“AM I RACIST?” No.

MARK STEYN: Most terrorists are jokes until the bomb goes off.

THIS CRUSHING OF DISSENT STUFF is starting to show a pattern.

JAM YESTERDAY AND JAM TOMORROW, BUT NEVER JAM TODAY: Reader Thomas Prewitt writes:

Funny how Bush 41 led a hugely successful military effort with Gulf War I yet lost an election because of the perception that “it’s the economy, stupid.”

Now, Bush 43 is in the tank because of the perception that Gulf War II is a disaster based on lies and gets no credit for a remarkable economic turnaround with record stock market highs, low unemployment, and huge chunks taken out of the budget deficit.

How does that happen?

I think it’s the Martin Crutsinger approach to economic reporting.

PRESSURING BUSH.

TECH-BILLIONAIRE boot camp.

Plus, five ways to become a millionaire.

“AM I RACIST?” No.

“TALIBAN CHIEF’S DEATH A BIG U.S. VICTORY:” That’s pretty strong stuff coming from AP, not noted for its positive war coverage, so I guess it’s big news. For lasting success, though, it’ll take a lot of these — and probably some improvement with Pakistan, which is looking pretty dicey at the moment.

StrategyPage has more on Afghanistan, including this observation: “Overall, the level of Taliban violence is less than last year. The Taliban boasted of a larger ‘offensive’ this year, but so far have not been able to deliver. . . . The Taliban have had more success using publicists, than guys with guns.”

COULD THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION BAN SALES OF The Secret?

I DON’T LIKE THIS, EITHER:

In 2009 the betting is that America will see the son of a former president replaced by the wife of another former president. If Hillary Clinton is then re-elected in 2012, the world’s greatest democracy will have been ruled by either a Bush or a Clinton for 28 years straight. And why should things end there? Michael Barone, author and pundit, points out that George P. Bush, the current president’s nephew, will be eligible to run for the presidency in 2012, Chelsea Clinton will be eligible in 2016 and Jeb Bush will remain a viable candidate until 2024. . . . The dynastification of American political life is weakening America’s claim to be a democratic beacon. These days political dynasties are usually associated with the young democracies of South Asia rather than mature republics. The dynastification of its political life also points to a deeper problem: the fact that America is producing a quasi-hereditary political elite, cocooned in a world of wealth and privilege and utterly divorced from most people’s lives.

Plus, as political dynasties go, the Bushes and Clintons seem pretty second-tier, anyway — but then, so is our entire political class these days. I also agree with Professor Bainbridge:

Perhaps it really is time to rethink how we select political leaders, so as to get back to the old model of citizen-legislators. Term limits, anyone?

Perhaps it is.

UPDATE: Reader Ben Borwick emails: “Almost all polls show Hillary losing to Giuliani so why perpetuate this
hype?” But will the Republicans be smart enough to run Rudy? Meanwhile, Professor Bainbridge writes: “Between Clinton and Bush 43 we’ve been ruled by Southerners for the last 4 presidential terms and Barnett wants to foist yet another good ol’ boy on us. Not that there’s anything wrong with Southerners, per se, of course. But maybe it’s time to let a Yankee city boy have a chance?” I’m not sure where Hillary’s faux-southern accent fits into this analysis.

Sort-of related thoughts here.

MOTHERS AND ADHD: Only a Mother Could Love Him.

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: Meet the new boss, yada yada yada:

Such is life in Washington, where members of Congress still don’t get it.

Voters sent a clear message last November when they flipped 30 seats in the House and another six in the Senate, handing control to Democrats. Congress’s love affair with pork-barrel projects — and the secrecy associated with them — was viewed as a defining factor in the election.

Yet today, six months after the elections, the Senate still has not enacted rules making earmarks transparent. Democrats have repeatedly rebuffed efforts by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) despite promises to govern more openly.

In the House, Democrats have had difficulty following a new set of earmark rules adopted earlier this year. When an intelligence spending bill came up last week, Democrats hadn’t even told the ranking committee Republican, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), about pork projects in the bill, let alone other members or the public.

But the Democrats’ shenanigans aren’t nearly as surprising as some Republican failures on the issue. Shortly after the White House vowed to veto the pork-filled agriculture supplemental spending bill last Thursday, three Republicans — Reps. Greg Walden (Ore.), Mike Simpson (Idaho) and Denny Rehberg (Mont.) — not only spoke in favor of the bill, they condemned President Bush for opposing it.

Term limits, which I used to view with skepticism, are looking much more appealing.

MOTHER’S DAY THOUGHTS from Ann Althouse and — in a very different vein — Jules Crittenden.

And, of course, on Mother’s Day your thoughts may turn to . . . James Lileks!

You can hear James and Cathy Seipp talking about parenting in this podcast from last summer. Cathy — who was, I believe, a fine mother — is no longer with us. Be nice to your mom today.

More on Mother’s Day here. And, from NPR, a look at the origins of Mother’s Day. Plus, some related thoughts here.

A POST-IMUS DOMINO EFFECT: “Now, it seems, the company is must demonstrate to each interest group that it matters as much as the last one that was able to extract a firing.” Well, not each interest group, quite.

ED MORRISSEY INTERVIEWED TROY SCHEFFLER who was booted from Hamline University for making some politically incorrect remarks. “What is certain is that Hamline should be embarrassed to have treated Troy in this manner. Had Hanson actually met Troy, she would have seen that she had nothing to fear from him. He would have shown her that people who get concealed-carry licenses don’t have a psychosis or some kind of aggression against humanity; they just want to have the option to defend themselves effectively when placed in dangerous situations. And it’s Hamline that put him and its other students in those situations in the first place. Shame on Hanson, Stern, and Hamline for their prejudice and their mistreatment of a fine, upstanding, and unassuming young man.”

THIS SOUNDS INTERESTING: Lee Gutkind’s new book, Almost Human: Making Robots Think. He did an interview on The Daily Show (Jon Stewart is disappointed that he’s not talking about nanotechnology) and you can see that video here. (Via BoingBoing,which has links to more information).

I WOULD HOPE NOT:

New Hampshire authorities said yesterday that they will not press charges against a former Marine who stepped into a deadly shooting and killed a 24-year-old high school dropout who had moments earlier fatally shot a police officer.

The former Marine, Gregory W. Floyd, 49, was driving with his son along Route 116 in Franconia on Friday night when he saw Liko Kenney, 24, shoot Franconia Police Corporal Bruce McKay, 48, four times in the torso. After Kenney drove his Toyota Celica over McKay as the officer lay on the ground, Floyd grabbed the officer’s service weapon and shot and killed Kenney. . . .

The elder Floyd drove his Tahoe into a spot between McKay and Kenney as a shield and told his son, who is in his late teens, to run to the officer’s cruiser and radio for help.

The elder Floyd picked up McKay’s gun from the ground and ordered Kenney to drop his weapon. Kenney refused, and Floyd saw Kenney appear to be reloading, Conte said. Floyd then shot and killed Kenney, Conte said. . . .

New Hampshire’s attorney general, Kelly A. Ayotte, said Floyd will not face charges because he was justified in using deadly force.

I would say that deadly force was not merely justified, but actively called for. Good for him.

UPDATE: This happened in Mark Steyn’s neighborhood, and he comments:

What’s slightly unnerving is the assumptions underpinning the Bostonian reporters’ opening paragraph – that somehow a quick-witted citizen-hero is the guy who has some splainin’ to do. Mr Floyd is exactly the kind of fellow you want around when trouble strikes. He seems not to have been armed himself, but he figured out what was happening very quickly and managed to retrieve the one available weapon from the dead officer. Rather than talking about “not pressing charges”, the state of New Hampshire ought to be thanking him for his bravery and improvisation.

Absolutely.

NIGERIA: IT’S GETTING A LOT WORSE: “MEND is not the only armed militia to come out of the 20 million people living in the Niger River Delta. But it is the most militant, determined and effective. After only a year, MEND has cut nearly a third of the countrys oil production. That’s a big deal, and the rest of Nigeria is paying attention. . . . It’s an ugly situation, and not likely to turn out well. This is especially true because there are now splinter groups in MEND, largely the result of arguments over how ransom money should be split up. While attacking oil facilities gets the most attention from the government, MEND gets most of its revenue from ransoms, followed closely by selling stolen oil and various criminal scams.”

Read the whole thing, and you’ll see some similarities to the current situation in Iraq. Lots of oil money, plus weak government, produces this sort of thing.

EVERY BRAIN is different.

MORE CRUSHING OF DISSENT:

Calling it a fight with Goliath, the Foothill Cities blog has removed controversial postings about Pomona City Manager Doug Dunlap after it received a cease- and-desist letter from the city attorney.

In an e-mail sent Thursday, City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman called the Web postings “lies and falsehoods” and demanded the content be removed.

The city attorney threatened legal action if Foothill Cities, which is written by an anonymous blogger, failed to comply.

On Friday, Alvarez-Glasman said the removal of the postings was “a move in the right direction.”

Even assuming Alvarez-Glasman has a legal leg to stand on here — which is far from clear — why is the City Attorney making legal threats on behalf of a private interest? Because the city has no interest in not being libeled, and the City Manager’s interest is a personal one. Does the City Attorney routinely do personal legal work for city officials?

Eugene Volokh has other thoughts. And if you’ve got a noncommercial blog (no ads, etc.) you may have libel coverage via your homeowner’s insurance without knowing it.

They told me that if George W. Bush were reelected, people who dared criticize the government would find themselves roughly silenced. And they were right!

BRIAN MOCKENHAUPT HAS AN INTERESTING LOOK AT ARMY TRAINING in the latest Atlantic Monthly. There’s lots of interesting stuff, but the parts worth breaking out have to do with how society isn’t living up to the Army’s ideals, not the other way around:

Young people are fatter and weaker. They eat more junk food, watch more television, play more video games, and exercise less. They are more individualistic and less inclined to join the military. And with the unemployment rate hovering near historic lows, they have other choices. . . .

Every platoon sergeant and squad leader I spoke with told me a version of this story: Many of the new privates are smart and eager; they’re quick learners and they know what they’ve gotten themselves into, joining the infantry in wartime. But too many are physically weak, are undisciplined, or have mental and emotional problems that should have gotten them screened out at basic training, if not earlier by the recruiter. . . .

The Army’s problem, however, is really just the nation’s problem writ small. The number of Americans serving in the military has steadily shrunk from more than 1 in 10 during World War II to fewer than 1 in 100 today. The all-volunteer military has allowed most Americans to distance themselves from national service, forcing the Army in particular to work harder and spend more to get the people it needs. As former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in another context, “You go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”

Until more Americans are more willing, more able, or perhaps more compelled to serve, the Army must maintain an effective all-volunteer force with the people it has and the limited number of additional people it can recruit. And that larger conundrum is beyond the power of any generals, captains, or drill sergeants to solve.

I think it’s a poor reflection on how we’re bringing up kids and teenagers, and on civilian/military relations in general.

UPDATE: Reader Michael Lunday begs to differ:

I retired in Jan 2001, however, I still work with these soldiers in a contract job. Your copy of a post regarding their, shall we say, less than optimum physique, is way overstated. Tell ya what, pick a day I have a group out here and you can run with em. And these are the 24 to 38 year olds, CPTs and COLs – not the 18 to 20 year olds that leave basic.

I think they could out run, out lift and out ‘hump’ me (btw, hump means hike with a Ruck Sack) except when I was their age (gotta say that ya know,,,, it’s a guy thing). These guys/gals are the best we have, and they are awesome.

The longest race I ever ran in was a 10k, and I considered it a victory the way Saddam considered Gulf War I a victory — at the end, I was still alive, and hadn’t puked. I’m not really built for running. [What are you built for? — ed. Blogging! And . . . er, never mind.]

Meanwhile, reader Rashad Mahmood emails:

Look, you can’t just explain away incentives by blaming it on parents. There is a simple way to increase the number and quality of volunteers for the army. Pay them more.

That’s true. I was commenting more on the physical condition and discipline aspects. It’s also true, however, that if society valued military service more, the psychic income involved would go up, and that’s a factor as well, as demonstrated by the vast numbers of twentysomethings who toil away in rock bands despite the generally nonremunerative character of that work.

POWERLINE TO THE DNC: So sue us! “We therefore associate ourselves with our reader’s statements regarding Governor Dean and invite Mr. Sandler to sue us for defamation as he threatens to sue Free Republic. This is to put him and his client on notice, however, that we intend to seek our attorney’s fees under federal law for the assertion of a frivolous claim if he does so.”

It seems to me that more people are trying to silence bloggers all of a sudden. Well, they told me that if George W. Bush were reelected, people who criticized the powerful would suffer. And they were right!

Why such libel claims are a bad idea, however, is discussed here.

UPDATE: Jim Treacher emails:

“It seems to me that more people are trying to silence bloggers all of a sudden”

As well as radio personalities. Interesting trend, huh?

It’s “battlespace preparation” for 2008.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Dart Montgomery thinks it’s all about creating a Parliament of Clocks.

BORIS YELTSIN: LESSONS FOR AMERICA PART TWO:

The Americans with whom I discussed these events were surprised at hearing about the high death toll. They didn’t realize it was this bad, nor had they been informed about the anti-Semitic nature of the riots. It seems the media had failed to do its job, which is strange considering that Moscow was swarming with foreign journalists. As far as I can remember, my personal impressions at the time were that in an attempt to stay objective, the Western journalists chose some questionable middle ground – which made their coverage anything but objective. . . .

Apparently, in their minds, a fascist must always have a swastika prominently displayed on the sleeve at all times – otherwise he’s just a victim working out grievances. These journalists wouldn’t recognize fascism if it smacked them over the head with a hammer and sickle, which is the Soviet version of swastika. They probably wouldn’t have believed me if I were to tell them that in the twisted minds of these ultra-nationalist maniacs, all Westerners were under the suspicion of being Zionist running dogs working to enslave and destroy Mother Russia. To appreciate just how crazy they were, consider the fact that one of their worst imaginary Zionist enemies was Bill Clinton.

Hmm. This sounds familiar.

JEEZ: No Disclosure: Presidential Candidates Defy Tradition, Refuse to Release Taxes.

UPDATE: Mark Kleiman notes that Barack Obama, despite being pictured with the others and a fan of 100 dollar bills, has released his tax returns, something that the story doesn’t mention until way, way, down.

PEOPLE LIVE LONGER, and yet: “The average retirement age is now 62, not 65. Indeed, only 27 percent of Americans retire at age 65 or later, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute.”
I find that amazing.

UPDATE: Reader Dick Thompson thinks I find it amazing because I’m assuming it’s voluntary retirement:

The question that needs to be asked is how many people retire willingly at 62. I know that my company, Citibank seems to have a history of having a personnel cut about every year or so and it also seems that almost all of the people cut are in the age group of 61-63 or 64. I know that when I got retired of the thousands who were cut at that time the age range seemed to be about my age of 63. The cut the year before and the one before that had the same profile. At that age what are your chances of getting another job of the same type where you will not be told that you are way overqualified for the position, sorry.

The other companies on Wall Street seem to be doing the same thing. The problem is that the cutting is not done at the highest levels but at the middle management levels so that the highest level people stay on and those of us who were in the range of 60-100K or better (I was in the slightly over 100K range) are the ones who are cut and basically forced to retire. I would love to see some studies done on this question because I think a lot of the retirees are for this reason. When you are used to getting a paycheck of x amount of dollars then going from there to living on your 401K is not really a good option and people cash in their SSA. The other problem with this group is that the company health insurance is converted to COBRA after 3 months and you have to grab that or you lose it. Have you priced COBRA health insurance for people in the 60+ age range?

No, happily. But this is a good point.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Not quite such a good point, from Kevin Drum: “If you work in a stimulating, highly rewarding job like, say, law professor or paid blogger, it makes sense that you might want to keep working past 62. On the other hand, if you’ve slogged away as, say, a Wal-Mart checker or an accounts payable clerk eight hours a day for the past 40 years, it makes perfect sense that you’d want to get the hell out at the earliest possible moment, even if it means accepting a lower Social Security payment. What’s so amazing about this?”

Well, yes, but I assumed that to people with low-paying jobs, retiring early is harder as they (probably) don’t have big 401(k) plans, much less fat defined-benefit pensions that start at 62. Given what I hear about Americans not saving for retirement, if only 27 percent wait until 65 that means either that Social Security turns out to be more generous than is generally supposed, that people have more resources than I thought, or that there’s something elese going on. One thing, I suspect, may be that many of these voluntary early retirers have spouses with good benefits packages who will continue working until they hit Medicare eligibility at 65+. Because if you retire at 62, there’s a health insurance gap until 65 that is too long to cover with COBRA. Though some employers will continue health benefits for early retirees to fill that gap, I’ll be not many of those are the low-wage jobs that Drum talks about.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Bruce Goldston emails: “I wonder how much this situation has been created by the huge number of public employees . . . national, state, city, and county government, and all the various municipal corporations and boards, not to mention the education establishment. Very few of those folks work til 65.” That’s true.

And reader Gary Thomas doubts the accuracy of Dick Thompson’s account: “The fact is that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) specifically protects employees over the age of 40 from discrimination. Companies have to bend over backward not to target them – even during early retirement ‘windows’ when they try to induce people to leave by giving them more retirement credit. It strains credulity to think that a company would want to get rid of the 63-year-olds- after all, they’ve pretty much accrued all of their pension and that cannot be taken away from them. I speak as an actuary who has worked for 10 years as an employee benefits consultant.”

Well, I’m no expert, but you certainly hear a lot about efforts to squeeze out older workers. Are those stories just media myths? That’s possible, I guess.

MORE: Reader Michael Hankamer begs to differ:

I read your post on early retirement and the updates that followed. I’m afraid that your reader Dick Thompson is probably right.

I’m 62, my wife is 61. She’s retiring from teaching in June, and while her co-teachers and principal are supportive, her school administration is not. She could stay on (a continuing contract), but the administration could care less about keeping an experienced teacher — it would much rather hire an inexperienced, and cheaper, teacher to replace her. ADEA doesn’t apply. The administration isn’t actively or inactively discriminating against her; it simply isn’t trying to keep her.

My case is quite similar. I’ll be retiring when I hit 63 in a few months. Not that I really want to; I love engineering. But the emotional burden of staying on in a place where I’m not supported by my management isn’t worth the paycheck. So I’m leaving too.

My suspicion is that I’m far from alone. With the benefit of early social security, our pensions and savings, we can afford to retire, so we’re leaving voluntarily. But not because we really want to; it’s simply that the emotional burden of staying on outweighs the financial incentive to do so.

More at his blog. And note this comment regarding Kevin’s Wal-Mart example.