embassy rooftop reservations

IRAQ WAR

All the talk is how the Democrat party has a cakewalk for 08. Well traditionally war rips the Democrats in half, and the caucus members elected in 06 swing districts - to give them majority - were quite conservative by modern liberal standards. Vietnam is being re-fought today with Democrats trying to mirror their past victory strategy (what most in the U.S. call defeat). What they have not accounted for is market efficiency. WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam were all fought with the draft. Government did not have as great an incentive to prevent battle deaths as they do now - without a limitless supply of conscripts. The military is now all volunteer and must compete in the U.S. job market (or at least good enough for all those poor dumb school dropouts according to Kerry/Moore) In one way all the prostration over every soldiers death is good - current wars are fought with very few casualties by the U.S. But on the other hand, death is a part of war and life and must be kept in perspective. Over 3000 Americans have died in Iraq - in another 55 years Iraq will reach Vietnam's 58,000 death status. The soldiers volunteered for a knowingly dangerous career - and did so for the benefit of their lives and others. Everyone alive today owes an unpayable debt to the many who have believed and fought for: live free or die - give me liberty or give me death.

football is better than futbol

AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM

Yes America is exceptional. An outlier in any plot of industrialized nations. The origins of this are no secret mystery shrouded behind demonic fumes of cultish smoke - but rather self evident. Here people have rights - power is ceded from the people to government by consent - not the other way around. The U.S. has more freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, gun rights, freedom from search and seizure, due process rights than any other nation. And yet many would allege that we are living in police state. Europe can easily apprehend terrorists because domestic intelligence is much less constrained. Libel is much easier to prove in most other democracies than ours. Guns and self defense are state monopolies in other advanced nations. People are tried and convicted in absentia in other places. These governments are illegitimate according to natural law theory. Unfortunately, here, the commerce and general welfare clauses have been used by activist judges and progressive politicians in an attempt to right all the wrongs in life and have created quite a bastardised enforcement of enumerated powers - and yet the U.S. is still the leading nation, among the world, in limited government. Economically individual states have 1st world sized output, and individual cities have more production than entire 2nd world countries. So a glass half full outlook should inspire us to maintain our political competitive advantage, bestow this knowledge to the next generation, and hope for a future when "in the course of human events...

internal combustion engine gore

AUTOMOBILES

There is no such thing as a zero emission vehicle. Electric cars get labeled that way by the government but its just propaganda. See electricity does not come out of the ether from outer space, and it doesn't come from magical rays of sun. Electricity has to be generated. Yes solar panels and wind/water turbines don't give off emissions. But they had to be made somehow so it would be interesting to know if they were made using fossil fuel power. Nuclear plants are clean but nuclear fuel materials are created with many emissions. Natural gas is a fossil fuel but also clean burning so it doesn't get lynched on as much as the others (dirty coal and big oil!) Better to fight liquefied natural gas port terminals in the U.S. and offshore exploration, and at the same time mandate its use - that is the progressive way! So these cars that get plugged in are actually remote emission vehicles because the electricity most likely was generated with emissions. And every time energy is transferred from one state to another, energy is lost - its inefficient. Hybrid cars are the best bet - but only cost effective at high oil prices. Flex fuel is a good innovation but ethanol needs to be subsidized to be cost effective and methanol will be black balled because it can be derived from coal (oh! the humanity!! - insert Hindenburg crash here:) Hydrogen cars are sci-fi or fantasy at this point - depending on your perspective. Most science fiction eventually comes true - whereas fantasy remains in the realm of ones imagination. Will the price of electricity go down when the incandescent light bulb is banned?

drunk on grain alcohol

RENEWABLE ENERGY

A lump of coal in ones stocking is a great gift and even more valuable lesson. It reminds us of how rotten we have been using non-renewable fossil fuels which will run out in ten years. Renewable energy such as wind, sun, hydro, and bio-fuels will provide progressive society with a sustainable clean energy source. Never-mind the naysayers who point out that it takes more energy to make ethanol, than the end product has, or that if all the corn in the U.S. were converted to fuel, the dent in fossil fuel use would be negligible. Critics mention increased demand for bio-energy will have negative consequences across many economic sectors. If feed for livestock goes up then the cost will rise and people will buy less - less consumption is good! People should be eating free-range meat if they have not yet converted to veganism. Also a fossil fuel tax could be assessed to help subsidize the poor of the world to purchase corn tortillas - and the tax could be ratcheted up until by law non-renewables were made illegal. A special committee of experts should be appointed to regulate energy and all human activities that involve energy. We need a Manhattan project for bio-fuels, and an Apollo program to reduce energy consumption by 1% a year - over the next 100 years - it could reach zero! Absolute poverty is very sustainable.

wehmeyer doctrine of self determination

SELF DETERMINATION

Michael Wehmeyer defines Self-Determination as “acting as the primary causal agent in one’s life and making choices and decisions regarding one’s quality of life free from undue external influence or interference.” This is an extension from natural law theory, and a repudiation of the nanny welfare state. Although Wehmeyer developed this more for individuals with disabilities and with implicit positive rights, I believe it to be a valid statement for all people more inline with the negative rights that Lock and Hume believed in. As Hayek points out, that once the state gets involved in governing peoples lives, ultimately self efficacy is removed from the individual to be replaced by the state, no matter how sincere the original intentions were. The state ultimately, as an entity is removed from negative consequences of ill conceived social policy, and often makes matters worse by increasing program X even after it has been proven ineffective. The mis-logic of program X failing and proposals of "we need more of program X to meet our progressive goals" should be self evident. It is illegitimate to just take (steal) the funding from the rest of society as if it is a fundamental positive right. As a matter of practice, it would be legitimate for advocates to inform the public to vote to give stipends to individuals with disabilities, to use or misuse as they see fit, to meet basic needs and recreation, with support staff of their choosing. Persuasion is always better than coercion - unless one wants to travel down the road to serfdom.

clash of history

LIBERALISM

Fukuyama was wrong in the End of history after the Berlin wall fell. It is not accurate to critique him on the Huntington Clash of Civilizations front - each could be true independent of the other - but rather an overreach, just as Hegel did in interpreting Waterloo. The end of history, on earth, will be when human life flickers out. Fukuyama proclaimed "an unabashed victory of economic and political liberalism" in 1989. Well some of us are still waiting on the spoils of this win. Are smoking bans, trans-fat bans, fuel efficiency standards, suburban sprawl restraints, and mandatory HPV vaccinations a victory of liberalism? What about nationalized health care, seatbelt/helmet laws, minimum wage laws, living wage laws, and toilet tank size restrictions? Is banning an outside group from mentioning a candidate for office within 60 days of an election a victory for political liberalism? What about taking property from one private individual, and giving it to another private individual via Kelo, or transfer payments? If he was referring to an end to large scale conflict over ideology, then he would be wrong on that count as well. Clinton bombed Kosovo without UN security council approval. Iran, Syria, and Jack Murtha are actively undermining a liberal movement. Europe blocks GM crop imports, many countries limit U.S. cultural imports. An effort is underway to create a global carbon regime. The EU and UN are always looking for the next illegitimate, undemocratic, totalitarian power grab. All theses things could lead to the next round of global conflict and chaos. Could not a loose coalition of anti-liberalism (anti-U.S./ anti nation state) be formed among decaying European societies, third world dictators, islamic militants, environmentalists, political economic populists and American progressives? This has already happened and history never stopped.

nuclear days are over

MILITARY DEFENSE

Nuclear deterrence is not an effective defense any more. Because of the current state of western progressive thought, it would not be acceptable to them, to retaliate against a third world nation with nuclear weapons. Even if a state actor hit the U.S. or Europe with an atomic weapon either by missile or smuggled in, Nato would have to respond with conventional forces. The outcry among the pacifists would be too great, and make even strong willed leaders shudder at the thought of vaporizing innocents. Obviously nuclear deterrence is no deterrence against non-state actors. One can threaten to annihilate the entire holey land if terrorists struck, but could not carry out that revenge. Advanced nations may only strike military targets - that's barley even justified in this day and age. Terrorists may strike anyone - even civilian women and children - its our fault after all. What is a worse stain on humanity? Forcing prisoners to form naked pyramids or luring in a journalist, trying to get a story, and beheading him on video? Detaining suspected islamofascists in a tropical prison or flying passenger airplanes into skyscrapers? The world court of opinion has spoken.

war of the parties

POLITICAL PARTIES

The Democrat party base stands on three legs: (1)Organized labor consists of government workers and unionized low-skilled labor, these are the Marxists. (2)Ethnic minorities consists of individuals who want transfer payments via state fiat power discriminatorily by race. (3)Liberal arts elites is a broad category to encompass well educated progressives' issues (white non manual laborers who own apple computers, listen to U2, believe in magical stem cells, and worry about recycling). Each of the Democrat legs is the antithesis of one Republican leg while sharing common ground with another Republican leg - the so called swing voters. The Republican party base stands on three legs: (1)Social conservatives are white evangelicals and orthodox Catholics. They are the antithesis of liberal arts elites and accepted by ethnic minorities on life and gay issues. (2)Nationalists are pro gun, pro defense, pro Anglo Saxon tradition. Their antithesis are ethnic minorities but syphon off organized labor voters. (3)Economic libertarians are the pro business, limited government types (in theory if not practice). They are the antithesis of organized labor but share some common ground with liberal arts elites based on their common education (at least at one point the DLC was free trade). Overall there is more overlap among the Republican base legs than the Democrat base legs. Most of the Republican base support at least two of the legs which make the legs coordinated. Where as the Democrat base legs can all walk in different directions. Minor party supporters are idealistically irrelevant - if anything effecting results to the opposite of their objectives. Then there are undecided voters - not very ideological - they go wherever the wind might be blowing on a particular day.

why not rudolph giuliani

POLITICS

Whats not to like about Rudy? Well guns for one - but that is about it for now. We'll have to wait and see how he comes out on the other issues. In some respects he is a Churchillian figure -somewhat seedy personal life but great leadership and governing principles. So who would you trust more on Judicial appointments, McCain or Giuliani ? (something Bush has even gotten right with a little help of course.) McCain is a progressive Republican in the style of T.R. He appears headed down the global warming bonanza, wobbly on tax cuts, and has already gutted the constitutions 1st amendment to prevent an "appearance of corruption" in Sandra Day O'Connor speak. He has an appetite for grandstanding and seeks out media approval. His maverickness is manifesting itself more as the progressive media general consensus as of late. He is a big government conservative, and worth mentioning that most foreign policy neo-cons backed him in 2000. Romney is a non starter. Who knows what his true convictions are if he even knows. The preferred ticket as of now: Giuliani / Gingrich.

government our doctor

PUBLIC HEALTH

Mandatory vaccinations of children for public school is a governmental overreach. The rational most cited being a public health issue and getting vaccinations will protect students from contracting potentially serious diseases. But there is a missing logical step in this supposition. If one kid is not vaccinated and contracts measles, the other kids with the vaccination would not be affected. It should be the parents choice over all vaccinations, the family unit should be the decider of the risk reward/factor not government. A private school would be justified in requiring vaccinations because people would be free to attend somewhere else, but this is not the case with the government monopoly on public schools. This is yet another petty issue that could easily be resolved with school choice vouchers. The latest progressive feel good phenomenon, coming out of Rick Perry's office of all places, is the HPV vaccination requirement, which is no doubt supported by scientific rationally minded women's groups (an oxymoron?). If 400 people died of cervical cancer in the state of Texas last year, then with the new requirement, 500 lives will be saved in 2030. The fiat power of government that can perpetrate mandatory vaccinations, is the same fiat power that perpetrated Tuskegee. Yes one can sign a waiver to get out of the requirement on philosophical or religious grounds in some cases, but is this the real reason for existence of the state?

being sorry for ones self

KARMA

What goes around comes around. The fates know this spinning the thread, tying the knots, and cutting it to length. Karma always catches up with you, its a kite tied to you - a shadow in your conscience. The bearer of bad karma should accept their actions and blame themselves, not others. Life is what happens to you and how you react to it. Except Bill Clinton who was attacked by a vast right wing conspiracy looking for a new enemy after the cold war had been won. But for the rest of society after a regretful event - what a disaster...

dehumanization of foes

DEBATE

If one can't win a debate or make a rational statement of logic to persuade opinion to their view, they can always attempt to discredit their opponent by claiming unhumanity. So if a president has an ideology which is coarse to ones good sensibilities, it would be worth mentioning that he looks like a monkey. That way when a policy proposal is advanced to reform social security or introduce more market forces to healthcare, one does not have to argue over actuary statistics, but rather just point out the non human features. The same applies to those who are of the laissez-faire persuasion. It is far easier to denounce the obvious benefits of capitalism if the characeture of pig is assigned to its practitioners. In rare circumstances when ones human opponent is clearly human, one can question the legitimacy of their birth, as in the case of the wealthy (rich bastards). One can also question their policy adversary's psychological sanity, feelings and emotions about caring, or intelligence due to religious beliefs, to avoid a debate over the facts. Do not leave it to chance, while arguing the finner points of the perpetual fight over inequality, but rather make certain that your opponent is seen as a less equal member of humanity.

post from god

GLOBAL WARMING

Don't even attempt to enter the Richard Branson $25M carbon extraction sweepstakes prize, because I've already got it wrapped up. Al Gore should be certifying my idea shortly. See, my idea would involve these things to be called 'plants', that are different from animals who emit carbon dioxide. These 'plants' would be living organisms like animals, but not moving, drawing nutrients out of the dirt with 'roots'. They could draw carbon dioxide out of the air through an apparatus I'll call 'leaves'. These 'plants' will remove the carbon (C) from carbon dioxide (CO2) and release the oxygen (O2). They would use this carbon to grow. I can think of a few different varieties of 'plants' that would be neat. Short plants could be called 'grass' with tall ones called 'trees'. (See picture for what a hypothetical 'plant' may look like.) If my creation goes according to plan, they should be able to propagate all over the globe by using wind, water, and animals, to spread 'seeds'. These 'seeds' would be a potential 'plant' (like an egg is a potential chicken) but very tiny and durable, only needing to be placed in soil with moister to grow into a full sized plant. In fact, according to my theory (which is pretty solid), over time these 'plants' could remove a lot of carbon from the atmosphere. Enough that, over millions of years as the plants die and get covered by earth, they could form massive mineral deposits which could be know as 'fossil fuels', and be energy sources for Adam and Eves offspring to become prosperous.

school bossing

EDUCATION

If natural selection biology has been taught in public schools for almost a century and half the public currently believes in creationism, then what would be the fear of intelligent design being mentioned? This and a myriad of other petty disputes in public schools can easily be avoided to the satisfaction of most parents (if not the mind indoctrinators). A lack of Darwinian knowledge does very little harm to society at large when compared to the blatant economic illiteracy of the public. That is a very comical situation unto itself: the progressive elite, priding ones self on being knowledgeable, looking down upon those poor religious fools, anti-Walmart, yet not understanding something as simple as Ricardo's law of comparative advantage (specialise in what your country does best, trade for the rest), or the law of demand's negative slope (raising the minimum wage, will decrease the number of entry level low skilled jobs). Here is a novel idea: Why not have the state put a dollar sign above every k-12 pupils head, and let schools public and private compete by offering high quality education similar to the U.S. college market, which is the best in the industrialised world, as opposed to the government monopoly in k-12 education. This could be known as a "school voucher" program or "school choice". This may be heresy in the modern liberal progressive church but i thought they were for choice. Instead, they burn at the stake any reform effort that doesn't conform to their universalist doctrine.

overrated democracy

CHINA

China and India are the growing powers that are attracting all the attention - but who will win the title as heir-apparent of the pax-americana if the U.S. gets too soft. India, the worlds largest democracy, benefits greatly from anglosphere institutions and language - but has a recent past mired in the Fabian Society. Their development could mirror the decline of the west - under-productive, over-socialist. China also relatively newly independent has a communist past but capitalist future. The greatest potential (good or bad to be determined) lies in China because of their one party rule. Democracy is overrated, it should be viewed as a means not an end. If China's one party wrote a constitution, inspired by Locke but even more progressive proof than the American's, then they could easily become a global hegemone and the world would be better off for it. This theoretical constitution could embrace life, liberty and property in a way only dreamed about by the wests classical liberals - just as Hong Kong is more capitalistic than any nation in the west. Right now China has just unrealised raw potential but history shows that even the near future can be wildly unpredictable.

overpowering the weak

NIETZSCHE

The weak, seeking to define the powerful elites attributes that keep them in power as evil, is seen as a sort of common movement of ill will against elites. The powerful elites with their more muted moral judgment of ethics is envisioned by Nietzsche as a superior worldly outlook, and shared by progressives. In this view lack of action and acceptance of the human condition is cringed upon (elites have better characteristics that their subservients should aspire to). Well a more accurate depiction of good and evil would have to better account with the historical evolution of political ideology as a moral actuator. In natural law theory, there are truths out there to be discovered by human reason. These are absolute good and evil, not good and bad as Nietzsche's noble man would have it. People can discover this embedded wisdom handed down through societal customs and trial and error over human existence. All people have rights that are unalienable and governments are legitimate only if they are constituted to protect those rights. The noble man or today's modern progressive seeks to become the overlord in totalitarian fashion of the masses. All people weak or powerful have the same rights and should be treated equally under the law, but the progressives have removed themselves from the negative consequences of their over governing - making them above the law. A humble existence is virtue - live and let live.

in a perfect world

DEATH PENALTY

Well the death penalty is a hot topic as of late. The supremes have decided that, citing foreign law and so called consensus among the states, that juvenile criminals, and individuals with cognitive disabilities cannot be executed. Foreign powers refuse to extradite captured suspects to the U.S. if they could face the death penalty. Texas the evil red state is seen as the devil incarnate, for executing the most each year even though deep blue California has more on death row. Every person has the right to life, liberty and property, so the question is if someone takes a life do they yield the rights to their own? Trusting the state with the lives and lively hoods of humans is always a risky endeavor - especially the modern welfare state. The death penalty is morally justified - yet there is always that risk of killing an innocent. It would be nice to live in a utopian world - much like heaven - where all is fair and right. But we ultimately live here on earth where pragmatism has some sway. Yes justice is not 100% perfect, but for there to be justice, the rule of law has to be upheld, and a majority of people support the death penalty as they have throughout histories common law. Its an imperfect solution to an imperfect world.

packing a 9mm

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

thinking highly of oneself

MININUM WAGE

The poor benighted people cannot think for themselves - they have no conscious, not even aware of their own existence. We can't trust them to be able to look out for themselves (only selfish bastards act in self interest). Two individuals do not possess all the knowledge needed to negotiate a fair wage - for that we need Washington's many florescent minds to irradiate for the dim minded. People need the protection of altruistical geniuses if there is going to be social justice. One can tell how much one cares about humanity by how high they think minimum wage should be. In a previous post I advocated for $10 an hour, but now I believe this to be to stingy (and I wish to advance my ranking among the compassionate). My new statement of self felicitation: Minimum wage should be $12.50 an hour with guaranteed health benefits. The price of everything has been going up: gas, healthcare, college tuition, corn tortillas, and raising minimum wage will help people buy more things (increasing economic output Keynes style). Walmart would have to pay more to employees which would raise their unfair prices, helping mom and pop shops, and reducing the trade deficit with China at the same time. Its a win / win situation (except for human reason).