February 10, 2007

DON SURBER TREATS Hillary's war amnesia.

FLY PRIVATE JETS WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE by buying "carbon offsets?" Or is it just a modern version of buying indulgences?

So you can still fly to the Caribbean and the conscience-free answer is to grow a shrub. Actually, someone else grows it for you - but it doesn't matter, your guilt is still expunged. Such is the popularity of carbon offsetting that scores of projects, such as the preparations for the 2012 Olympic Games in London, will be labelled 'carbon neutral'.

Pop bands have also jumped on the bandwagon, claiming to be carbon-free in terms of their tours. Banks, insurance companies, hedge funders and diplomats are all offsetting like crazy. These schemes sound wonderfully simple. But how do they work? Indeed, do they work?

Apart from planting trees, another way is to fund energysaving initiatives, usually in the Third World. So you fly, for example, to Goa, and in return, a village elsewhere in India is given half-a-dozen low-wattage light bulbs or a hundredth of a new wind turbine.

In theory it all adds up, but there are sceptics who doubt that such schemes work. According to a recent report in Nature magazine, there are myriad problems with such programmes. It said: 'The first problem is simply calculating the amount of carbon that needs to be offset.' . . . But the main problem with offsetting is that it is, at best, a sticking plaster. If we are serious about reducing carbon dioxide emissions, then simply paying £30 to a company every time we jet off to the tropics is the equivalent of putting a paper bag over our heads and wishing the problem away.

Count me among the skeptics. This sounds like a way for fatcats to continue to live high while preaching at the rest of us. On the other hand, there's this: "A growing army of eco-refuseniks is making the ultimate sacrifice in the age of cheap air travel by pledging to give up flying and using slower modes of transport instead." We'll see if it catches on. . . and lasts.

UPDATE: Jim Ashmore notes that he was way ahead of me on this: "it appears the carbon neutrality culture is nothing more than guilt riddance via checkbook matched up with an entrepreneurial opportunity."

ANOTHER UPDATE: More skepticism from Jay Reding:

It’s typical hypocrisy — the very rich can afford to buy “carbon credits” while those of us for whom money is an object cannot afford to do the same. For all the talk about how the left abhors social stratification and pitting the haves and against the have-nots, that is precisely what this sort of thing does. It allows Al Gore to emit tons of pollutants directly into the upper atmosphere while preaching his Sinners in the Hands of an Angry Gaia message to the masses, then buy his way to a clean eco-conscience afterwards. Meanwhile, the rest of us are told that we have to make dramatic sacrifices to “save the planet.”

It starts at the top. No more “eco-tourism” for the rich. No more private jets to the Super Bowl. No more jet-setting across the country for high-priced speaking engagements. Either this is a crisis that will destroy all of mankind if it isn’t fixed now or it’s just another way for the world aristocracy to purge themselves of a false sense of noblesse oblige. If it’s the former, then the private jet-set are spoiled beyond belief for acting in such an ecologically injurious manner — if it isn’t then they’re peddlers of snake oil and fear.

Indeed.

A DOUBLE STANDARD AT GOOGLE-OWNED YOUTUBE:

The Google property has recently banned the popular atheist commentator Nick Gisburne. Gisburne had been posting videos with logical arguments against Christian beliefs; but when he turned his attention to Islam (mirror of Gisburne's video by another user), YouTube pulled the plug, saying: 'After being flagged by members of the YouTube community, and reviewed by YouTube staff, the video below has been removed due to its inappropriate nature. Due to your repeated attempts to upload inappropriate videos, your account now been permanently disabled, and your videos have been taken down.'

Christians who want similar consideration from Google will presumably have to start blowing things up and beheading people. As I've noted before, it's quite unwise to create this kind of incentive structure. I thought the Google people were supposed to be smart.

UPDATE: Here's a Christian blogger who nonetheless supports Gisburne:

I, like many of the greatest minds of the last 2000 years, think that Christianity is a perfectly reasonable and logical thing to believe. Still, I am appalled that Gisburne's YouTube account has been deleted and his voice silenced.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Gisburne has a new account, and posts a video on the subject.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Eugene Volokh comments:

YouTube is a private company that is entitled to choose what it carries; and while using YouTube is a convenient way to effectively get your views out, you can certainly get them out even without YouTube. Nonetheless, consumers are also entitled to criticize YouTube and other media organizations — organizations that make a living off our vibrant marketplace of ideas — for refusing to carry certain important viewpoints because some find those viewpoints offensive.

Indeed.

MORE: Further thoughts here: "Needless to say, this sounds familiar."

RUDY IN CALIFORNIA. Sounds like he wowed 'em.

ERIC DREXLER'S CLASSIC BOOK, Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology, is now available online as a free e-book.

NO 757 NEEDED: "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the subject of Republican criticism for her mode of air travel, flew home nonstop Thursday night aboard a 12-seat military aircraft set aside for use by lawmakers."

That seems reasonable.

JUST GOT BACK from the area Bloggers' Bash. Lots of local bloggers were there, including Barry from Inn of the Last Home, Mike Faulk, Lissa from LissaKay.com, Rich Hailey, Michael Silence, Katie Allison Granju, Perry Nelson, ToAAW, Jonathan Hickman, Randy & Michelle from KnoxViews, Doug and Cathy McCaughan, Les Jones, and -- subject of a rock-star-like greeting from Helen -- Say Uncle. A good time was had by all.

And, really, Mick Jagger or John Ondraisik wouldn't have gotten half the greeting that SayUncle did. But then, neither one of them is half the blogger that he is.

LAPTOP UPDATE: Got the little Vaio laptop that I mentioned earlier. So far it's pretty cool: Tiny, jewel-like, but easy to use. Surprisingly, the keyboard seems a bit bigger than the Dell (the Insta-Wife agrees) and the screen, though smaller, is very crisp and readable.

It comes with builtin WWAN and a 30-day trial for Sprint. I can also put my Verizon EVDO card in (it's got a PC slot) but I may give the Sprint free trial a go. I can cancel the Verizon at any time if I like the Sprint better.

JOHN HINDERAKER: "The current flap over the Pentagon Inspector General's report on Douglas Feith's Office of Special Plans has embarrassed the Associated Press, the Washington Post and, if he has any shame, the Inspector General. The controversy does have the merit, though, of raising once again the issue of the relationship between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda and other terrorists." They've got video from 2000. If nothing else, it blows away the revisionist argument that claimed connections between Saddam and Osama originated with the Bush Administration.

UPDATE: Earlier it said "Saddam and Iraq," not Saddam and Osama. Fixed now. Thanks to reader E. Cart for the correction. So far as I know, nobody has yet claimed that Bush made up connections between Saddam and Iraq, though it'll probably happen soon . . . .

THE ECONOMIST: "Now that poverty means a risk of obesity, rather than starvation, it is harder to decide what constitutes the minimal decent standard of living a society should provide."

SEX-ED FOR SENIORS:

"Sex is a part of life. People are sexual from the time they're born until they die. People can be orgasmic into their 90s," said Sallie Foley, a sex therapist who works with seniors at the University of Michigan's Sexual Health Counseling Services in Ann Arbor, and writes a regular column on love and sexuality for AARP's magazine.

But there's a dangerous downside to sex in the golden years. Many sexually active seniors don't realize that they may be at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, and even more may not know how to protect themselves.

"The hormone therapies and Viagra can keep sex going even into the 80s and 90s for some people," said Dr. John Morley, a geriatric sex counselor at St. Louis University School of Medicine. "But a lot of the patients I see are not having sex with their life partner, or are also active with someone else, and those partners may not realize they need protection."

I'm all for safe sex, but the AIDS fears seem exaggerated. If you're 90, which is a bigger worry -- something that might kill you in 10 years, or missing a shot at getting laid now? I guess it all depends on your discount rate . . . .

UPDATE: A reader sends this story to suggest that I'm wrong to be so cavalier. I stand corrected. Hey: Glove your love at any age.

MICHAEL LEDEEN ON IRAN: On this week's blog week in review.

PAT DOLLARD ON Iraq, media bias, and George Clooney.

LOOK FOR the Mullah label. It's the sign of quality IEDs!

TRAFFIC CAMERA UPDATE:

Hatala brought the findings to court to challenge his ticket.

"Becomes pretty clear that it wasn't your vehicle that was speeding," the judge said.

He didn't have to argue much. Pohlman said the court admitted the ticket was issued to the wrong car, in the wrong lane.

"So based upon the testimony provided we are going to find you not liable for this violation," the judge said.

Pohlman reported a different problem at that same location on Chester Avenue at East 71st Street.

Bill and Sue Faber of Massillon said they haven't been in Cleveland for six months, but the city sent them a ticket.

"No way we could be in Cleveland," Faber said.

"Do you have witnesses for that?" Pohlman asked.

"Yes, we do," Faber said.

Yet Cleveland sent the ticket showing a car speeding, but the plate belongs to the Faber's truck.

Pohlman said you can't read the license in the picture at all. He said it appears Cleveland guessed and sent the ticket anyway.

"I always thought we were always innocent until proven guilty and now I find it's guilty until I can prove I'm innocent," Faber said.

These things are all about revenue.

MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT WIKIPEDIA.

And there's more on Wikipedia's problems here. I find it a decent place for casual reference when the subjects aren't politically charged, but much less useful when they are.

UPDATE: Bruce Rolston emails that he thinks the worries above are silly. Perhaps so -- I don't really think that Wikipedia has any sort of "in" with search engines beyond what their algorithms give it -- but Wikipedia's biggest problem stems from lack of trust, which is an issue with a reference site. I've certainly seen stories on it being manipulated by people with agendas ranging from random individuals, to Microsoft, to Congressional staffers.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Ben White emails: "For a new-media guy, your line above has quite the old-media-elite color to it." Hmm. Really? It's just that you go to Wikipedia for a reference, not an opinion. But the way it works means that -- though errors probably do get fixed over time -- people with an agenda and persistence can undermine the reliability of what you see on any given visit. I'm all for the "asymptotic approach to the truth," as Kaus calls it, but I'm not sure it works well in the context of a reference. And I'm hardly alone in having such concerns. This isn't a huge slam at Wikipedia -- if you follow the link just above you'll see that even Wikipedia folks share some of these concerns -- but a warning about what's there, especially on controversial issues. Just remember that Wikipedia is part of the low-trust environment of the Internet, even if it seems, somehow, more like, well, an encyclopedia.

MORE: Ed Driscoll reminds us that Big Media are not immune from this sort of thing, too.

STILL MORE: Ted Frank: "The problem is worse than he imagines, because lazy mainstream media are now relying on the site."

THE FOLKS IN SHELBYVILLE ARE JEALOUS: Obama launches campaign in Springfield.

UPDATE: More on Obama here. Is he "black enough?"

HE WAS FOR DISSENT before he was against it. Er, or something.

ROUGHNECKS: Michael Yon posts a new report from Iraq. And here's a radio interview of Yon.

UPDATE: Radio link was bad earlier. Fixed now. Sorry!

MARK STEYN: "Who lost Britain? Answer: The British."

THE MOTHER OF ALL CORRECTIONS.

ANN ALTHOUSE HAS SOME THOUGHTS on Rudy Giuliani, abortion, and federalism. A couple of observations:

First, Ann refers to federalism's role (under the inaccurate moniker of "states' rights") as a shibboleth for anti-desegregation forces. The segregationists used it as a slogan, naturally enough, because federalism was a popular idea that had appeal to people beyond their ranks. That's usually why people choose such things. But, of course, the promiscuous way they deployed it in the service of a bad cause had the effect of undermining its appeal. (People on the left have managed to do the same thing to the notion of "equality" over more recent decades). Nonetheless, despite its abuse at the hands of segregationists, federalism plays a lot of positive roles in our system as well, roles that have nothing to do with race. I explore those at some length in my essay, Is Democracy Like Sex?, which looks at the unappreciated benefits of a number of Constitutional features.

Federalism is also relevant to abortion debates. Dave Kopel and I argued, in fact, that a proper reading of Congress's enumerated powers doesn't allow for federal regulation of abortion. I rather doubt that Rudy is taking that position himself, though I'd be gratified if he were.

YOU HEAR SIMILAR THINGS FROM SOLDIERS: "I find the war in Iraq much more frightening to watch on television when I’m on leave outside Iraq than I find it when I’m there." (Via Romenesko).

EXTREME MORTMAN on the Washington Post Feith/Levin correction: "From Deep Throat to Deep Doo-Doo."

MICHAEL YON REPORTS via email from the Transfer of Authority ceremony in Iraq:

This morning in Baghdad, General George Casey transferred authority of MNF-I to General David Petraeus.

Anyone who knows much about General Petraeus might agree that David Petraeus seems to have been born and raised to win this particular war. Frankly, the odds seem nearly impossible. Iraq is broiling and it's getting worse. But there are glimmers of hope, and I see those glimmers with my own eyes here in Iraq. Troop morale is still good to high, and Iraqi Security Forces are improving, for instance. But make no mistake: America has asked David Petraeus to walk into a burning barn and perform brain surgery on a dying patient. If it can be done, David Petraeus is our man. The odds are against him. Personally, I am betting on General Petraeus, his staff, and the great number of hard-minded people who believe Iraq can stand again. This means I am betting for the good guys, and against the terrorists.

I am not naive; I was the first writer, back in early 2005, to begin loudly proclaiming that Iraq was in civil war. People said I was "pessimistic," or did not know the definition of "civil war." I was the first, to my knowledge, to outline that Afghanistan will become a bloodbath during the Spring of 2007. Yet I believe that today we have found the right mix of knowledge and experience to succeed in Iraq.

Fortunately for the United States, the outgoing commanding general, George Casey has not decided to retire. General Casey will take his great experience back to Washington where it will be vital to the outcome of this war.

Photo L to R: General John Abizaid; General George Casey; General David Petraeus; Chaplain Hoyt; Command Sergeant Major Jeffrey Mellinger

The photo, of course, is by Michael Yon.

February 09, 2007

MARINES "HIT THE JACKPOT" near Fallujah.

UPDATE: Read this from Bill Roggio, too.

THE ANSWER TO BAINBRIDGE'S QUESTION is that the Wall Street Journal is a trusted brand in an industry where there aren't many of those any more. Some background here.

JUST NOTICED this on HPV vaccination by Linda Seebach.

UPDATE: Mark Kleiman criticizes the editorial.

GREENLAND'S GLACIERS: Not melting as fast as previously. That's good news, I guess.

People in Buffalo would probably like to see some melting start up about now, there. They'll have glaciers of their own soon, at this rate, with over 100 inches of snow already and another four feet expected. Glad I live in the south.

UPDATE: Reader Steven Erickson emails: "The 100'' is in Oswego, which is 100 miles from Buffalo, north of Syracuse!" It's still a lot of snow.

REALITY. TV.

But several years ago, the 34-year-old mother of three stopped watching the morning shows. After getting TiVo, she had no patience to sit through multiple commercial breaks during a live newscast. On top of that, the segments began to seem more and more frivolous.

"Watching morning television for me is the equivalent of reading People magazine in the dentist's office," said Lauck, who writes for websites from her home in Santa Rosa, Calif. "They don't have anything new or particularly relevant to my life. It seems like a lot of fluff. I feel like I can get information faster and cleaner on the Internet."

Lauck's not alone in souring on network news programs. In particular, this season has seen a significant erosion of the morning shows' demographic sweet spot: 25- to 54-year-old women.

Those shows' producers may be the first ever to go broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public. Also, the tv news folks have been going beyond their usual negativity and sensationalism by playing up the bad news even more to make Bush look bad, but judging from this story by doing that they're also chasing away their audience, which now finds their programs too depressing. Oops.

THIS SEEMS LIKE A GREAT IDEA:

British billionaire entrepreneur Richard Branson, with former vice president Al Gore at his side, on Friday offered a $25 million prize for anyone who can come up with a way to blunt global climate change by removing at least a billion tons of carbon dioxide a year from the Earth's atmosphere.

Branson, saying that the "survival of our species" is imperiled by current environmental trends, said the prize was similar to cash inducements that led to some of history's most notable achievements in navigation, exploration and industry.

Congratulations to both of them for a very positive effort, which as Lance notes goes beyond the usual "hair shirt" environmentalism. Some thoughts of mine on the value of prizes can be found here.

UPDATE: It's only sort of related, but this piece on how to save energy is worth mentioning.

POLITICIZING SCIENCE: Hey, maybe there's more of it than I think.

HEH: "They Were For Dissent And Alternative Analysis Before They Were Against It." All of this focus on prewar intelligence by Sens. Levin and Rockefeller is just more of the antiwar historical revisionism that I've noted in the past, designed to give Democrats who voted for the war some protective cover between now and 2008. Though "vote for us, we're gullible" seems like a weak slogan.

UPDATE: It's a bad slogan -- but an appropriate one -- for the Washington Post, too, which seems to have been misidentifying Carl Levin's quotes as coming from the DoD Inspector General. Oops! From the WaPo correction:

References to Feith's office producing "reporting of dubious quality or reliability" and that the office "was predisposed to finding a significant relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda" were from a report issued by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) in Oct. 2004. Similarly, the quotes stating that Feith's office drew on "both reliable and unreliable reporting" to produce a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq "that was much stronger than that assessed by the IC [Intelligence Community] and more in accord with the policy views of senior officials in the Administration" were also from Levin's report. The article also stated that the intelligence provided by Feith's office supported the political views of senior administration officials, a conclusion that the inspector general's report did not draw.

Can anyone play this game? And Stephen Spruiell observes:

As I write this, Chris Matthews is peddling the phony WaPo scoop on Hardball, prattling on about how this report proves that Doug Feith "cooked the intel" to get us into war.

Oops. Will Matthews apologize on his next show?

ANOTHER UPDATE: More from Jules Crittenden: "If the Pentagon doubted what the intel agencies were telling them, and said so, I’m not particularly surprised. I’m glad they weren’t just sitting around allowing themselves to be spoon-fed analysis by people with a pretty poor track record."

SLASHDOT: "ARMY OF DAVIDS BEATS PENTAGON PROCUREMENT." The article they're writing about, which includes Bill Roggio, is here.

Nice plug, just as the paperback edition comes out!

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue:

This budget week, there was one thing on which Democrats and Republicans agreed: It's time to do something about earmarks. And in a nod to voter disapproval with these special-interest projects, this year Congress will do its pork spending in secret.

Welcome to Congress's new and dirtier earmark game, in which the big spenders are setting all the rules. In front of the cameras, both parties claim to have found earmark religion, and are talking up a bill that would reform the way Congress asks for billions in goodies for lawmakers' home districts. Behind the scenes, they're working feverishly to keep the earmarks rolling, this time using a technique outside of the legislative process and hidden from public view.

Read the whole thing, and remember that we have to keep the pressure up.

SOME DIVERSITY QUESTIONS that the Association of American Law Schools doesn't want to answer. But for good reason, it turns out.

JONAH GOLDBERG SPANKS ELLEN GOODMAN for a silly column comparing people who disagree with global warming theater to holocaust deniers.

This sort of behavior by global-warming enthusiasts is offputting, and justifies those who compare them with religious fanatics. As Arnold Kling wrote the other day:

The Left's religion often comes dressed up as science. Marxism is one example. The eugenics movement of the early twentieth century is another. The Global Warming crusade is probably another.

On a practical level this doesn't matter that much to me -- as I wrote before, we should probably be acting as if global warming theories are true regardless -- but acting as if isn't the same as crushing all dissent. And I can't help but feel that for people like Goodman, getting to compare people you disagree with to holocaust deniers is the main point, and global warming is just the excuse. Don't want me to get that impression? Don't act that way, then.

UPDATE: Don Surber: "How offensive to Holocaust survivors. To equate the Nazi slaughter of 12 million Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, Catholics and others based on their ethnicity and gender with the debate over whether mankind’s “sin” of driving an SUV (but never the pickup truck) is appalling. A rabbi should wash her keyboard out with soap."

A SURVEY OF "OBSCENE AMENITIES" at Hot Air.

IN THE MAIL: A copy of Blogalicious! the blogosphere cookbook. I offered a couple of recipes and a rather succinct introduction. It's also got contributions by "Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt, Power Line, The Volokh Conspiracy, Little Green Footballs, Captain's Quarters, The Anchoress, Stop the ACLU, Crooked Timber, The Belmont Club, Black Five, The Mudville Gazette ... and Bitch, Ph.D." Plus some rather nice cover art by Cox & Forkum!

A NATIONAL REVIEW EDITORIAL on Rudy's candidacy.

UPDATE: Some thoughts on the NRO editorial, from Eric Scheie.

SMACKDOWN IN GOTHAM: Here's more on Mike Bloomberg's illegal gun purchase program:

Bloomberg sent civilian private investigators into gun stores across the country, and had the investigators pose as straw purchasers. Bloomberg never informed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives about the sting operations, and when the stings were announced, several law enforcement officials said as many as eighteen active law enforcement investigations were put in jeopardy.

For months the ATF was silent on the matter, but recently disclosed that an investigation into Bloomberg’s actions was taking place. Now the Battle letter, first made public by the New York Daily News, details the problems with Bloomberg’s attacks on firearms dealers.

According to the Daily News, none of the gun dealers Bloomberg is suing broke federal law and took part in straw purchase transactions. The letter also took Bloomberg to task for conducting these stings "without proper law enforcement authority," though there is no indication that BATFE or the Justice Department would seek to file charges against Bloomberg or his civilian private investigators. Instead, the letter warns that Bloomberg’s operations could put the city at risk of legal action.

Straw purchases are illegal, and Bloomberg has no more right to violate this law than anyone else. (In fact, it's "vigilantism" of the sort that antigun folks often complain about.) All he's got is the political protection against prosecution that comes of being a bigshot. Which means he's demonstrated a weakness in the firearms laws, all right, just not the one he intended to.

THE RELIGIOUS LEFT is unhappy with John Edwards over the Marcotte affair.

INEQUALITY WARS, at Cato Unbound. Alan Reynolds, btw, is no relation.

TOM MAGUIRE: "I love the smell of dropped felony counts in the morning."

HERE'S MORE of that "vigilantism" that Robert Spitzer was complaining about:

The male victim, whose identity wasn’t disclosed, told police the attacker pushed a gray pistol into his stomach and demanded the keys to the car.

The unidentified woman reached into the car and pulled a pistol from the glove box, according to a sheriff’s report. She fired five shots at the attacker, who dropped his pistol as he ran away. He fled in a burgundy Buick.

“We’re kind of hailing (the man and woman) as heroes,” Lott said.

He said police don’t encourage people to go out and “just start shooting,” but they do encourage people to protect themselves.

This is a distinction that Spitzer still hasn't learned to make. Fortunately, the unidentified woman did better: "Jeffcoat, who is accused in 10 armed robberies in Richland County and Columbia in less than a month, has an arrest record dating back 12 years." (Via Dave Hardy.).

HOWARD KURTZ: "This Air Pelosi story is gaining altitude."

RAND SIMBERG on astronauts gone wild.

SOME INTERESTING THOUGHTS on what the Marcotte Affair means.

UPDATE: One of the interesting tropes employed by Marcotte's defenders is that Bill Donohue is just as bad. I don't think that really withstands a side-to-side comparison of their writings, but even assuming arguendo that it does, there's a big difference: Donohue hasn't just been hired as a spokesperson by a Presidential campaign. And if he were hired, people would rightly draw conclusions about that campaign from the fact of his hiring, and many of the same people who are complaining about the exhumation of Marcotte's frothing remarks would be eagerly bringing up Donohue's past statements. This is why smart campaigns are careful about who they hire.

IN RESPONSE to my computer post below, Jose Guardia emails:

I read you're considering buying a smaller Sony laptop; have you seen the Sony Vaio UX series? It's barely bigger than the Nokia you just tested, but has cell connectivity and better features in general. Here's a video review: Link.

It's not available in Spain yet, and perhaps in the US is neither. I was tempted trade the Inspiron I also use for one of those small 2 lbs Vaios, but I think I'll wait for the UX at least to try it in my hands and then decide.

Actually, I ordered the small but not quite that small Vaio TX. But I'm supposed to be reviewing the Vaio UX for Popular Mechanics at some point. I did see a UX at the Consumer Electronics Show and it looked pretty cool. Not really a laptop-replacement for all purposes, but a terrific go-anywhere blogging tool from all appearances. I'll see if it lives up to appearances.

JOHN TAMMES rounds up news from Afghanistan that you probably missed.

AN OPEN LETTER TO GOOGLE from Shanghai blogger Isaac Mao.

AUDIO GEEKERY: So I'm an audio geek, and I care more about sound quality than most people. But the public radio folks are absolutely insane. I did an interview with Weekend America from my home studio -- one of those things called a "tape sync" (though there's no tape anymore) in which they record their end, I record my end, and then they edit the copies together into one seamless whole. That produces better quality than a phone connection, of course. But when I uploaded the file to their site, they wanted it as a .wav file, rather than an .mp3 file, meaning that our little interview was over 135 MB in size, and took a long, long time to upload. I'm absolutely sure that by the time it's put on FM or satellite radio no one will be able to hear the difference, but they were adamant. Sure, the dulcet tones of my speaking voice are worth going to any length to preserve, but still . . . .

MICHAEL FUMENTO REPORTS on stem cell progress that's not getting the attention you'd expect.

February 08, 2007

TROUBLE IN PARADISE.

NANCY PELOSI takes the advice of an InstaPundit reader, and thinks about flying commercial instead of requisitioning a big government jet:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she might decline the use of Air Force planes to travel from Washington to her San Francisco district because the Pentagon won't guarantee her an aircraft that can make the trip non-stop.

``I have said that I am happy to ride commercial if the plane they have doesn't go coast to coast,'' Pelosi said today.

It's certainly more greenhouse friendly. But Rep. John Murtha continues his thuggish ways:

Murtha said he will hold hearings that examine the use of military planes by members of Congress and Bush administration officials for the past two fiscal years. Asked whether the hearings are payback for the decision on Pelosi's request, he smiled and said, ``Would I do something like that?''

Not if he's smart -- glass houses and all that. Which probably means that the answer is "yes."

UPDATE: Reader Randy Dunn finds Pelosi's claims that security is the motivation disingenuous in light of other Democratic positioning on the war:

Given this practice was initiated shortly after 9/11 for the 2nd in succession, which at the time seemed to be the thing to do, shouldn't the whole program be reevaluated? Now that the Democrats have reaped the benefits of having most of mainstream America doubting the necessity of the war on terror, the reason for the military transport program has eroded considerably. Why perpetuate an expensive, environmentally destructive program when it has outlived its effectiveness? Actually, to retain the program, there would have to be some consensus that that it still is relevant - that Islamic terrorism is still a clear and present danger to our government leaders. And that terror attacks are imminent.

Personally, I like it that members of Congress mostly fly commercial, as it makes them aware of what the rest of us have to go through, and gives them a stake in security procedures that work.

LOADS MORE LIBBY-BLOGGING, at Tom Maguire's.

DELL NON-HELL: Had trouble with the Inspiron laptop, and an online chat with the support guy yielded a reinstall of the wifi driver, which didn't help. Didn't have time to follow up for a few days, but got some time tonight. Called on the phone and the support guy had me fixed in fairly short order -- it was a conflict between the wifi and the EVDO card. I hadn't had this problem before, despite going on three years for that combination, but apparently there's some new Windows update that creates the problem. (Thanks, Bill!) Anyway, I know that one experience, good or bad, isn't representative, but my experiences with Dell support over the years have been pretty good. Given that people mostly go to the Internet to complain, I figure I should report when things go right, too, just to even things up a bit.

UPDATE: A reader asks how much trouble I've had on this Dell. Not much. It's going on 3 years old, and this is the second time I've called on it -- the other time was this one. It's getting a bit worn and battered from being hauled around so much, and in fact I'm about to replace it with a tiny Sony Vaio as my main carry-around computer. But it's been quite good, and it will continue to serve sitting on the bar in the kitchen.

BOB ZUBRIN WAXES SKEPTICAL on the Hydrogen Economy: "Hydrogen, therefore, is not a source of energy. It simply is a carrier of energy. And it is, as we shall see, an extremely poor one."

THE IRVINE INTIFADA. Stuff like this sends an unfortunate signal about the effectiveness of violence, and its toleration.

AUSTIN BAY'S SITE is back up.

HYPERINFLATION in Zimbabwe.

THE ECONOMIST is putting letters to the editor online as they come in, with only minimal filtering. It's an interesting experiment. (Via Megan McArdle).

MICHAEL BARONE: "If we want to curb carbon dioxide emissions, then let's ban private jets. It's funny seeing those Hollywood stars private-jetting into Washington to tell the rest of us that we've got to have a lower standard of living. Let them fly first class, and save the Earth!"

Everybody has to sacrifice. And I think this idea may be, er, taking off . . . .

HARRY REID, meet Harry Reid.

OUCH: "You can tell they are working for a political campaign now because they are apologizing just like politicians." Thus are the netroots domesticated.

BLOOMBERG BUSTED:

The federal government will not file criminal charges against any of the 15 out-of-state gun dealers accused by Mayor Bloomberg in a federal lawsuit of selling guns illegally, the Daily News has learned.

In a stern rebuke to the city's high-profile crusade against illegal guns, the feds warned the Bloomberg administration that it could face "potential legal liabilities" if it continues to conduct sting operations that fall within the jurisdiction of federal agents.

Bloomberg announced the filing of a federal lawsuit last May against 15 gun dealers, who he lambasted as the "worst of the worst." The city later filed a similar lawsuit against another 12 dealers.

In both cases, the city sent private investigators to gun dealers and secretly videotaped them making what Bloomberg called illegal "straw purchases."

A "straw purchase" refers to when an individual talks with a store clerk about purchasing a gun, but then gets another person to fill out the required federal forms and undergo the mandatory background check.

According to a letter sent to City Hall, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and various U.S. attorneys' offices have determined the city's findings against the 15 dealers "do not rise to a level that would support a criminal prosecution."

Bloomberg's behavior, on the other hand, is under investigation by the ATF.

UPDATE: Dave Hardy isn't surprised:

The dealers would have the defense that they didn't realize that the gun was going to the person who didn't sign the forms, but the buyers have no such defense -- they knew exactly that that was the plan. So there's no doubt that the buyers broke the Gun Control Act, and that those who set them to it were liable as aiders and abettors, not to mention on a conspiracy theory. I'd assume that Bloomberg and company (1) figured it was worth it for the publicity and (2) figured that the laws don't apply to the rich and powerful. They may just have been right on both.

We'll see.

CRAZED ASTRONAUT UPDATE: "A report issued last year that critiqued NASA's plan for long-duration space missions for failing to deal with 'issues of human sexuality' now looks strikingly prophetic in the wake of Nowak's apparent love-triangle meltdown. But trying to predict whether an astronaut will be vulnerable to psychiatric or psychosocial problems remains an inexact science, one of the report's authors says – though that may change as research into genomic screening, brain scans and biometric monitoring continues."

ANNA NICOLE SMITH HAS DIED, setting up "the child custody case from hell."

CRUSHING OF DISSENT at San Francisco State University.

The SFSU Administration's concern for civility is rich, given SFSU's history of tolerating antisemitic violence.

MICHAEL MALONE looks at the future of media.

OKAY, I COULDN'T RESIST THE AIRPLANE REFERENCE BELOW, but I have to point out a more positive item from the same story:

The Speaker also answered an inquiry from Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) on nuclear energy by saying that while she was once opposed to nuclear energy, changing technology had made her "bring a more open mind" to the option.

"It has to be on the table," she said.

I think that if you're serious about global warming or energy independence -- much less both -- it absolutely does have to be on the table. I'm glad to see Pelosi recognize that.

I MENTIONED THE NOKIA N800 here a while back. My review at Popular Mechanics is now online.

EDWARDS IS keeping the bloggers. As I suggested earlier, that's probably the right thing to do.

UPDATE: More here.

A PRESS BLACKOUT? "Abu Omar al-Baghdadi is Al Qaeda's guy in Iraq, and nowadays, the Sunni insurgency is being whittled down to Al Qaeda's activity in Iraq. It's that simple, and he's that important. So why isn't the Times writing that? I think the answer has something to do with what seems, to my eyes, to be a determined campaign to keep the American people from knowing the nature of the enemy in Iraq because identifying this enemy as Al Qaeda casts the debate about the war in a whole different light." (Via Ed Driscoll).

THE ECONOMIST: "Perhaps someone who knows polls can explain why Mr Giuliani and John McCain continue to dominate every poll of Republicans? The Fox, Time, CNN, ABC/Washington Post, Gallup and Zogby polls all say the exact same thing: these two, both famous for not exactly cuddling up to the evangelical base, are leagues ahead of the likes of Sam Brownback and Mitt Romney in the minds of Republican voters."

GREENHOUSE UPDATE:

Citing "a growing chorus of voices," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called Thursday for "mandatory action to reduce greenhouse gas pollution"and said she wants legislation ready for July 4th -- which she declares "Energy Independence Day."

The Speaker's remarks came at the beginning of a hearing of the House Committee on Science and Technology this morning. The hearing is taking testimony from four of the scientists involved in the United Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Meanwhile, once again the Bush Administration is insensitive to global warming:

The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi against Republican criticism that her desire to fly in an Air Force transport plane is an extravagance.

"This is a silly story and I think it's been unfair to the speaker," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. Some Republicans are taking issue with the size of the plane Pelosi has requested.

Pelosi, a Democrat, asked for access to a C-32, a military version of the Boeing 757-200, that could fly to her hometown of San Francisco without refueling.

And the planet suffers, but Bush doesn't care . . . .

UPDATE: Still unanswered: "Did Pelosi know that the smaller C-37A was just as capable of flying non-stop to California as the lavish C-32, yet request the more expensive C-32 anyway?"

MORE: Reader Phillip Kahn emails:

Nancy Pelosi need not fret about nonstop service via military jets. I happen to work for a major airline (*cough* United *cough*) that provides just the nonstop service from Washington DC to San Francisco that Mrs. Pelosi seems to be looking for. In fact, we even have 8 flights a day each way! Surely Mrs. Pelosi's staff will have plenty of seats to choose from. Although I must admit, I'm a little surprised that she has apparently never heard of us seeing as how we have a hub in the city she works in and another hub in the city she represents. I suppose she's been too busy "looking out for the children" to realize these things.

How convenient! And since commercial carriers in and out of DC give members of Congress special treatment, she can be confident of getting the flights she needs.

THIS SOUNDS GOOD: "Coalition forces in Iraq have delivered a series of stunning blows to al Qaeda in Iraq in the last 48 hours."

Plus, a surprisingly positive report from NPR's Anne Garrels. (Via Kaus). Keep your fingers crossed.

THE POWER OF BLOGS. Beating out football!

BOYS JUST WANT TO HAVE FUN.

JIM GERAGHTY: "When the campaigns start attracting larger entourages, it should be fun to see who's calling for the most stringent restrictions on CO2 emissions, and then to calculate which candidates are actually generating the most emissions during their campaign by flying around the country."

HAPPINESS IS A WARM MACHINE GUN? Actually, a warm machine gun is one that has beeen fired, and given the price of ammo that could be grounds for unhappiness. I took my advanced constitutional law seminar to a shooting range a few years back (we were studying the right to bear arms) and rented an MP5 for the students to shoot. It's only a submachinegun, but I picked up the ammo tab and it was over 200 bucks. But they enjoyed it. So maybe happiness is a warm machine gun so long as someone else is paying for the ammunition. . . .

UPDATE: Reader Jim Hogue emails:

Your comments about the MP-5 brought back some memories, both fond and not so. I lugged an MP-5(A3, I think, it had an retractable stock) around when I was in Mogadishu, Somalia during operation “Restore Hope.” I carried it while on counterintelligence collection trips throughout the neighborhoods near the airport.

I loved the versatility and lightweight. It was easier than a M-16 to maneuver inside a HUMVEE and It shot the same ammo as my M-9 pistol and, unlike M-16 A1 rounds at the time, would ricochet nicely down a dark ally meaning you didn’t have to expose yourself if you needed to return fire.

It had a three round burst selector, which is really all you need. Firing fully automatic used up ammo fast and should only be used if you’re within 10 yds of whoever is shooting at you. That’s WAAY closer than I ever wanted to be!!

I carried three spare magazines including one magazine connected to the magazine currently loaded. The ammo was much heavier than M-16 ammo and that restricted how much we could carry (more was always better!) plus most of the 9MM ammo was meant for pistols and therefore we didn’t take as much of the 9MM as the M-16 ammo in our deployment kits.

The MP-5 was easy to clean and the corrosive salt-water environment coupled with high humidity in Mogadishu meant cleaning was required almost every day.

It was not meant for long firefights, it mainly provided significant short-range firepower to permit you to withdraw from whatever mess you had stumbled into.

I've never particularly enjoyed full-auto fire myself, but some people do. Interestingly, when I took my class to the range it was the women students who seemed to enjoy shooting the MP5 on full auto the most.

TIGERHAWK: "If I were a petty man, I and my anonymous source would be bitter that the Post did not acknowledge whence this story came. However, filled as I am with the milk of human kindness, I am merely delighted to have participated in a small but entertaining national political story."

FRAUD at the National Reconnaissance Office?

JIM LINDGREN looks at historical revisionism regarding spat-upon veterans: "Contrary to Lembcke’s claims, I quite easily found many accounts published in the 1967-1972 period claiming spitting on servicemen. . . . On the issues raised by Professor Lembcke, I have to say that I'll take the world of Congressional Medal of Honor winners and Pulitzer-Prize winning journalists for the New York Times and Washington Post over the professor's armchair speculations--especially since many of the former actually witnessed the events they described, while the professor appears not to have made a serious attempt to review the available evidence before publishing his book." Lindgren has debunked bogus history before, of course.

DAVID BERNSTEIN: "Has the Bush II administration appointed any conservative judges with significant libertarian sympathies? If not, why not?"

AUSTIN BAY looks ahead to springtime in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, here's a StrategyPage look at what's going on in Iraq.

A LOOK AT THAILAND'S MUSLIM INSURGENCY: "The level of killing has gone up to over two people a day, minor by Iraqi standards, but still the most lethal conflict in Southeast Asia, bar none; and it has the potential to grow dramatically in 2007."

HEH: "While I agree with Don Imus that there's 'something wrong with' Chris Matthews, I'm amused to see that no one pointed out the obvious. Imus isn't upset about the F-bomb on his show. He's upset because he owns a ranch."

February 07, 2007

ACTION ALERT: Stop taking yourselves so seriously!

Way back in 2002, Justin Sodano wrote:

Methinks that the blogging community is starting to get a little too big for its britches. Yes, blogging's more popular than ever. Yes, some of you are getting lots and lots of attention (even me, for a brief period).

But everyone needs to calm down, take a step back, and realize that we are all just typing words into a computer. We're not saving the world.

Still true today.

UPDATE: Indeed: "It’s hard to remember when so many had so much to say about so few."

ANOTHER UPDATE: Succinct, as usual.

FROM SAIL TO STEAM IN THE NEWSROOM: "The newspaper industry has been in the grip of a multi-year perturbation that has few parallels to other industry-wide rapid evolutions. In the past I have compared it to the years in which the carriages pulled by horses gave way to motor cars, but that is not the best analogy as one industry died as another rose. The better analogy for newspapers is the transition from sail to steam among ships, especially navies."

"Pinch" Sulzberger agrees:

Given the constant erosion of the printed press, do you see the New York Times still being printed in five years?

"I really don't know whether we'll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don't care either," he says.

Sulzberger is focusing on how to best manage the transition from print to Internet.

"The Internet is a wonderful place to be, and we're leading there," he points out.

The Times, in fact, has doubled its online readership to 1.5 million a day to go along with its 1.1 million subscribers for the print edition.

Sulzberger says the New York Times is on a journey that will conclude the day the company decides to stop printing the paper. That will mark the end of the transition. It's a long journey, and there will be bumps on the road, says the man at the driving wheel, but he doesn't see a black void ahead.

I hope that he's able to pull it off, though his record to date does not inspire confidence.

BAD NEWS FOR THE REPUBLICANS:

When reporters are openly describing, without any sense of remorse, how the Democrats have gamed them into pinning blame squarely on the Republicans, you are definitely not winning the PR contest.

On the other hand, when reporters are willing to do that, it's pretty hard to win the PR contest.

AIR AMERICA FIRE SALE: The Smoking Gun has the documents.

CONFRONTING THE REAL WORLD, at Harvard. Just proof that learning can take place anywhere.

TOM MAGUIRE is providing saturation coverage of the Libby trial.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO A GLOBAL WARMING SHINDIG, IT SHOULD AT LEAST BE IN A hybrid SUV, shouldn't it? I mean, if it's good enough for me, it should be good enough for . . . .

Okay, I guess that doesn't actually work.

UPDATE: Reader Ed Holston thinks this shouldn't be getting publicity:

I'm afraid the conservative blogs are too far ahead of the news cycle: they are becoming corrective image consultants to the Democrats. Expect Pelosi to take a hybrid tomorrow. As with the Edwards campaign bloggers, the quick blog attention helps them corrects their missteps, well before the sympathetic MSM would ever begrudgingly get around to covering it.

Call it the Heisenblog Effect . . . .

KATHRYN JOHNSTON SHOOTING UPDATE:

The Fulton County district attorney will seek felony murder charges against at least one of the Atlanta police officers involved in a botched drug raid that resulted in the shooting death of an elderly woman, said the officer's attorney. . . .

On Nov. 21, narcotics officers went to the home of Kathryn Johnston in southwest Atlanta to execute a "no knock" search warrant. Johnston was killed and the three officers were injured in a ensuing shootout.

"No knock" warrants are frequently issued so police can get inside before suspects can destroy or dispose of drugs. When the officers kicked in the door, the elderly woman apparently fired five shots from her own revolver.

Johnston's friends and family members contended the woman, who kept the gun for her protection, was a feeble and frightened woman who rarely ventured outside after dark. And they say that she was never involved in any drug activity. Her family says she was 92, while authorities say she was 88.

Junnier later told federal investigators that officers had lied to a magistrate judge about sending a confidential informant to Johnston's house to purchase drugs in order to get the warrant.

I'm okay on giving cops -- and anyone else caught in a life-or-death situation through no fault of their own -- the benefit of the doubt. But this life-or-death situation was the cops' fault, for lying in order to get the warrant. Plus, I think that no-knock tactics should be reserved for cases where there's a serious threat to life or limb.

MEGAN MCARDLE: "I'm not sure I understand the objections to mandatory vaccination for HPV."

UPDATE: Eugene Volokh weighs in.

CLAUDIA ROSETT: The curious career of Maurice Strong.

Before the United Nations can save the planet, it needs to clean up its own house. And as scandal after scandal has unfolded over the past decade, from Oil for Food to procurement fraud to peacekeeper rape, the size of that job has become stunningly clear.

But any understanding of the real efforts that job entails should begin with a look at the long and murky career of Maurice Strong, the man who may have had the most to do with what the U.N. has become today, and still sparks controversy even after he claims to have cut his ties to the world organization.

From Oil for Food to the latest scandals involving U.N. funding in North Korea, Maurice Strong appears as a shadowy and often critically important figure.

Read the whole thing.

CRY ME A RIVER: Lawmakers revolt over long hours.

There's a broadening bipartisan "uprising" to ditch the longer workweek among both lawmakers and staff, especially in the Senate, said a top Democratic Senate aide.

"It's a grind," said Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., who enjoys one of the easiest commutes to the Capitol from his home in Northern Virginia. "It's a lot more stringent than people originally thought it would be."

A visibly annoyed Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., agreed: "I just told (Reid) I won't be back by 4:30" for the vote Monday, "even though I'm catching a 1:55 flight."

Things are tough all over.

UPDATE: Not much sympathy at The Mudville Gazette. The troops also work long hours.

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: The "Favor Factory" is open for business again! Mark Tapscott looks at the impending Congressional porkfest and comments:

Perhaps taxpayers should forward their own funding requests to Taylor. If you do, CC me. I'll publish the "most worthy" ones here. Maybe we will even have a public vote on them to see which ones ought to be funded and which should be directed to File 13.

That will be more of a public debate than Congress typically gives the vast majority of earmarks.

Sadly, yes.

MORE REPORTING FROM BAGHDAD on what's going on with the surge.

HEH: "As some people in this room are suddenly finding out, the alternative minimum tax is a way of declaring working people rich and raising their taxes."

IS CHINA RECOLONIZING AFRICA?

MORE DRAMATIC READINGS at Hot Air.

KIDNEY BLEGGING and kidney blogging.

I LOVE LIFE: Michael Totten reports from the top floor of Lebanon's civil society. Excerpt:

Most Lebanese think the American and Israeli “realists” who want to negotiate with the Syrians are painfully naïve at best, and downright sinister at worst. There’s an old saying about the Damascus regime in Beirut: Assad starts the fire, sells the water, and never delivers. And Lebanese will never forget that Secretary of State James Baker green-lighted Syrian domination of Lebanon for completely unneeded “help” in ousting Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.

Like Bill Roggio, Bill Ardolino, Michael Yon, and the other independent bloggers, he relies on donations, so if you like his (or their) work, be sure to remember to make one.

A NEW INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHT -- against religious defamation? When they start locking up imams who call for the murder of Jews, or call them "apes" -- or even proposing that those imams be publicly criticized and ostracized -- I'll believe they're serious.

In the meantime, I've got a different candidate.

UPDATE: More here from Ilya Somin. "In addition, the US and other liberal democracies should consider denying funds to the UN Human Rights Council (which is a strong supporter of the Defamation of Religion resolution, among other attacks on freedom of speech) and other international bodies that promote new international law norms that undermine freedom of speech and other civil liberties. The democracies of the developed world provide these bodies with the lion's share of their funding, and the power of the purse can be used to curb their depradations, even if it can't end them completely."

GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE: "The Bush administration has agreed to provide House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with regular access to an Air Force passenger jet, but the two sides are negotiating whether she will get the big aircraft she wants and who she may take as passengers, according to congressional and administration sources. . . . The defense source, who asked not to be named, termed her request 'carte blanche,' saying she wanted a plane that could carry an entourage just like President Bush, who flies on Air Force One, and Vice President Dick Cheney, who also always flies on military planes." Well, she is third in the line of succession, but you don't need an entourage for that. Dennis Hastert used a commuter-sized jet.

UPDATE: A reader recommends the C-20, an Air Force variant of the Gulfstream III. "It has the range for non stop San Fran to DC, and is faster than a big jet on less fuel." Looks nice to me, though it does produce something like 10,000 lbs of C0₂ per hour. Still, that's a lot less than the jet that Pelosi actually wants, I guess. My reader continues: "Of course it will carry fewer staff, and has only one flight attendant." Quel horreur! But leadership demands sacrifices, especially if we are to save the planet from the scourge of global warming.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Further thoughts from Rich Karlgaard.

MORE: Some greenhouse perspective:

The typical American is responsible for 10 tons of CO2 emissions annually through their direct energy use of home, cars and air travel, and about 24 tons of CO2 including their purchases, activities and the other services we all share throughout the economy.

By comparison, a Gulf Stream III business jet (10-12 passenger) from New York to Los Angeles will emit around 31 tons of CO2 during the 6 hour flight.

And remember, that's the small jet, not the much bigger one that Pelosi wants. Flying commercial, of course, is far more greenhouse-friendly. According to this calculator from British Airways, a one-way one-passenger flight from Washington, DC to San Francisco (roughly the same length, though a bit shorter) would produce 0.44 tonnes (0.485 tons) of C0_2. Even travelling with an "entourage" you're way ahead. Jets full of the hoi polloi aren't as pleasant, but they're much more efficient. Fill the Gulfstream up with people who actually need to travel, of course, and you're doing about as well as the commercial airliner in terms of efficiency, which is why I'm okay on that, but when you get to the bigger planes you're clearly way, way behind -- and if you fill them up with cronies and campaign contributors just because you've got extra seats, you aren't really making things better.

MORE: Weirdly, Josh Marshall writes:

After the piece ran in the Times, it came out the Denny Hastert had had just the same use of Air Force jets since 9/11. The difference is that the plane Hastert used won't fly cross-country without refueling. Here's the Times at the story again today. It's basically a rehash. But they again fail to mention this salient point, which more or less exposes the whole story as bogus.

But actually the story does mention that point quite clearly:

Mr. Hastert used an Air Force commuter-type jet to travel to and from his district. Mr. Hastert gained the access for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, attacks. Previously, the House speaker, who is second in the line of succession to the presidency, used commercial flights for such trips.

Mrs. Pelosi wants a larger aircraft that can fly to her home district of San Francisco nonstop. She also wants to be able to ferry other members of the congressional delegation, family members and her staff.

Hastert had a commuter jet. Pelosi wants a bigger one, partly for nonstop range and partly to accommodate an "entourage." That seems clear to me, and to others -- it's why my reader recommended the long-range C20, above, a commuter-sized jet that won't accommodate an entourage. Meanwhile, here's another bit from the story:

The congressional source said the speaker's office requested an Air Force plane to take her to a weekend Democratic retreat in Williamsburg, but the Pentagon declined.

The source said Mr. Hastert on one occasion used an Air Force plane for such an event. The Air Force later determined it was a mistake, and such flights were not repeated.

The source said the Pentagon will likely give in to Mrs. Pelosi's requests for a large plane and travel entourage, given her and Mr. Murtha's power over defense spending.

Pelosi seems to want to establish herself as a sort of Junior President. This seems unwise to me, and it's certainly bad for Hillary -- why vote for the first woman President if we've already got one?

STILL MORE: Here's another story:

Republicans are taking issue with the size of the plane Pelosi has requested. Pelosi had asked for access to a C-32 plane, a military version of the Boeing 757-200. . . .

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, flew in a small commuter-sized jet. Pelosi and her aides say that because her congressional district is in California, her security would require a larger plane that can fly coast to coast without refueling.

"It's not a question of size, it's a question of distance," Pelosi said Wednesday. "We want an aircraft that can reach California."

Navy Cmdr. Jefrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday that Pelosi would be offered "shuttle service for no more than 10 passengers between Washington and San Francisco only based on aircraft availability."

"This does not guarantee nonstop transport," Gordon said.

Demanding nonstop service seems a bit much. That's certainly hard for the rest of us to get, in this hub-and-spoke era. And the C-20 above seems to have the range she wants, it's just not as big as a large commercial airliner -- and, really, why should it be?

EVEN MORE: Thuggishness from Murtha:

Late Wednesday afternoon, one of Pelosi's closest allies in the House, Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., chairman of the key Appropriations Committee subcommittee on defense, told CNN that the Pentagon was making "a mistake" by leaking information unfavorable to the speaker "since she decides on the allocations for the Department of Defense."

Nice little Army you got there. Shame if something was to happen to it. However, this story has a lot more detail. It suggests that the C-20 is iffy for coast-to-coast flights, but that the C-37 (basically a military Gulfstream V) is what the Pentagon was offering:

There are four types of planes available at the 89th Airlift wing, at nearby Andrews Air Force Base  the C-20 Hastert once used, C-21s which are even smaller than the C-20 and thus not able to fly nonstop to San Francisco, and the fabled C-32.

There is also the C-37A — a military version of the Gulf Stream 5, which is about the same size as the C-20, but is able to fly nonstop to California. One military source who asked not to be identified says that it may be that Pelosi and her aides were shown a C-37A and didn't understand that it was different and more potent than a C-20, since they look so similar.

Would Pelosi be willing to use a smaller plane than the lavish C-32 as long as it could fly coast to coast?

"Yes," said a Pelosi aide.

Problem solved! Though the Gulfstream V will still make the greenhouse talk ring a bit hollower, I should think.

TERRY MORAN: "If a Republican candidate teamed up with a right-wing blogger who spewed this kind of venom, how would people react?"

UPDATE: Rand Simberg defends the blogosphere.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A lot of the lefty bloggers are up in arms that this has become a scandal. (The desperation is apparent in posts like this one, especially when you follow the links back and compare the actual posts with Marcotte's blogging). I suspect that this is because a lot of them would like to join the establishment, and now fear that their prior anti-establishment rantings will get in the way. It'll be interesting to see if there's more Pandagon-like airbrushing of blog archives over the next few weeks. Meanwhile, other Presidential candidates would be well advised to spend a bit more time poking through the archives of any bloggers they think about hiring. There's nothing really wrong with cursing or overwrought blogging in itself, but the standards for political operatives are different. And, as the Pat Buchanan / Larry Pratt business years ago demonstrated, candidates are held responsible for what these people do and say. Traditionally, people who want to rise in the ranks of political operatives have had to be careful about their behavior; this applies to bloggers who want to do that, too.

As Jay Reding says, "Predictably, the left-wing blogosphere has gone nuts over the piece. Like it or not, Ms. Marcotte may have the right to free speech, and no one is arguing that she should be censored. However, what she says is incendiary, derogatory, and bigoted. Had she treated Islam the way she treats Catholicism, she’d be widely ostracized."

Ann Althouse observes: "All you bloggers seeking political jobs should expect the same ... and more. After this new dustup, your prospective employers should check to make sure there are no usefully discrediting quotes, and you may never get the job." She's not so sure that keeping the blogosphere, and professional campaign posts, separate is such a bad thing.

A.C. Kleinheider: "I would caution John Edward's against bowing to the advice that those around him are no doubt giving him: that these bloggers are liabilities and political dynamite that needs defusing. Yes, the conventional wisdom among the political elite will be that these bloggers are liabilities. It won't always be however. If new media and blogging is something you want to embrace, you must go whole hog or not at all." I don't think that Edwards should fire them either; presumably he hired them because of their blogging, after all, and it's unfair to fire them for the same reason. It's a campaign -- he's taking criticism for their views, but if he believes in the views he should keep them on. You always get criticism in campaigns. This will be an interesting test of Edwards' backbone.

Further thoughts on the lefty blogosphere's conniptions here.

MORE: I agree with Conn Carroll: "If Edwards understood what he was doing when he hired Marcotte, he must follow the advice of Bowers and Wilbur. When Edwards hired Marcotte he signed up to a hard hitting unapologetic movement, a movement whose rhetoric is, shall we say, not always appreciated in the mainstream. If he backs off the ethos now, he can kiss their support away forever."

And if he didn't understand what he was doing, then this raises some questions about his future personnel decisions.

More thoughts here. And IowaHawk has got the papers.

A LOOK AT THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT: I haven't read Lance Hill's book on the subject, but I have a story of my own. About ten years ago, we had Kathleen Cleaver speak at the law school and lots of folks from the black community came. During the Q&A, one older black minister stood up and said that the right to bear arms had been the most important constitutional right during the Civil Rights era and told a similar story to the one here. Many of my colleagues were surprised. I wasn't, because I had read the work of Robert Cottrol and Ray Diamond.

BAD NEWS FOR THE RIAA:

Debbie Foster, the RIAA file sharing defendent who notoriously took on the organization after it went after her for copyright infringement, has won some amount of the legal fees [see update below] she seeks from the RIAA after having their case against her dismissed last summer.

This is a significant development; the landmark case could have dramatic repercussions for the RIAA's legal campaign against file sharers, since a precedent now exists for the RIAA to compensate wrongfully-sued defendants for their legal costs.

(VIA BoingBoing). Plus, Steve Jobs wants to abolish DRM.

TRANSPARENCY: In Tennessee, a proposal to make the legislature subject to the Open Records law, Tennessee's equivalent of FOIA. It's a good idea, and Congress should make itself subject to FOIA, too!

A NEW LOOK AT THE NEW DEAL, from Arnold Kling and Brad DeLong.

HOROLOGIUM IS BACK.

MINE YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

EUGENE VOLOKH OFFERS FREE LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING ADVICE to Tennessee Rep. Rob Briley.

THE MPAA WILL PROBABLY BLAME PIRACY for declining movie attendance, but this Zogby poll suggests an alternative explanation: the movies suck:

High ticket prices (30%) and a dislike for the movie selections (30%) are the top reasons given for falling movie attendance – 13% said they don’t like the crowds in the theater. Those age 18-24 are most likely to complain about costly tickets – nearly half (46%) said high ticket prices have kept them away from the theater. Among older adults, dissatisfaction with the film selections is the main deterrent – 46% of those age 65 or older said this