be free to be who I am, I can feel safe, and everyone in the country can be safe and happy. Um, yeah."

"I feel the idea that you can defeat terrorism through war is absurd." Also, "I enjoy his ideas on medical insurance and education. They should be human rights."

Read the entire thing at NRO here.

I would pay Al Franken to try this with me. I'd go all ninja on him.

Scott,

Regarding David Kay, did you see this? I haven't heard anything in the mainstream press about the Syrian connection.

I saw David Kay interviewed on NBC this morning. I expected it to be a frustrating experience, but it was actually pretty encouraging. Kay pretty much put a bullet in this whole "Bush lied" hysteria, even going so far as to say that despite the lack of WMD's found in Iraq, the war was still a prudent undertaking. He brought up a point that I found to be very interesting. He said that from about 1998 on, Iraq was crumbling from within, and was unable to really do anything that required any organization. Saddam's scientists were taking money, but not producing the weapons Saddam wanted, although there were active weapons programs. Because of this lack of stability, terrorist organizations were taking notice, and beginning to infiltrate with the hopes of making off with whatever weapons technology they could find. Essentially, he proved there was an imminent threat and a link to terrorism, both points that are hotly contested by the left.

Another bonus was that Matt Lauer, not exactly a champion of the right, wasn't trying to spin Kay's statements at all. He actually was doing a lot to help Kay make his point. I still think the left will use the Kay report to try and hang Bush, but it looks like this one isn't going to have any legs.

Hold on to your wallets, folks. This piece points out that despite President Bush's current spending extravaganza, every single one of the current democratic candidates would increase the amount of federal spending even more.

While I find the current amount of spending truly appalling, at least the Republicans believe in a somewhat reasonable distribution of income taxation. These Democrats think they can pull this off while making the so called rich pay an even more disproportionate share of the load. Perhaps the Dems don't think they can achieve the popularity enjoyed by FDR until there is a full scale depression in place.

Oh what the Hell, just to be cantankerous and contrarian:

1) Dean

2) Kerry

3) Edwards

Well, I can't claim any New Hampshire residency, but both of my parents are New Hampshire natives, and I think Kerry is right about their political tendencies. Here's a few of my own predictions:

Kerry (John, not our beloved blogger) will win.

Lieberman will do poorly, and leave the race soon thereafter.

Clark will do poorly, and continue a slow slide into oblivion.

Dean will do ok, perhaps even squeaking out second place, but then join Clark on a slide into oblivion in the following primaries.

Sharpton and Kucinich will wait patiently in oblivion for Dean and Clark to arrive.

Edwards will do well enough to remain relevant, and will go on to a strong showing in the south, which will solidify his position as the most likely VP candidate.

Look for a Kerry/ Edwards ticket when all of this eventually shakes out.

The Patriots will win the Super Bowl. Tom Brady will stiff John Kerry on an endorsement.

Pom perompompom…pomperompompom…pomperompompom…. Actually it’s not so bad to be alone in the house…reminds me of those days when my folks and sisters had gone off and I was able to sniff in the oldest one’s drawers without fear of being detected…just had to make sure her stuff looked like untouched upon leaving the premises… She was just in full Duran Duran swing and I knew she kept some tutorial bookies for young girls with here and there a nice pic in it…ah….memories….


……………………………..(sigh)………………


…yup…am definitely feeling like I’m starring in Home Alone 5…but before the wackos try to break in…almost wished some hacker ‘d show up… just to break the monotony…


............................(checking comments section)......................


Uh-oh. Mark from Colorado wrote: "You're really spoiling for a fight, huh. I'm up for it if you are.". I would be very careful making such bold statements Mark. Extreeeemely careful. According to my old Rand McNally '93 Colorado has about 3,400,000 inhabitants and Maine some 1,300,000. Which means that Belgium with 10,300,000 is still outnumbering the two of you by more than two to one.


OK ok...after all you're not that bad Americanos. [RANT OFF].


I'm off till the end of the week to Florida! Booked an Air France flight to Miami. Will try do do the Keys too. So see you by Friday!

Kerry, Friday 23rd, 2004:

You have no idea how alike you and Tom are, are you certain that if we traced his family and yours that they don't intersect somewhere?


I might hope not.


Kerry, Friday 23rd, 2004, after packing sunglasses and protective cream:

PS, Hope those rough days are due to the quarterly filing, not family stuff.


It was the quarterly filing. Pfah! As if Mainers ever care!


CNN Weather, Friday 23rd, 2004:

"(AP) -- Arctic air was forecast to bring accumulations of 6 to 12 inches in the eastern Great Lakes, while an area of low pressure was expected to cause scattered snow showers in the Northeast. Wind chill values across were to plunge as low as minus 20."


Bar Harbor is in the Northeast isn’t it? Whoahahahahaha!!!!!


Michael, Friday 23rd, 2004

Mark from Colorado, how about inviting Christiane from Switzerland, Robert, Rachel and Arruda to the comments section?

…Sorry fellas and gals... have just been lurking lately... had some rough days... no time to post anything valuable... noticed though that Tom's best friend, the one with the French face, won in Iowa and that Dean went off not with a whimper but with a bang... Knew practically nothing about SOTU until I came upon it here... so whadda ya think was the reason those soldiers were looking less than happy? Were they sitting next to Hillary mayhaps?


…………(reading latest post)………….



[RANT ON] Oh yeah, sure. Tom, Kerry, Scott and wife off to the Richard Grason Inn in Bar Harbor until Monday “for some R&R which means plenty of discussion, but no blogging”! Sure. Leave me alone defending the West's values eh? Sounds pretty socialistic to me. Guess you’ll discuss the chef’s menu or have a fight over who’ll get the Ashley bedroom and who’ll sleep in the Melinda cave. Scott, I hope there’s more than one wall between the two. I heard Tom snores like an A 10 attacking a Republican Guard column. I suggest you drop him into the Tyler bedroom, although Kerry confided me he’s afraid alone in the dark. Kerry, you don’t really want to sleep in this Melinda thing, the color is giving me a migraine already. That “fully-equipped gourmet kitchen” REALLY SUCKS!!!! If you think the loser who runs the place is mentally half as stable as the Lion of Kosovo and can have a look at my site without succumbing to the Mother Of All Depressions then hand him the link to it, maybe guests will be able to have decent meals by the time LPB III is POTUS. “Spectacular view of Frenchman’s Bay”…”French doors lead from the Melinda Room…”. Who the hell came up with the idea of hiring this place anyway? I bet it’s Tom. For all his ranting on the French he doesn’t fool this one. Admit that you are a sly Frenchofile Tommy. What you gonna say now eh? C’est la vie?

“We leave the site in Michael's adept hands to use as he pleases.” Hah! You bet!!! In my country we have a saying: “When the cat is off the mice dance on the table.” Well, you asked for it yourself Kerry. You practically begged for it. Don’t start whining come Tuesday.


…………(seething)..........


Can't think properly anymore… Good night to all those living outside Maine... good night for me at least... in His Infinite Goodness The Lord hath wanted it that Belgium should be perpetually six hours ahead of Maine... not to speak of Colorado...


.............................................

Here's a great piece on the Patriot Act. Bookmark this one for future use against frothing civil libertarians.

The last passage is the most telling: "As for civil-liberties abuse, a useful measure of just how profoundly threatening the law is should be Section 223, the Patriot Act provision under which citizens can seek monetary damages if they are mistreated. To date, the number of lawsuits is zero."

Grand frère cracks down on the beard menace threatening France.

Maybe that's why they didn't back us in the war with Iraq. At the start of the war, Saddam just had a moustache.

Did I ever mention that the International Criminal Court sucks?

Well, there was nothing earth shattering in the SOTU address. Here's a few negatives:

Ted Kennedy getting air time.

Ted Kennedy getting air time fondling his ample jowls.

A $300,000,000 "initiative" (nice call, Kerry) to help people leaving prison to get training, etc. to re-enter the work force and not be repeat offenders. In other words let's reward criminals with money taken from people who obey the laws. I can't tell you how pleased I am at the thought of my hard earned money going to assist the guy who broke into my house last year. I wonder if I can get in on some of this training should I fall on tough times. Probably not without committing a crime first. Here's what I propose for ex-cons: You let them out of jail at the end of their sentence. That one is free.

Some of the most sorry military personnel ever (again, nice call Kerry). Those who had a pulse couldn't even be bothered to pay attention. Must have been Wes Clark's old staff.

"Limiting spending increases to less than 4%." What a miser! This counts as cost cutting in Washington.

John Kerry referring to the economic recovery as a "Wall Street Bush League recovery" in an interview after the speech. What a wordsmith. I'm not sure I'll be able to take much more of his tall, twisted head.

About 15 other new ways to piss away taxpayer money on things the government should have nothing to do with.

On a positive note, here are a few good things from the SOTU:

As Kerry said, Bush really set the Dems up with that Patriot Act line. How long are these people going to continue to think he is stupid?

Many important Democrats looking classless, petulant, and unprofessional on camera. I know; what's new?

A strong denunciation of socialized medicine. Bush showed some good backbone here. Looks like we're going to avoid the biggest disaster of modern government for a few more years.

Another mispronunciation of "nuclear". I'm glad the pres is holding his ground on this important issue.

Well that's all I can remember. It will be fun to watch the Democratic candidates fall all over themselves trying to out critique each other tomorrow.

This is good news. "Arab fighters die in gun battle after Iraqis inform on them"

Keep this this in mind as the Democratic candidates hammer Bush on the budget deficit.

Jose Maria Aznar strikes me as exactly the type of person I wish there were more of in the EU. The linked interview is interesting, Aznar impressed me during the events leading up to the late unpleasantness in Iraq, I'm sorry to see he is stepping down.

Michael, any comments or impressions?

Mark, you wrote:

"Now I have to hear Michael's comments about the EU trade agreement with Syria. I thought France had 1 vote in the EU, not 15! How did Italy and Spain vote on this?"

Mark, since I have to get my quarterly VAT Declaration prepared and ready by tomorrow (otherwise I will get shot by the BFP, Belgian Fiscal Police), I must and will try to keep this entry short and precise.

Well, the mere fact that this EU-Syria Association Agreement has been reached – may I remind you, after five years – is just an illustration of the vast difference in policy between EU and USA, while both have basically the same goals. As you will find out here, the Association Agreement implies a.o. measures to guarantee basic human rights as well as enhancing free trade and liberalizing the Syrian economy, which is very much state-controlled. I don’t seriously think the US will be opposed to these goals.

The EU hopes to achieve them through embracing and kissing the Syrian government all over; the USA plays hardball to make them do it. It’s just a matter of policy but both America and the US have the same goals – Iraq all over again.

Now, being a rightwinger myself – btw, Mark, that was quite some confession from Lee C., Scott (not the one from Maine, that one from Oregon), CVS etc. yesterday on Omar’s blog - I generally have no problem denouncing the EU’s all too often “soft” approach. I, too, think that a much more straightforward course would yield better results. In this particular case, however, you have to understand that the talks were already well underway long before 9/11, in a time when the US itself was not yet up to go for it the Iraq way. 9/11 happened, but it happened in the US, and because of that the idea of pre-emptive strikes (Afghanistan, Iraq) and ballsy politics became acceptable for (the majority of) Americans. Through inertia and European complacence and, yeah, because the softies content is higher over here, Europe is not yet ready for the American way (it might change when an Airbus crashes in the Eiffeltower, God forbid). And that’s why after 9/11 these talks just continued with an Agreement now having been reached. We’ll see what comes out of it, but indeed, I’m not holding my breath.

You’ll like to hear it when I say that I expect more from the events in Iraq for Syria to change than from the EU’s Association Agreement. In a weird way both the EU’s and the USA’s moves don’t even have to be counterproductive in this particular case. You know, those Syrians sweating with 130,000 GI’s in their backyard but, nervously, not exactly knowing how to put oil on the waves without losing their face and then, miraculously, hey, there’s just in time this nice framework for political and economical reforms offered by the Europeans!

Well, on the voting system as agreed upon under the 2002 Nice Agreement, I’ll have to refer you to my earlier post. Don't fall asleep behind the keyboard.

I think the issue had to be agreed upon by the Council of Ministers through Unanimity Voting. Since it passed, all member states must have agreed. Note, however, the scheme you get presented under the link is the one envisaged for the 25-member EU due in May. Unanimity thing was already in place I guess.

One last note: thank you Tom for not so long ago recognizing the rationale behind the EU. The EU is not there because of leftists. If Europes politicians would have the same grit as their American counterparts (well… except for this particular Vermont variety - and you know I don’t mean Bremer), there would be a EU just as well. The vehicle is good. The driver could be better.

So much for being short. Hope at least it was precise.

Will the madness never end?

Someone's ability to discern right from wrong is just a wee bit hosed up.

I quote:

"To applaud the US army's capture of Saddam Hussein and therefore justify its invasion and occupation of Iraq is like deifying Jack the Ripper for disembowelling the Boston Strangler."

This is a picture a friend of ours took the other day down at Mere Point in Brunswick. It is a cold weather phenomenon known as sea smoke.



Click on the image above to see a larger picture.

This story supposedly documents American National Security Agency "corruption". The only problem is that when you read the story you find that there is nothing there. Much ado about nothing.

Hat tip to Moxie loving Andrew Stuttaford over at the NRO Corner

Michael, this is exactly why I do not like John Kerry and do not want him as my next president.

"Kerry, for example, now attacks President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq, under a resolution the senator supported. He laces into No Child Left Behind, an education plan the senator backed. And he vows to modify the effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which the senator helped enact."

Honestly, I think Clark is the worst of the lot now; he is a bald-faced liar. Dean is a flake and the things he preaches today don't square with the way he ran Vermont (quite a bit to the right of garbage he spews these days).

I thought I was the only one who felt this way about the Olympics.

Mark, you wrote:

"What is it with this "European Union" idea? I understand why European nations would want to have "free-trade" agreements with each other and other friendly arrangements. But, why did they think a single currency was a good idea? Unlike the United States, the European countries have distinct national histories, languages and cultures. You can't just wrap them up together and say "EU." Am I wrong?"


Mark, in short: after the steel and coal industries of core European states integrated, the necessity and benefits of free movement of capital, persons, services and goods was recognized. This was realized during the fifties and sixties. I'll skip the political developments, too long to elaborate here. During the seventies it was realized that in addition to the free movement of capital etc... a single currency was the natural addition to the set of measures, because of:

*elimination of the high transaction costs during valuta changings
*ending the uncertainty inherent with unstable exchange rates
*easy price comparing for citizens of EU states travelling within the EU
*a more efficient common market, thus creating additional jobs

There's even an international benefit: the euro strengthens the international monetary stability.

As a matter of fact, indeed, because of the strong national identities you can't just wrap us together and label us "EU". The whole process started with an idea of Robert Shuman in the early fifties and right now we have arrived at the point where an EU "government", the Commission/Council of Ministers and a EU "House of Representatives", the European Parliament, are consolidating their hold on a lot of events normally considered the realm of the separate states. When wil this process end? I don't know, possibly when the EU will have become something like the USA and will then be called the USE, say in 30 years or something. So it's really not "just", if it's gonna go this way the whole thing will have lasted 80 years.

Now Mark, I'm fully aware of the tremendous costs and financial abuses inherent to this process, as Tom, Scott and Kerry repeatedly regularly point out, justified even. I have never doubted that it will be, and has been, a "long, hard slog". But as a European, I'm willing to live with that. I am FOR the Union, I'm just AGAINST it being led mostly by leftists.

Consider the following situation: if leaders like Washington and Madison had not recognized at a very early stage that a Union of the then 13 states was necessary, where would you be now? What we now know as the USA would be an amalgam of some 50 republics, each with their petty policies and sensitivities, perhaps (certainly?) warring each other from time to time. Texas dollars being stronger currencies than, say, Maine dollars or even worse, Colorado dollars (heh heh). A unified and common Foreign Policy? Forget it. California, Texas, New Mexico, Florida et al want to intervene in WWI in Europe but Wyoming, Kansas, Missouri etc. don't want to... sheesh what a mess...

If you feel uneasy about a stronger EU here's some consolating viewpoint: just as we in Europe were beneficiaries from the US's Federalism (during WWI and WWII), so the US might be someday in the future, be glad to have us, your ancestors, as a powerful ally.

I believe that in 30-50 years the world might well be divided in five or six powerful blocs. China, very likely a Latino-American bloc (there's already the Mercosur like our ECCS in the 50's), India, furthermore maybe a bloc around Japan, I read Japan has aspirations to lead something like the EU, Russia and allies... and USA/USE, unlike the others with common roots and values. I said it before, I see us more like future partners than like adversaries.

Btw, CONGRATS with your blog! Will try to hop in from time to time and leave some comments. See you at the Iraqis too.

Now this is art.

I'll accept all of your apologies for disagreeing with me now.

P.S. What's up with Elvis getting the halo? Jesus looks envious.

Hey Michael, does this mean that the Belgian who becomes EU president next will have a Belgacom or Delhaize logo on the back of his suitcoat?

Michael,

You're absolutely right about the motivations behind this exhibit, and I am as disgusted as you are with these people and their cause. It's probably a distraction for us to be debating what art is and isn't here, as this topic has been kicked around for ages and to my knowledge there is not a satisfactory answer. The apparent aim of Tom's original post was to point out the lunacy of the exhibit, and my reply probably got us a bit off track.

The basic point is this: The content of a piece of art cannot disqualify it as art, no matter how offensive and ill intentioned it may be. There is a famous quote regarding art who's author's name escapes me that goes like this: "There is no such thing as bad content, only bad form. This explains the place of form in art." I believe this applies here.

The rise of antisemitism in Europe is indeed frightening, and should be opposed at every opportunity. But what would we all say if a gallery in New York denied the display of artwork glorifying the creation of Israel on the basis that it was too offensive and ill intentioned to be considered art?

Tom, I’m on your side on this. Under other circumstances I would agree with Scott, underwriting his assessment that it is “art”, albeit really bad, crappy art. Being a European and given the fact the exhibition took place in an EU country I feel compelled however to put the whole thing in context.

The context is this:

*Last summer the Mayor of Rotterdam, The Netherlands, had to intervene personally in the case of the so-called “Black Schools”, where the majority of students are young immigrants, mostly Moroccans. In several schools the pupils made it impossible that history lessons on the Holocaust were given, wreaking havoc in the classrooms and shouting slogans like “Joden, die moet je doden” (“Jews, those you have to kill”). The case was brought to attention by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a 33-year old MP of Somalian origin and former Muslim. Check out this link. It's in Dutch but you'll get the meaning.

*There’s a Europeanwide phenomenon of anti-Semitism on the rise, with, e.g., threatening of prominent Jews and desecration of Jewish graves. If you got the time, take a look here.

*Past autumn German Press was for some weeks in turmoil over the forced resignation from his party by Christian-Democratic MP Martin Hohmann, whose bold remarks accused the Jews of being a people of perpetrators, citing that millions of Russians died in the early twenties in a Revolution orchestrated by Jews. A symphatizing Bundeswehr Special Forces General, Gunzel, was also force to resign. Read the story at Time. Believe me, a lot think like Hohmann and Gunzel but speak not out (yet).

*Gretta Duisenberg, the wife of former European Central Bank President Wim Duisenberg, made a lot of press the past years for her biased stance in the Palestinian issue, always glorifying the suicide bombers and accusing the IDF of terrorist behaviour in the Occupied Territories, and even going so far as hanging a Palestinian flag from her house. Btw, there's a strange side-story on this lady, do a Google for former CIA-agent Philip Agee.

*On Dec 5th, 2001, Brussels Head Rabbi Albert Guigui, was beaten and spit in the face in a Brussels metro station by a group of youngsters of North-African origin.

*etc. etc etc...

Believe me, it's just the tip of the Iceberg.

The bottomline is, in Europe as a whole there’s a frightening rise in Antisemitism, more often than not thinly veiled as anti-Israelism. One can rightly criticize the IDF’s actions in the West Bank and Gaza as being harsh and humiliating to the Palestinians, although when history will pass its judgement the Israelis’ actions will become – are already – quite understandable. The point is that in Europe hatred against Israel for its policy is being used as a vehicle to commit Europes ages-old disease: Anti-Semitism.

And that’s where this so-called “art exhibition” comes in the picture. What's embarrassing me is not so much that the "work" was from Jews themselves – I frown upon and consider as a nutcase many a modern artist - but the fact that such a distasteful thing was organized in a European country which praises itself for its religious tolerance. Exhibiting crap like this fake bloodpool is just another sickening example of "Political Correctness". Glorifying wackos blowing innocent civilians up is good. But don't try to make a hush about a burnt Paris synagogue. It has NOTHING to do with art. Not even with bad art.

Tom,

Regarding the Swedish art exhibit, I have to disagree with you. Like it or not, this is art, even if it is silly, pretentious art based solely on shock value, which anyone who knows anything about art knows is the easiest and least sophisticated way to express an idea. This is why we see so many images created by political artists with Bush depicted as Hitler. It's hopelessly easy, shocking, (at least is still is to some) and juvenile, and doesn't speak to anyone other than those already living on the same fringe as the artist.

This is how I judge all political art: If the work cannot convince anyone of its intended message beyond those who already hold the same belief as the artist, then it is a silly rant and deserves no more attention than the temper tantrum of a child. Unfortunately, the political art scene seems to be a catch all for talentless people who feel that a shocking, shallow message wrapped up in leftover childhood angst is enough to qualify their work. I mean really, when was the last time you saw a beautiful piece of political art?

Unfortunately, all this crap is still art; it's just really bad art. The Israeli ambassador made a big mistake by making such a scene. He would have been much better off ignoring the piece, or dismissing it quietly for the waste of matter that it is. The creator of that piece is now getting entirely more attention than he deserves.

I want to have about 6 more kids, buy another huge SUV, and move to the Bay area just to piss these people off.

This kind of crap is not art. What the hell is the Museum of National Antiquities doing displaying it. I'd probably have done more damage than the Israeli ambassador.

Interesting article (USERNAME: downeastblog@gwi.net; PASSWORD: downeastblog) on past judicial recess appointments (of which there have been more than 300).

"Some of the more famous cases include Earl Warren's 1953 appointment by President Eisenhower to be chief justice of the United States and Thurgood Marshall's 1961 appointment by President Kennedy to the 2nd District Court of Appeals."

Hat tip to NRO's Corner.

Nice culture.

"Reem Raiyshi a mother of two from Gaza...was named as the woman who blew herself up Wednesday at the major crossing point between Israel and the Gaza Strip, killing at least four Israelis and wounding seven others."(Emphasis mine)

I'm sure that her children's lives have been improved by her actions. I'm also sure that somehow it is George Bush's fault that these people are ignorant, murderous, barbaric savages, But you already knew this.

Christ, and I thought Lieberman was a moderate, not a stinkin' commie. He's not fooling Kim though.

O.K. The real reason I posted this link is because Mr. Du Toit says "a first class ball-kicking" which makes me laugh. But he does make a good point about Lieberman as well. The entire Democratic lineup is definitely rather underwhelming.

The most foul and foreign French.

French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie says her government is willing to help train Iraq's police and military but rules out sending French troops there.

.

Huh? Maybe they are planning on setting up an online training class.

Interesting story by a liberal assailing some of the anti-globalization idiocy that seems to be trendy these days.

"Perhaps the candidates are simply pandering to unions, or bashing President Bush. But my guess is that they sincerely believe that such trade policies would help poor people abroad — and that's why they should all traipse through a Cambodian garbage dump to see how economically naïve these schemes would be."

As usual, the motivations behind these "moral" stands are not thought through. Something similar is going on with genetically modified foods. Millions in Africa are starving because their leaders will not accept food from the U.S. because it is "genetically modified" and therefore European nations (EU?) will not deal with them or fear of "contaminating" their crops.

But it just "feels good". Yeah. Tell that to a Cambodian scavenging a garbage dump.

Good.

"Toronto-area Muslim leaders say thousands from their community are boycotting travel to the U.S. in their trek to Mecca this month..."

Hat tip to NRO's Corner.

Goddamnit. This sort of thing is becoming all too common. I don't care what your opinion on the death penalty is, the encroachment of "international law" into the U.S. legal system is a very disturbing trend.

I almost threw up when I read this: "Prime Minister Jean-Claude Raffarin and conservative government have pledged to cut value added tax (VAT) on sit-down restaurant meals to 5.5 percent from the standard 19.6 percent." (Emphasis most definitely mine)

And France has to ask the EU's permission to lower its own meal tax?! Michael, you most assuredly mad Belgian, are you sure you support this whole EU thingy? I'll be glad to send you an application for U.S. citizenship.

I'm very happy that President bush has nominated Charles Pickering to the federal appeals court. While it it is only effective until the next congress takes office in January 2005, the president effectively took charge of this ridiculous situation and made the first move. I'm not sure what the Dems are thinking but all of this delaying and refusal to do their jobs has to be turning off some of their own constituency.

George Will takes a very insightful look at the concept of the nation state and how it relates to current world affairs. The forming of the EU and the attempt by the US to create democracy in Iraq are not treated kindly here. This is a long read, but well worth it. Will proves here that he is one of the top political commentators around, if just a bit long winded.

Ayatollah Sistani seems to be threatening trouble. I think this would be very short sighted approach to shaping the future government of Iraq. First, with this much clerical interference, Iraq is well on its way to being as successful as Iran or Saudi Arabia (which are on their way out). Secondly, (and perhaps the reason he insists on immediate, direct, nation-wide elections) if things play out according to Sistani's wishes the Kurds and Sunnis are going to be slightly under represented. Thirdly, I am not sure the Iraqis will really cotton to theocratic rule. For all of Saddam's negatives, religion was not shoved down the people's throats and women had more freedom than in most of the Middle East.

So Sistani, we in the West have hundreds of years worth of experience in democracy, you have hmmmmm, oh yeah, NONE. Shut up and learn something.

This story makes my gun-toting inner-child feel all warm and squishy. Common sense, and in L.A. of all places!

P.S. I'd be glad to oblige anyone who asked me to use my banana "in a happier way." My guess is that it would only be happier for me.

This is the sort of attitude that would frighten me as a European. Particularly this line:"The Brussels-based commission is currently considering whether to mandate the smoking ban Europe-wide, or give each state the freedom to decide whether, and to what extent, to ban smoking in public." (emphasis added). This shouldn't even be up for discussion, of course each state should have the freedom to decide.

Amazing. I actually agree with the French on affirmative action. I particularly like the line: "Affirmative action has traditionally been seen as an ill-conceived American invention that celebrates differences and encourages divisions." Amen to that brother.

Sigh. The "Lion of Kosovo" unimpressive as ever. Oh look! Here's the actual statement.

Regarding immigration policy depending on nationality, I tend to agree with Scott. Part of our problem these days is that we've offered our nation up as a sort of huge, milk laden teat for all the world to suckle. Back when our immigration policies actually made sense (ie. we were discriminating in who we admitted and denied) it made sense to grant asylum to Cubans who were fleeing a ruthless, totalitarian regime. The difference was they were looking to escape their situation, our social services were not beckoning them to latch on to a big ol' nipple. Also, these people for the most part planned on returning to their nations someday, once their totalitarian governments were overthrown.

Alas, today the picture is a bit different (Thank you Senator Kennedy and the 1965 Immigration Reform Act). People from oppressed nations can tug at our heartstrings claiming to be fleeing oppression when they really just want the freebies the American taxpayer provides.

I believe that particularly since September 11th, 2001 we need to make drastic changes to our immigration laws. An amnesty for illegals, pardon me "undocumented workers" is not the answer. We can find Americans to perform the menial labor that these people currently do (See this article by Kate O'Beirne at NRO) by removing (my preference) or otherwise heavily gutting our national social services so the people living on these services will have an incentive to work. This would also dampen the zeal of those from around the world who flock to our nation for a handout.

(RANT ON) I know, I'm a heartless, conservative bastard. It's called pragmatism, and while it may not make your inner child (gag) all warm and fuzzy it will allow you clowns to remain in your little syrupy, utopian dreamworld because we'll still have a United States of America. If we had things your way and lived in our little collectivist commune and Read Marx out loud as we played our bongo drums, guess what? You guys would be the first one complaining because of the totalitarian way things were shaping up, AND you guys would be the first ones shot into the shallow graves you'd just dug yourselves.

So yes, you soft-hearted, softer-headed, "can't we all just get along?", group-hug types should be thanking the likes of me. And you're welcome! (RANT OFF)

What the hell is the matter with President Bush? This new initiative to promote marriage is egregious on two fronts. First fiscally, we need to be cutting spending. I'm not talking about the federal government's interpretation of cutting, ie. increasing the annual buget by only 6% instead of 7%. No, I'm talking about cutting millions and millions and millions from the budget. This initiative is right up there with the National Preschool Anger Management Project (I am not making this up, scroll down a bit). We need a sea change in the attitudes of our representatives when it comes to spending money. They need a firm budget amount each year and then have to work everything in under that number instead of just piling the pork on without even a thought as to how it will be paid for.

Second, the government should have no purview here whatsoever. This includes the courts forcing gay marriage on states, decreeing no fault divorce, etc,. Apparently "Compassionate Conservative" means free-spending, big government, and now - Dating Service!

Regarding immigration, one thing is for sure: Our policy has to remain the same regardless of one's nationality. I don't mind discrimination when it comes to immigrants, as long as it's based on things like potential employment, financial status, criminal record, etc. Essentially, all things that can lead to a person damaging our system rather than improving it. (I'm sure the PC weenies are loving that.) Political fashion has no place in deciding who gets in and out of the country.

The fact that we border an impoverished nation is irrelevant. We need to do what's best for us. We have no obligation to any other nation when it comes to securing our borders, unless those other nations would like to start paying taxes into our system. If you look at the history of Mexico, they had as much opportunity to get things right as the U.S. did, but they squandered the opportunity. It reminds me of the bleeding hearts that were wailing when we invaded Afghanistan, whining that these poor, peaceful people have been overrun by countless armies over the centuries, and we're just the latest invader to come and beat up on them. At what point are these people responsible for their own problems? Is it somehow our fault that nations like Afghanistan, despite being around much longer than the US, can't seem to get it right? Of course not.

I'm for helping out Mexico insofar as it helps the US, and no farther. Beyond that, it's just another handout that will come back to haunt us.

Kerry,

I think the Bush marriage initiative is a crock. As many others have already outlined, the government has no business meddling with marriage, period. I also believe that the premise that marriage encourages fiscal responsibility and productivity is highly suspect. The statistics suggest that people who are married are generally more financially stable and create more stable environments for children, etc. I don't dispute this. What I do question is the cause and effect implied here, as if marriage itself magically makes people more responsible and more productive, and therefore less likely to live in poverty. It seems like a classic case of letting the policy drive the data rather than the other way around. It is just as likely that people who are predisposed to marriage are naturally more responsible and productive people to begin with, which means that promoting marriage (which would likely be ineffective anyway) would do nothing to reduce poverty or increase productivity. Of course, this is only one of several potential misinterpretations of this data. It is like saying that children who listen to classical music at home score higher on standardized tests, therefore classical music makes children smarter. It is also possible that parents who expose children to classical music are generally smarter or more involved in their children's education than those who don't, which would explain the higher test scores.

No matter what you believe about marriage, I'm sure most sane people can agree that the Bush administration needs to start talking about ways to spend less money, not more. Enough already.

This sounds rather ominous.

Hey Mainers! I know this is just from Cable Nuts Network but it's therefore not less relevant!!!

So when GWB steps down in 2008 will you send him over here? Cleaning up Belgian mess would be a nice old man's pastime.

It looks like the whole Paul O'Neill thing is fading quickly. With the government now investigating him, he made an appearance on NBC's Today show this morning, and was seriously backpedaling on many of the statements in his book. He asserted that the whole thing about Bush planning for war with Iraq before 9/11 has been spun by the media, and that he thought this was a responsible move by the Bush administration. I haven't read O'Neill's book (like I'm going to buy that), but it its believable that the desperate left would seize upon any scrap of evidence that could be used against Bush, whether it has substance or not. O'Neill also said he would "probably" vote for President Bush in the next election.

We all know that this guy was a lousy Secretary of the Treasury. It seems plausible that his statements weren't all that bad, and the left is simply running with them because that's all they have. It also seems plausible that he's a weenie and doesn't have the backbone to stand by his statements. Either way, this is shaping up to be a non starter.

Put this one into the vast "evaporated hopes of the left" file.

This comment on Tim Blair's site pretty much sums it up:

Look, Howard Dean's head is shaped like a thumb. Or, a big-toe.

I simply can't hear the voice of someone whose head is shaped like a digit, or a pied.

His head isn't a real man's head, it's a cartoonist's head. Maybe that's what makes him so mad .......... his head looks like a toe.

Hat tip to Jeff Jarvis.

Thomas Friedman has a very interesting Op-Ed piece (requires registration) regarding the upcoming decision whether to admit Turkey to the EU or not. While I don't necessarily agree with all of his suggestions (such as the U.S. subsidizing the E.U.), I think a lot more hinges on this decision than economics alone.

This from The American Spectator:

What former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and other Bush administration blabbermouths failed to mention when leaking NSC documents and the like for the forthcoming book O'Neill worked on, is that the Clinton administration had many of the same documents prepared laying out plans for a Iraq post-invasion Iraq.

"We had the same stuff," says a former senior Clinton Administration aide who worked at the Pentagon. "It would have been irresponsible not to have such planning. We had all kinds of briefing material ready should the president have decided to move on Iraq. In fact, a lot of the material we had prepared was material that the previous Bush administration had left for us. It just isn't that big a deal. Or shouldn't be."

Exactly. It isn't that big a deal, especially considering the source. I believe Mr. O'Neill spent a large chunk of his time in office touring Africa with rock star "Bono".

Michael,

Thanks again for "EU 101". You pointed out a lot of things that I was not aware of.

As Kerry points out, this all seems like a recipe for a massive, lethargic bureaucracy, but we can't claim to be immune to that on this side of the pond, either. I still feel that the much greater cultural differences within the EU versus those within the U.S. will make it that much harder to get anything truly productive done. Here's to hoping that both the U.S. and the EU someday figure out that less is more when it comes to government.

The left's position against Bush on the war in Iraq is going to start looking even more like a house of cards if this turns out to be true. The anti-war left is so committed to the theory that Bush lied about WMD's that if these shells turn out to contain chemical weapons, they may as well forfeit in 2004.

Just for grins, here's some potential responses from the left if the above story turns out to be true:

A few artillery shells with chemical agents don't count as WMD.

Sure we found WMD's, but how come Danish soldiers could find them and American soldiers couldn't? We need a full scale investigation.

Since the shells have been buried for at least 10 years, then it's possible they were buried before the first UN resolution banning them, which makes them only "sort of" illegal.

Bush Sr. had the weapons planted back in the first gulf war, knowing that his son would invade Iraq 12 years later, find the weapons, and fulfill their evil Illuminati plot.

These things have been sitting in a swamp for 10 years, how dangerous could they be, anyway?

Ok, so there's chemical weapons in Iraq, but where's the evidence of Saddam's nuclear program? Bush still lied!

Bush knew about the chemical weapons from the beginning and waited until an election year to reveal them for his own political gain. Wait, that would mean that he wasn't lying. Never mind.

Hi you all. Kerry, I promised you to pick up the thread on your Dec. 31 questions and here it is. Permit me to quote you:

“Michael, upon re reading the agreement, it says that unanimity (one country blocking is enough) is reserved for among other things foreign policy and defense. This caused some interesting feelings, my first was, "oh no worries, they'll NEVER get anything done that way"--then it hit me, "OH NO, that's exactly it!". If there were an event such as Iraq, in this layout, it would take only ONE state (France, say?) to say "Mais non, les Americains, malheureusement, je regret...." well you get the picture. One state could block help from the entire of Europe under auspices of "defense" or foreign policy.”

Well, this was the bottomline of your worries. It shows that you have been reading the resume on an earlier posted link quite well. Before addressing your topic, allow me to elaborate:

The EU’s “government” consists basically of two parts, namely:

a.) THE COMMISSION
For those people remotely aware of the EU’s functioning this is the part of the executive body that mostly shows up in newsreels. From May 2004 on, there will be 25 commissioners (ministers), one for each country. I don’t know yet if and how their terms will be affected by the enlargement but until now each commissioner served a four-year term and one of them is President. Right now this chap is Romani Prodi, a Centre-Left former Italian PM with a good record. Well, until now and in order to not complicate things too much for you Americanos, I said that this Commission was the EU’s government. Hmmm, that’s not exactly the whole truth. Let us rather say that the entire executing body is comprised of, indeed, this Commission, AND the so-called Council of Ministers (see b.). Not gonna make this post top-heavy and indigestible, if you want to know more about a.) check this out.


b.) THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS
Well, this Council of Ministers, the part of the EU’s executive body that’s less often in the spotlights, has the final say on legislation. Unlike the Commission, membership is fluid, with each government mandating an appropriate minister depending on the subject to be treated. E.g. the issue is border control, then the Foreign Ministers form the Council.

The presidency of this Council of Ministers rotates among the member states with each state being “Council Host” for a 6-month period. Want to check out more about this, click here.

And another good link on the Council is this.


Have I got you this far? Unbelievable. Take a cigar.

Now, if you want to get the final clue hold on for a sec. Are you puzzled by the appearance of Berlusconi suddenly popping up last summer as “head of the EU” but don’t you know how his function relates to Prodi’s? And now Berlusconi has been succeeded by the slightly less colourful Bertie Ahern, Ireland’s Taoiseach (gaelic for PM) but his fella Prodi is still around??? How come???

Well, it’s all about the EU’s governing body being made up of the Commission on the one hand and the Council of Ministers on the other hand. It’s really not that strange, compare it with a Board of Directors and an Executive Committee if you want. The Commission handles the day-to-day business but the Council prepares and takes the strategic decisions. So Prodi who is President of the Commission just serves out his four-year term, Ahern on the other hand is President of the Council and will be replaced again in six months. Prodi does the shopping and cooking, Ahern plans installing a new kitchen (ahem ahem).

Now that I assume that you got the stuff above locked and loaded, let me elaborate again on Kerry’s concerns. As said, it’s the Council of Ministers which has the final vote on strategic issues and for that the following voting system was put in place (on the 2002 Nice Summit):

a.) UNANIMITY is required among the Council’s Ministers for, yes, the key matters defence, foreign policy, all kinds of taxation, culture, education, health, border control etc… And indeed Kerry, if ONLY ONE of the 25 member states opposes a decision this decision cannot pass!

b.)QUALIFIED MAJORITY VOTING, the two formulas are:

* Decisions taken on a proposal of the Commission (e.g. the internal market):

From May 2004 (25 member states): require 255 votes of the 342 PLUS must be approved by simple majority of the member states (one country = one vote, in this case 13!)

• Decisions taken in all other cases:
Require 255 votes of the 342 PLUS at least two-thirds of the member states (in this case 17).


Well Kerry, in a way you are right with you concerns. On really important matters France’s vote can block any decision even if all 24 others are in favour of it. Truth to tell, I’ve been worrying too because it indeed does not bode too well for when gut-requiring issues are at stake. On the other hand we should not be too pessimistic. After all, the EU’s Council of Ministers is a democratic entity, with envoys from democratic countries. Any decision-making is ultimately subject to the approval of European citizenry. On that we must stake our hopes for reason and sound judgment ruling the EU’s decision-making. This is not some kind of process like the UN’s Security Council voting system you know, where – let’s call a spade a spade – a dictatorship like China, or an increasingly pro forma democratic Russia can block all the goodwill on the Earth. You can be quite sure that when France is too stubborn on any given subject there’s going to be a lot of talking and negotiating behind the scenes. And contrary to the UN, the EU’s countries’ economies are getting so intertwined there’s plenty of room for bargaining, so that if again France would refuse to bend, it has to reckon that e.g. other countries won’t be that indulgent when at a next meeting Frances interests would be more directly involved.

Hmmmm, think I will post somewhat on the EU Parliament and its judiciary, then something on the EU’s military plans and then it’s time for some other stuff. Your servant, Michael.

I guess the "Lion of Kosovo" can make claims like this when he hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of being elected. What a fool.

And now David Limbaugh with a counterpoint on the immigration plan...

Here's a piece in the Wall Street Journal defending Bush's immigration plan. There are a few details here that I had not heard yet, such as the fact that current illegal residents would have to pay a fine to qualify for their work visa, and they would also have to prove that they have employment. There also seems to be no plans to make this 3 year work visa a stepping stone to citizenship.

While I'm not ready to jump on board by any means, this article doesn't make the plan sound quite so horrible. What I'd like to see detailed are the specific plans to crack down on the flow of additional illegal immigrants once this is passed. So far that has only gotten some lip service, and in my opinion it's the most important part of the proposal.

Kerry,

I'm not sure I buy Jarvis' viewpoint on Bush's immigration proposal. Outsourcing certainly does send money, and to some extent, jobs, outside our borders, but there is more to the equation than merely keeping the jobs here. All of those new immigrant workers are going to be eligible for benefits, which cost the American taxpayer money. If the majority of these workers are working at payscales below what most Americans would accept, as seems to be the plan, then it is likely that they will be taking more from the public treasury than they put in. There are a lot of complex variables involved here, and it's nearly impossible to predict the outcome of such a move. As the Germans discovered, you can wake up in a recession with a massive population of immigrants collecting far more benefits than they are putting into the system.

I was watching O'Reilly last night, and Dick Morris had an interesting observation about Mexican immigration. He pointed out that over the last several years no states have gone from being Democratic states to Republican states. However, several states (I can't recall which ones) have gone from being Republican states to Democratic ones. The reason? The states that switched from Republican to Democrat received enough Mexican immigrants to tip the scales in favor of the Democrats. This points out one of the potential unintended consequences of Bush's immigration policy. While I'm not against immigration as a concept, and I don't have anything against Mexicans, I do worry about allowing a large population of people into this country who are likely going to vote for more and more benefits for themselves out of the public treasury. While Bush is counting on the Hispanic vote in 2004 with this move, we may see the massive influx of Mexican "guest workers" mysteriously become citizens, and then say "thanks for letting us in, but we're voting Democratic anyway."

Ideally, I believe in the concept of open borders. Two things keep me from supporting that concept in our current environment: First, our current welfare state makes it so that immigrants can move here and live of the American taxpayer instead of adding to the economy. Second, the war on terror has made open borders a near suicidal policy for the US. Without the fear of terrorism, we could get rid of our social welfare system, abolish the minimum wage and other regulatory policies, and open the borders. The result would be a booming economy open to anyone who wants to come here to work. Unfortunately, al Qaida and the American left (and now the right) has seen to it that this system will never see the light of day.

Here's a class act from Donald Rumsfeld. I wonder if The Lion Of Kosovo would have turned this honor down?

Now this is diversity training.

This guy has a point.

I love this.

Hat tip to Eye on the Left

This just shouldn't be.

Hat tip to NRO's Corner.