HEY, I DIDN'T NOTICE IT BEFORE, but the Glenn and Helen Show has been nominated for best podcast at the Weblog Awards. Vote early and often!
MORE NON-PITY for ambitious young strivers who want to change the world while earning large salaries. "In fact, one of my biggest mistakes in life was not recognizing early that the most effective way to achieve my goals would have been to get wealthy first, then to apply that wealth toward them, as Elon Musk, John Carmack, Jeff Bezos and others have done. . . . But their fundamental premise is flawed. Who is it that really changes the world, and for the better?" Read the whole thing.
DO NOT TRUST CONTENT FROM ANDREW SULLIVAN: I can't go around answering all of Andrew Sullivan's misrepresentations, but it's telling that he can't seem to criticize me without misrepresenting what I've said. In this post he links to a truncated version of my views on the torture debate on another blog. Why?
Probably because if he linked to my actual post it would reveal some uncomfortable things. First, that I'm not pro-torture despite Andrew's pathetic eagerness to find me so, and second, that I was criticizing the Democrats' inconsistency on the subject. Oh, and third, it appears that waterboarding, over which Andrew has exercised himself so much in recent years, and upon which he has staked his many, many, many, many claims to moral supremacy, actually stopped in 2003 -- ironically, just as Andrew executed his pivot against Bush and the war -- and was only used three times. This seems pretty consistent with my view of torture, which is that I'm against it, but that it's not quite the issue Andrew wants it -- perhaps I should say needs it -- to be. Rather, especially for the Democrats, the torture debate has been a political tool, applied in an "any weapon to hand" fashion when politics dictate, but abandoned when they feel the need to talk tough on terrorism.
Meanwhile, at the Cato Institute, a correction to John Quiggin, who was led into error by foolishly relying on Andrew's representations that I had renounced libertarianism.
DAVE KOPEL: Fred Thompson 1, United Nations 0. Plus this: "It's been a long time since a major presidential candidate quoted Grotius, and my view is the more Grotius in America's public debates, the better. I hope Pufendorf starts to get some attention too." Apparently, Thompson was listening in law school. Plus, this observation: "It's rather telling that the UN's American defenders fail to directly address an indisputable fact: U.N. Human Rights Council's subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights has endorsed a report denying the existence of a human right of self-defense."
TONY SNOW ON the news industry's decline: "There's an old boast in the business -- that the job of a journalist is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. The thing is, we never realized that we were becoming The Comfortable."
JULES CRITTENDEN: "Even the Brits, who are barely in Iraq anymore, are noticing how unsporting the Iraq coverage is."
GOOD POINT ON THE MURTHA SCANDALS: "Just imagine for a moment if this had been Newt Gingrich." Think we would have heard more?
IN THE MAIL: Stephen Baskerville's Taken Into Custody, on marriage, divorce, and families. It actually came last week, but the Insta-Wife immediately stole it.
A STATE OF EMERGENCY IN PAKISTAN: Follow the link for a roundup.
Such is the mixed legacy of ethics reform passed by the new Democratic majority that took control of Congress in January on a wave of voter revulsion about corruption. The Democrats banned an assortment of sleazy practices, such as the gifts lobbyists used to shower on Congress. They also ordered lobbyists to report more fully on contacts and contributions. But they left plenty of wiggle room and, not surprisingly, there's plenty of wiggling going on. . . .
One of Congress' seamiest practices is earmarking, when lawmakers slip special projects into bills to direct your tax dollars to politically favored recipients. The Senate promised to shine a bright light on this practice. But in some cases, the reform works more like a low-watt bulb. For example, the $5.2 billion in earmarks tucked into the Senate's defense spending bill are still difficult to decipher, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group.
Then there's the whole private-jet thing. Follow the link for more.
Geez, we’ve been dealing with this in academic science for decades now.
I wish these people would do the math: Doing something that’s stimulating and fun, sounds great at a cocktail party, and is supported by charity or tax money means that you will probably be making peanuts. (In my field, there are usually about 200 applicants/permanent position, all with Ph.D.s.)
Don’t like being broke? Do something that makes you a profit center instead of a cost center.
So later this month, according to THIS INVITATION, the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, is holding a "Rural Americans for Hillary" lunch and campaign briefing at the end of this month….
..but she's holding it in Washington, DC….
…at a lobbying firm…
… and specifically, though it's not mentioned in the invitation, at the lobbying firm Troutman Sanders Public Affairs…
…which just so happens to lobby for the controversial multinational agri-biotech Monsanto.
Behind the rise of Concurrent is Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee, who helped arrange funding to launch the organization in 1988. Murtha has since arranged millions of dollars more in directed congressional appropriations called earmarks. Now Concurrent has nearly $250 million in annual revenue and 1,500 employees.
Concurrent is a prime example of how to marry entrepreneurial savvy, influence on Capitol Hill and arcane procurement rules to create budget magnets in congressional districts. Unlike many other big contractors, Concurrent pays no income tax on most of its revenue. Unlike nonprofit, federally funded research-and-development corporations, it is not chartered by the federal government. . . .
"The message they give to federal agencies is, 'We're the guys you want to play with because we have big friends,' " said Keith Ashdown, an investigator at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan group in the District that monitors congressional spending. "This is the model everyone is following."
No danger of corruption here. Move along.
REASONS TO VOTE FOR HILLARY: "Hillary Clinton, like Richard Nixon, is a hard-boiled realist, who understands national vital interests as well as political necessities. She will throw rhetorical bones to the left but govern in the center, because she will want to be reelected. She will employ all the usual suspects of the American foreign-policy making establishment and pursue a moderate-to-firm course in international relations. . . . John Edwards is fairly close to reality when he says a 'vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for the status quo.'"
ROBERT SPENCER AT DARTMOUTH: Joe Malchow has posted video, circumventing Google's censorship.
Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.
It's pointing out the obvious, but sometimes to see what is in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle.
166,000 NEW JOBS: Much better than expected. Larry Kudlow is gloating.
SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY SPEECH CODE enjoined.
President Bush just added another resident to Vetoland, this resident being the water projects bill that got saturated with pork-barrel projects in conference. Despite having enough votes to override his veto, Bush sent the bill back as a protest against its escalating earmarks . . . .
The reason for the veto seems rather obvious. The House approved a $14 billion waterworks bill, and the Senate approved a $15 billion companion bill. Rather than split the difference and approve a $14.5 billion bill, or even go with the Senate's $15 billion, the conference committee reported out a $23 billion bill that proves that when pork multiplies, it's because taxpayers are getting screwed.
Seriously -- how did an extra $8 billion get added to the bill in conference? That's an increase of over 50% from the Senate bill, in conference. The larger embarrassment is that our elected representatives didn't see this greedy manipulation of the conference process as any big deal and overwhelmingly supported the results.
That's what pork does to corrupt the legislative process -- it buys votes. It's a bribery system that helps cover up another bribery system. One porcine paw washes the other, and the resulting appropriations grow on grotesque scales almost overnight.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Of course, if Bush had been willing to veto pork-laden bills a couple of years ago, Republicans might have held onto the Congress. Still, better late than never, I guess.
First, it was the Dangerous Book for Boys, and now it's the Daring Book for Girls. We talked to Daring Book authors Andrea Buchanan and Miriam Peskowitz about girls, the outdoors, and the shockingly large number of fun activities that don't involve cellphones, televisions, or videogames.
There's lots of talk about hopscotch, building forts, the virtues of Swiss Army knives and scooters, and the importance of doing things out in the world. Plus, the surprising virtues of boys. And is Hillary Clinton a daring girl?
You can listen directly (no downloading needed) by going here and clicking on the gray Flash player. You can download the file and listen at your leisure by clicking right here. And you can get a lo-fi version, suitable for dialup, cellphones, etc. by going here and selecting lo-fi. A free iTunes subscription is available here, and you can visit our show archives at GlennandHelenShow.com.
TURNING THE ETHICS TABLES: "Senate Republicans said Thursday they would invoke new ethics rules to block Democratic efforts to send to President Bush the first appropriations package of the 110th Congress. . . . Under the new ethics law, which was enacted in September, sustaining a point of order would strike the offending language, in this case the Veterans Affairs measure. The bill without the offending language would then be sent back to the House for reconsideration. Before the law, sustaining the point of order under Senate Rule 28 would essentially kill the bill. Congress changed the rules to make it easier for members to strike language inserted during the penultimate stage of the legislative process. When they regained their majority at the beginning of the year, Democrats vowed to make conference committee action more transparent after complaining for years that Republicans had abused the process by inserting provisions in the dead of night."
GOOD NEWS ON IRAQ: See Page 18. "Well, it couldn’t very well displace this Page 1 scoop: 'Schumer Stays Mum on Mukasey.' After all, when was the last time Chuck said nothing about anything?" Now that is news!
PRO-TORTURE DEMOCRATS: "Clinton, Clinton, Obama and Schumer. They have all, to a greater or lesser degree, embraced the concept of coercive interrogation (some, even torture — which is unquestionably illegal), and they have all underscored the excruciating complexity of this issue. Somehow, they are fit to lead the Democratic Party but the suitability of Mukasey — who has taken a more measured stance — to be attorney general is in doubt? What am I missing here?"
I dunno. Maybe that the "torture" debate is a political tool, and otherwise unserious?
UPDATE: Reader Patrick Cullen emails:
Simply a politocal tool? Really!?
I just cant stay with you on this one, Glenn. I don't care what party is in charge or who's zooming who on this. Its become an awful stain on our reputation. We need to maintain as much high ground as possible, and you seem to still be looking through the foggy glasses on this issue.
This is America. Surely we do not need to resort to the tactics of Stalinist Russia or the Khmer Rouge to preserve democracy. I am a two-time Bush voter who is embarrased by this Administrations power grab and lawleessness in the face of danger. I keep waiting for a glimmer of sanity from you on this...
I've been consistently against torture. The Democrats have been inconsistently against torture. If I'm looking through "foggy glasses," it's because I've failed to appreciate how much the Dems have been allowed to get away with this inconsistency.
For all the debate over waterboarding, it has been used on only three al Qaeda figures, according to current and former U.S. intelligence officials.
As ABC News first reported in September, waterboarding has not been used since 2003 and has been specifically prohibited since Gen. Michael Hayden took over as CIA director.
So is this an issue now because it matters, or because it's a partisan political tool? I think I know the answer. And I was entirely serious when I suggested that Mukasey volunteer to be waterboarded along with any interested members of Congress. I'll be happy to do it too: Me, the AG, and Chuck Schumer. Let the cameras roll.
VIDEO ON THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE'S CLIMBDOWN ON INDOCTRINATION, at Hot Air.
MORE LIKE THIS, PLEASE: "Scientists at Case Western Reserve University have genetically engineered mice that outrun, outlive, and out-eat ordinary mice while staying lean, light, and fertile well into old age. Chalk it up to a change in a single gene." This isn't quite Aubrey de Grey's Methuselah Mouse, but it's a move in that direction.
THUMBS DOWN ON COLBERT from South Carolina Democrats. They're afraid of the Colbert juggernaut. But since the reason they gave was that he's not a national candidate, there's only one thing to do -- go national!
HILLARY SUPPORTER: Tim Russert should be shot. "Another said Russert 'should be shot,' before quickly adding that she shouldn’t say that on a conference call." Er, no.
DEPTH-CHARGING THE CANDIDATES: Mickey Kaus observes:
Rosenbaum's post seems to be functioning as a sort of depth charge that threatens to bring all the various rumored scandals about all the candidates to the surface. It would be funny if they all turned out to be true! And then Rosenbaum's initial report--that the LAT is sitting on something--turned out to be not true! ... I'm not saying that's the case. I'm just saying that would be funny.
Indeed. Meanwhile, David Zincavage observes: "Can’t one just imagine all the things that could come out in a Giuliani vs. Hillary election campaign?"
Every single time I write about health insurance, commenters and emailers flock to tell me that I wouldn't feel this way if I, or anyone I know, had been sick and uninsured.
I'm afraid the empirical evidence indicates that you're wrong. I was uninsured, with asthma and an autoimmune disease, for years as a freelancer. I was then, if anything, more opposed to national health insurance than I am now.
Read the whole thing.
November 01, 2007
CHUCK SCHUMER defends torture if "thousands of lives are at stake."
"It's easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture cannot be used. But when you're in the foxhole, it's a very different deal. And I respect, I think we all respect, that the President's in the foxhole every day."
I WASN'T GOING TO RESPOND when Andrew Sullivan -- deliberately, or in unforgivable cluelessness -- transformed my statement about leaving the Libertarian Party into something about not being a libertarian at all. Andrew says a lot of silly things about me these days, and life is too short to pay attention to them. But now that silliness seems to be spreading. So let me repeat what I said before: "But note that no longer being a member of the Libertarian Party is hardly the same thing as not being a libertarian. If it were, there would be precious few libertarians left." Anyone who can't understand the difference between libertarian ideas and the Libertarian Party probably isn't smart enough to be blogging, and certainly shouldn't have his page topped with the words "Of no party or clique."
Doubtful. If they did, they'd probably be recommending the sword cane. I didn't realize anybody made those anymore.
Of course, you could always defend yourself with a deadly pickle. And then destroy the evidence, with no trace left behind except for a hint of garlic-breath!
But if science and engineering programs are vulnerable because they don't have enough women, are universities as a whole vulnerable for not having enough men?
The complaint writes itself, and that's even before we note the absence of Men's Centers and the frequency of antimale rhetoric from faculty and administrators.
A GO-ANYWHERE KEG COOLER that's also environmentally friendly! So you can fight global warming by having a cold one, I guess . . . .
She's a triangulator. A trimmer. A carefully calculating pol who says what people want to hear. A canny candidate who is allergic to specifics. That image could damage Clinton long after everyone has forgotten about her specific answer on MSNBC. Remember the Bush ad that showed John Kerry windsurfing left and right in a flip-flopping metaphor?
The media are piling on, in part because journalists believe White House aspirants should be seriously scrutinized, and in part because they are desperate to turn this into a horse race.
Yeah, it's gotten pretty dull and there's still a year to go.
DIPLOMACY IS NOT FOR AMATEURS: And, unfortunately, the professionals aren't especially good at it either . . . .
LEFT AND RIGHT BLOGOSPHERES UNITE over access to debate footage. Stories here and here.
THE NEW BLACKLIST: An excerpt from Roger Simon's forthcoming book on Hollywood. Best line: "With my radical past, I suspect I could do a better job of writing left-wing movies than Hollywood has lately, judging from the box office receipts of those films."
GEE, THAT'S A TOUGH ONE: "Is the WaPo 'running a story based off of selective quotations and gross mischaracterizations from a handful of memos?'"
UPDATE: From the comments: "Let me see if I have this straight, we can get the memos of a defense secretary in a time of war before the administration he worked for is even out of office, but we cannot get the memos of the first lady 7 years after her administration is over?"
Why is it that news sites refuse to publish the documents upon which they report? I mean, even Glenn Greenwald produced the emails he was mischaracterizing. Why can’t The Washington Post do the same with the infamous “snowflake memos” it has managed to obtain?
Because then people could make up their own minds.
BLOGGERS COMPLAIN ABOUT HILLARY to the Federal Election Commission. "The complaint, filed by Matthew Margolis and Mark Noonan, cites stories published in the Los Angeles Times and New York Post questioning contributions to Clinton’s Democratic presidential campaigns from impoverished Chinese neighborhoods in New York City." I'm not hsurprised that this has happened. And these guys wrote the book on the subject!
“Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated,” according to Sheik Omar Jabouri, spokesman for the Iraqi Islamic Party and a member of the widespread and influential Jabouri Tribe. Speaking through an interpreter at a 31 October meeting at the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in downtown Baghdad, Sheik Omar said that al Qaeda had been “defeated mentally, and therefore is defeated physically,” referring to how clear it has become that the terrorist group’s tactics have backfired. Operatives who could once disappear back into the crowd after committing an increasingly atrocious attack no longer find safe haven among the Iraqis who live in the southern part of Baghdad. They are being hunted down and killed. Or, if they are lucky, captured by Americans.
As with all Michael Yon reports, read the whole thing. And remember that he's supported by reader donations, so if you like his work, consider hitting the tipjar.
UPDATE: Pockets of Al Qaeda support still remain, though.
What I find most interesting is that in all the speculation about who was involved, I haven't seen anyone suggest that it was a Hillary sex scandal. That must mean something . . . .
Of course, if members of Congress think waterboarding is torture they could just, you know, outlaw it.
UPDATE: No waterboard, but Chuck Schumer is feeling squeezed: "With a crucial Judiciary Committee vote on attorney general nominee Michael Mukasey scheduled for Tuesday, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) finds himself in a conundrum as fellow Democrats begin to turn against the man he publicly recommended for the nation’s top law enforcement spot." I guess Schumer's too far-right for today's Democratic Party!
MORE KAUS-STYLE ANECDOTAGE ON IMMIGRATION: Took my car to the car wash today. The work force used to be all Mexican; now there were no Mexicans to be seen. More results from even modest immigration enforcement? One downside: All the newly-hired American workers were kinda disorganized and slow compared to the old Mexican workforce. Maybe that will change with practice.
UPDATE: Reader James Paternoster thinks I'm too optimistic about the practice:
The roofers next door speak Spanish and work quickly, as at the carwash. There's a work ethic that must be as attractive to employers in the trades as the wages they can pay to illegals. Perhaps it's even a bigger factor than the wages: I wonder what Mickey Kaus thinks about that question. And whether Americans' experience with Mexican workers will raise expectations of tradespeople and manual workers generally? And whether that can lead to a better work ethic, or whether it will just lower the quality of service?
To be fair, these guys didn't seem lazy, just badly coordinated. But the work-ethic point is one I've heard a lot.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Steve DiSciullo emails: "The Mexicans are afraid of being fired and the Americans aren't, that's the difference."
Because they know the narrative, but those pesky facts don't fit. . . .
NOW THAT'S SCARY: Forget zombies. I sent off my next Popular Mechanics column, got ready to take it easy for a few days, and then checked my email to find not one, but two law review articles back from the editing process for revisions. I'd prefer zombies -- they just want to eat your brain, not subject it to bluebook citation form . . . .
ROBERT SAMUELSON LOOKS AT CULTURE AND POVERTY. The notion that some cultures are more likely to produce prosperity is troublingly non-multi-culti, but it is nonetheless correct. Prosperity doesn't happen on its own. It requires certain basic features that not all societies have, or even want.
IMPORTANT HEALTH NEWS: "While the doldrums that follow lunch are still not completely understood, recent research strongly supports a brief nap to treat them." Naps are good.
MY COLLEAGUE BEN BARTON: The Justin Timberlake of the law professoriate? Personally, I think he's more talented. And I know he has better taste in women . . . .
A WEBSITE THAT LETS YOU create your own cookbook. I like the idea for All Corn, All the Time. But according to James Lileks, that's now politically incorrect. "It's the new tobacco. Squanto's Revenge!"
LONGEVITY UPDATE: In the Washington Post, Joel Garreau writes: "Aubrey de Grey may be wrong but, evidence suggests, he's not nuts. This is a no small assertion. De Grey argues that some people alive today will live in a robust and youthful fashion for 1,000 years."
Thoughts on aging research as an election issue, here. And more background can be found here.
REBECCA AGUILAR UPDATE: Writing in today's Dallas Morning News, Aguilar supporter Mark Davis argues that suspension is enough punishment, and that dismissal is unwarranted. Read the whole thing.
Why is Rudy doing so well? People in the know used to think the rubes just didn't realize Rudy has dressed in drag and once lived with 2 gay guys; they just remembered him as the star of that 9/11 show they saw on TV that one time.
But now it's dawning on the pundits that Americans probably know all that stuff by now, so why isn't Rudy sunk? They're shuffling around for explanations.
Shuffling, indeed.
PROFESSOR BAINBRIDGE: "Maintaining civilian control of the military is a two way street."
UPDATE: Steven Den Beste senses a double bind here:
We've been told incessantly that we can't advocate war unless we as individuals are willing to join the military and personally fight that same war. Otherwise we're chickenhawks.
And now we're told that members of the military are not permitted to express opinions in favor of the war. (Soldiers against the war like Scott Beauchamp, of course, are lauded even when it's shown that they're liars.)
ALI ETERAZ: "The future of Islamic reform lies with post-Islamism - a recognition that politics rather than religion provides for welfare in this life."
ROGER KIMBALL on the limits of openness. "The moral burden of the campaign (as distinct from its aim of benefiting its client) is not to encourage us to think more carefully about what it means to be a leader or follower, to be good or bad, to be trendy or traditional, but rather to blur the distinction between those contraries altogether. The aim is to short-circuit, not refine, our powers of discrimination. And the goal of that disruption is always at the expense of one side of the equation."
OUCH: "Isn't it sort of disappointing that one has to spend this much time telling journalists, and journalists' most ardent supporters, why it is important that journalists don't lie?"
CJR:What was CBS thinking? "I can’t help but wonder what the reaction would be if some big-name blogger had done something like this. It would have been open season on the blogosphere, with lamentations over the amateurish, rule-free environment that blogs inhabit, with the mainstream media gleefully tisk-tisking over their misguided young cousins."
BLAST FROM THE PAST: Reader Wayne Baisley emails: "In case you were unaware of it, 47 seconds into Brownsville Turnaround On The Tex-Mex Border, the opening track on The KLF's 1990 album Chill Out, the Mexican radio announcer mentions, 'Comandante Glenn Reynolds.'"
Heh. Yeah, the KLF was a big influence on Mobius Dick, actually, though not this album particularly. (In fact, it wasn't really any of their albums as much as some of their attitude; Mobius Dick was influenced more by Juan Atkins, Juno Reactor, BT, etc.). You can hear the sound clip here.
UPDATE: While we're plumbing the distant past, the inspiration for "A.G. Android" came from this Tom Tomorrow cartoon.
DEBATE FATIGUE DEEPENS: "Can anyone possibly be in the mood to see that none of her competitors come close to Hillary again?" Luckily, it's not affecting very many people.
DAVID ADESNIK: "I consider it a small victory when even the UN recognizes that anti-American forces are the actual perpetrators of crimes against humanity."
MICKEY KAUS: "Do you sense there is some large mass of dark matter, an unseen Scandal Star, the gravitational pull of which is warping the coverage of what seems, on the surface, a pretty dull presidential race? I do."
UDPATE: Reader Tony Deakin wonders if this is it. I doubt it. Not enough sex.
MEET THE NEW BOSS, YADA YADA: "Earmarks. Back-room deals. Cronyism. This is the kind of stuff the Democrats pledged to clean up during their 'Culture of Corruption' campaign swing in 2006. But members like Murtha — influential power-brokers addicted to the old ways — have very effectively prevented them from keeping their promises. At the beginning of the year, Murtha called the Democrats' ambitious ethics-reform proposals 'total crap.' Thanks to guys like him, that's what they've amounted to."
LAME PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS FROM LAW SCHOOLS are called "law porn" in the trade. Tom Smith objects to the term: "My objection is that it is demeaning to pornography."
MORE ON INDOCTRINATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE, from John Leo. "The basic question about the program is how did they think they could ever get away with this?"
EUGENE VOLOKH: "First, killing an enemy military leader -- and apparently a highly competent one -- in the middle of a war almost always is the humanitarian decision. It takes little consideration, it seems to me, for our military to properly come to this conclusion. That Yamamoto was 'highly intelligent' and that he had lived among us might have emotionally humanized him to people who are considering his fate. But it surely didn't entitle him to any exemption from military attack. . . . There's nothing humanitarian about preserving an enemy military leader -- and instead focusing only on killing enemy line soldiers -- when that means more likely deaths for our soldiers. . . . Indeed, if Yamamoto's killing were analogous to the death penalty, then the death penalty should be acclaimed as a high moral imperative: Rather than wondering whether the death penalty saves innocent lives, we'd be nearly sure of it." Read the whole thing.
UPDATE: Dan Phoenix thinks there's less to this story than news reports suggest.
HAVE GIRLS' HALLOWEEN COSTUMES gotten too slutty? "A bigger question is, who's designing these costumes in the first place? And why do they think parents will buy them?"
I'm okay on slutty, but not for 9-year-olds.
NAGGING WORRIES ABOUT CHINA. Me, I think that their long-term prospects are excellent if they can avoid civil war, but that they're currently in the mother of all bubbles and that it is likely to pop with a serious bang.
CLOSE, BUT NO CIGAR: A report on Armadillo Aerospace's close brush with success in pursuit of the Lunar Lander Prize.
Plus, an interview with Peter Diamandis on what's next.
They told me that if George W. Bush were re-elected, we'd see loyalty oaths and ideological crushing of dissent on America's campuses. And they were right!
ADVERTISING AGE: "Of course, the news here is that The New Republic still had advertisers!"
IN THE MAIL: Judge Andrew Napolitano's new book -- out today -- entitled A Nation of Sheep. The thesis, I gather, is that Americans are no longer willing to stand up for freedom.
The general advice for avoiding infection is basic hygiene — washing hands or using alcohol-based sanitizers, keeping scrapes covered until healed and refraining from sharing personal items like towels and cosmetics.
But some recent laboratory studies suggest that antibacterial products containing triclosan may not be the best way to stay clean. Instead of wiping out bacteria randomly, the way regular soap or alcohol-based products do, triclosan may inhibit the growth of bacteria in a way that leaves a larger proportion of resistant bacteria behind, according to lab studies at Tufts and Colorado State Universities, among others.
The concerns are still theoretical at the moment, but of course by the time they're not it'll be a problem. On the other hand, it's hard to argue with this:
Soap companies say the worry about triclosan takes the focus away from the real culprit: the abuse of antibiotics and the need for better hygiene in general.
Unlike illegal drugs, abuse of antibiotics raises the risk of harming many, many other people. And hand-washing is always good.
MORE HATE in tolerant, multi-culti Europe. "Books calling for the beheading of lapsed Muslims, ordering women to remain indoors and forbidding interfaith marriage are being sold inside some of Britain’s leading mosques, according to research seen by The Times."
In the massive 2008 military-spending bill now before Congress -- which could go to a House-Senate conference as soon as Thursday -- Mr. Murtha has steered more taxpayer funds to his congressional district than any other member. The Democratic lawmaker is chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, which will oversee more than $459 billion in military spending this year.
Johnstown's good fortune has come at the expense of taxpayers everywhere else. Defense contractors have found that if they open an office here and hire the right lobbyist, they can get lucrative, no-bid contracts. Over the past decade, Concurrent Technologies Corp., a defense-research firm that employs 800 here, got hundreds of millions of dollars thanks to Rep. Murtha despite poor reviews by Pentagon auditors. The National Drug Intelligence Center, with 300 workers, got $509 million, though the White House has tried for years to shut it down as wasteful and unnecessary. Another beneficiary: MTS Technologies, run by a man who got his start some 40 years ago shining shoes at Mr. Murtha's Johnstown Minute Car Wash.
A review by The Wall Street Journal of dozens of such contracts funded by Mr. Murtha's committee shows that many weren't sought by the military or federal agencies they were intended to benefit. Some were inefficient or mismanaged, according to interviews, public records and previously unpublished Pentagon audits. One Murtha-backed firm, ProLogic Inc., is under federal investigation for allegedly diverting public funds to develop commercial software, people close to the case say. The company denies wrongdoing and is in line to get millions of dollars more in the pending defense bill.
I'd say that further -- and broader -- investigation is warranted. Read the whole thing, as it's a free link.