Jumat, 29 April 2005
Selasa, 26 April 2005
The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid
The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid: "The new op-ed columnist at the New York Times, John Tierney, finally engages the Social Security debate -- and it's a whopper. After an endless parade of lies from Paul Krugman about how bad reform with personal accounts has been in Chile (for example, this), Tierney actually got on a plane and checked it out himself (Krugman, of course, never leaves his office in Princeton; he gets all the facts he needs from radical leftist websites). Here's what Tierney discovered, upon conferring with a Chilean pal Pablo:
After comparing our relative payments to our pension systems (since salaries are higher in America, I had contributed more), we extrapolated what would have happened if I'd put my money into Pablo's mutual fund instead of the Social Security trust fund. We came up with three projections for my old age, each one offering a pension that, like Social Security's, would be indexed to compensate for inflation:
(1) Retire in 10 years, at age 62, with an annual pension of $55,000. That would be more than triple the $18,000 I can expect from Social Security at that age.
(2) Retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $70,000. That would be almost triple the $25,000 pension promised by Social Security starting a year later, at age 66.
(3)Retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $53,000 and a one-time cash payment of $223,000.
You may suspect that Pablo has prospered only because he's a sophisticated investor, but he simply put his money into one of the most popular mutual funds.
Welcome to the fight, John!"
After comparing our relative payments to our pension systems (since salaries are higher in America, I had contributed more), we extrapolated what would have happened if I'd put my money into Pablo's mutual fund instead of the Social Security trust fund. We came up with three projections for my old age, each one offering a pension that, like Social Security's, would be indexed to compensate for inflation:
(1) Retire in 10 years, at age 62, with an annual pension of $55,000. That would be more than triple the $18,000 I can expect from Social Security at that age.
(2) Retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $70,000. That would be almost triple the $25,000 pension promised by Social Security starting a year later, at age 66.
(3)Retire at age 65 with an annual pension of $53,000 and a one-time cash payment of $223,000.
You may suspect that Pablo has prospered only because he's a sophisticated investor, but he simply put his money into one of the most popular mutual funds.
Welcome to the fight, John!"
Senin, 25 April 2005
Power Line: Name That Speaker
Power Line: Name That Speaker: "Senator John Cornyn's web site has a new feature called 'Name That Speaker.' The game is to identify the source of the following quote, delivered on the Senate floor:
I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would refuse to put an anonymous hold on any judge; that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty. If we don't like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her down.
Go to Senator Cornyn's site for the answer." HERE
I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would refuse to put an anonymous hold on any judge; that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty. If we don't like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her down.
Go to Senator Cornyn's site for the answer." HERE
Blog d'Elisson: IF I COULD BE...
Blog d'Elisson: IF I COULD BE...: "...the creator of a successful meme, I’d sit back and watch it rip its way around the Bloggy-Sphere.
But I’m not. The one meme I tried to start, the Punchbowl Meme, never got any legs. Possibly that's because (1) it was disgusting, and (2) I relied on people who read Bd’E to pass it on spontaneously. What a dolt.
I’m lucky if I get comments equal to 5% of my visitors on a given day. To grab a meme? Too much work. So you need a meme that you can tag people with. Then, a good one will grow like a chain letter.
Well, I got tagged with this one by TeaFizz - so here goes.
First, here’s how it works. You need to pass this on to three bloggers. Tag! [Select three who have not already answered this thing, as otherwise you are merely trying to Piss People Off.]
Now, below you will find a list of 18 occupations. Select at least five of them (more is OK) and feel free to add to the list after you have made your selection from the list that was sent to you.
For each one you select, simply finish each sentence with what you would do as a member of that profession. Be serious, be funny, do whatever the hell you like: just complete the sentences, OK?
Here's the list I got from TeaFizz, with one more tacked on by me:
If I could be a scientist...
If I could be a farmer...
If I could be a musician...
If I could be a doctor...
If I could be a painter...
If I could be a gardener...
If I could be a missionary...
If I could be a chef...
If I could be an architect...
If I could be a linguist...
If I could be a psychologist...
If I could be a librarian...
If I could be an athlete...
If I could be a lawyer...
If I could be an innkeeper...
If I could be a professor...
If I could be a writer...
If I could be a backup dancer...
If I could be a llama-rider...
If I could be a bonnie pirate...
If I could be a midget stripper...
If I could be a proctologist...
If I could be a TV-Chat Show host...
If I could be a knish-stuffer...
Now, for my answers:
If I could be a writer, I could spend time writing an online journal for no compensation other than the occasional linky ego-boost or comment. On second thought, no.
If I could be a missionary, I could, at least, have job security. A missionary is always assured of having a position.
If I could be a lawyer, I could sue myself and get rich.
If I could be a painter, I could spend my time deciding whether to paint pictures or houses.
If I could be a proctologist, I could study under the G.I. Bill. And I’d study the Big Question facing members of my profession: Is it true that a proctoscope is a silver tube with an asshole at both ends?
If I could be a chef, I could start the Extremely Slow Food movement, for those people who want their food prepared lovingly and carefully from the finest ingredients and who are willing to pay through the eyeballs for the privilege. But every so often, I would have to have a greasy Lump-o’-Crapburger from one of the Fast Food Emporia: Know thy enemy.
And a parting shot: If I could be independently wealthy, I could sit on my ass and blog all day. But I’m not, so I can’t. Shit."
But I’m not. The one meme I tried to start, the Punchbowl Meme, never got any legs. Possibly that's because (1) it was disgusting, and (2) I relied on people who read Bd’E to pass it on spontaneously. What a dolt.
I’m lucky if I get comments equal to 5% of my visitors on a given day. To grab a meme? Too much work. So you need a meme that you can tag people with. Then, a good one will grow like a chain letter.
Well, I got tagged with this one by TeaFizz - so here goes.
First, here’s how it works. You need to pass this on to three bloggers. Tag! [Select three who have not already answered this thing, as otherwise you are merely trying to Piss People Off.]
Now, below you will find a list of 18 occupations. Select at least five of them (more is OK) and feel free to add to the list after you have made your selection from the list that was sent to you.
For each one you select, simply finish each sentence with what you would do as a member of that profession. Be serious, be funny, do whatever the hell you like: just complete the sentences, OK?
Here's the list I got from TeaFizz, with one more tacked on by me:
If I could be a scientist...
If I could be a farmer...
If I could be a musician...
If I could be a doctor...
If I could be a painter...
If I could be a gardener...
If I could be a missionary...
If I could be a chef...
If I could be an architect...
If I could be a linguist...
If I could be a psychologist...
If I could be a librarian...
If I could be an athlete...
If I could be a lawyer...
If I could be an innkeeper...
If I could be a professor...
If I could be a writer...
If I could be a backup dancer...
If I could be a llama-rider...
If I could be a bonnie pirate...
If I could be a midget stripper...
If I could be a proctologist...
If I could be a TV-Chat Show host...
If I could be a knish-stuffer...
Now, for my answers:
If I could be a writer, I could spend time writing an online journal for no compensation other than the occasional linky ego-boost or comment. On second thought, no.
If I could be a missionary, I could, at least, have job security. A missionary is always assured of having a position.
If I could be a lawyer, I could sue myself and get rich.
If I could be a painter, I could spend my time deciding whether to paint pictures or houses.
If I could be a proctologist, I could study under the G.I. Bill. And I’d study the Big Question facing members of my profession: Is it true that a proctoscope is a silver tube with an asshole at both ends?
If I could be a chef, I could start the Extremely Slow Food movement, for those people who want their food prepared lovingly and carefully from the finest ingredients and who are willing to pay through the eyeballs for the privilege. But every so often, I would have to have a greasy Lump-o’-Crapburger from one of the Fast Food Emporia: Know thy enemy.
And a parting shot: If I could be independently wealthy, I could sit on my ass and blog all day. But I’m not, so I can’t. Shit."
Sabtu, 23 April 2005
Chrenkoff Post Excellent
Chrenkoff: "Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is beating his head against the wall, or to be more precise, against the media:
'The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is encouraging newspaper editors to tell America the full story of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
' 'It�s particularly important today... because the American people need to know the full story,' Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers said in addressing the American Society of Newspaper Editors, 'because it is going to be their resolve that is so critical to our ability to confront the extremist threat'.'
Which is precisely why many in the media insist on focusing on the bad news. Not all, by any means - many reporters and editors do their best to provide fair and balanced reporting; others are simply naturally biased in favor of the 'exciting' bad news at the expense of the 'boring' good news, whether they're writing from Boston or Baghdad - but a significant minority, which is personally opposed to Republican foreign policy, has been doing its best to repeat the brilliant performance of their Vietnam-era predecessors.
Wellington famously remarked that the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton; today, America's wars are being lost in the cafeteria of the Columbia School of Journalism.
'Myers told the editors he reads far more about the problems of servicemembers� equipment and the latest insurgent attack than about 'the thousands of amazing things our troops are accomplishing'...
'The chairman said that part of the problem lies with the military. He said commanders must be more responsive and give more access to reporters. 'We�re working on that,' he told the editors.
'But still, 'a bomb blast is seen as more newsworthy than the steady progress of rebuilding communities and lives, remodeling schools and running vaccination programs and water purification plants'.'
See any edition of my 'Good news from Iraq'.
'Myers challenged the newspaper editors to ensure the American people understand the hundreds of ways their sons and daughters are improving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
' 'In your profession and mine, (we are) working hard to defend our values, our way of life and our Constitution,' Myers said. 'We risk our comfort, our safety and our lives for what we believe in.' The chairman noted that more than 40 journalists have been killed while covering operations in Iraq. The 'Fourth Estate' always has covered conflicts, Myers noted, but what is different today is the amount of news and that it travels so much faster than in the past.
' 'What questions are the news reports trying to answer?' the chairman asked. 'The theme of the coverage lately seems to be 'When are the troops coming home?' rather than 'What are we accomplishing?'''
That's a rather charitable interpretation and a brave attempt by the General to find some common ground. In fact, 'our values', 'our way of life' and 'our Constitution' quite often tend to mean totally different things to military people and journalists.
'He said the military will work with the press. 'Our task is to give you better access, more timely information and we will do that,' he said. 'In return I would ask you to keep at the task of trying to show as complete a picture as you can. I know our troops deserve that, and I think the American people deserve it as well'.'
As we all know, just because you deserve something, it doesn't mean you're going to get it. Thank God for blogs."
'The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is encouraging newspaper editors to tell America the full story of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
' 'It�s particularly important today... because the American people need to know the full story,' Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers said in addressing the American Society of Newspaper Editors, 'because it is going to be their resolve that is so critical to our ability to confront the extremist threat'.'
Which is precisely why many in the media insist on focusing on the bad news. Not all, by any means - many reporters and editors do their best to provide fair and balanced reporting; others are simply naturally biased in favor of the 'exciting' bad news at the expense of the 'boring' good news, whether they're writing from Boston or Baghdad - but a significant minority, which is personally opposed to Republican foreign policy, has been doing its best to repeat the brilliant performance of their Vietnam-era predecessors.
Wellington famously remarked that the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton; today, America's wars are being lost in the cafeteria of the Columbia School of Journalism.
'Myers told the editors he reads far more about the problems of servicemembers� equipment and the latest insurgent attack than about 'the thousands of amazing things our troops are accomplishing'...
'The chairman said that part of the problem lies with the military. He said commanders must be more responsive and give more access to reporters. 'We�re working on that,' he told the editors.
'But still, 'a bomb blast is seen as more newsworthy than the steady progress of rebuilding communities and lives, remodeling schools and running vaccination programs and water purification plants'.'
See any edition of my 'Good news from Iraq'.
'Myers challenged the newspaper editors to ensure the American people understand the hundreds of ways their sons and daughters are improving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
' 'In your profession and mine, (we are) working hard to defend our values, our way of life and our Constitution,' Myers said. 'We risk our comfort, our safety and our lives for what we believe in.' The chairman noted that more than 40 journalists have been killed while covering operations in Iraq. The 'Fourth Estate' always has covered conflicts, Myers noted, but what is different today is the amount of news and that it travels so much faster than in the past.
' 'What questions are the news reports trying to answer?' the chairman asked. 'The theme of the coverage lately seems to be 'When are the troops coming home?' rather than 'What are we accomplishing?'''
That's a rather charitable interpretation and a brave attempt by the General to find some common ground. In fact, 'our values', 'our way of life' and 'our Constitution' quite often tend to mean totally different things to military people and journalists.
'He said the military will work with the press. 'Our task is to give you better access, more timely information and we will do that,' he said. 'In return I would ask you to keep at the task of trying to show as complete a picture as you can. I know our troops deserve that, and I think the American people deserve it as well'.'
As we all know, just because you deserve something, it doesn't mean you're going to get it. Thank God for blogs."
Kamis, 21 April 2005
Praactice Ammo
Bad Example: "CHEAPEST PRACTICE AMMO EVER FOR THE CHEAPEST PRACTICE EVER
(A Guest Post by blogless Peter, for Carnival of Cordite)
Let's face it, few of us can really afford to shoot enough to really get absolutely confident in our skill. It's not just the ammunition costs, either. Range time is expensive and with gas costs it's even expensive driving to the range. Then when we get there, we find there are all kinds of restrictions on how we can shoot. Some ranges don't allow rapid fire, most will go into hysterics if we try to work on a draw, and Lord help you if you need to practice engaging a threat from behind.
There is an answer, actually more than one. Primer powered wax, rubber and plastic bullets. Someone who is already a handloader is at least partially set up to use these handy little wonders. Someone who isn't will need some tools and some supplies. Some you have around the house already - a small hammer, a drill - some you'll have to buy, and there are other things that can speed the process up.
The first thing we need is modified cartridge cases. Unless you are already set up to handload, start with new, unprimed cases. Otherwise it's hard to find something that is thin enough to go through the factory flash hole yet strong enough to knock the spent primer out. Most outfits sell cartridge cases by the hundred. A little later on I'll tell you where to buy them and the priming tool you'll need.
The first thing we must do is drill the primer flash hole a little larger with a three-sixteenth inch drill bit. You'll need to hold the cartridge case with a pair of pliers and work the drill with the other hand...it's really a job for two people unless you have three hands. Hold the case as close to the rim as possible with those pliers, the metal is thicker down there and you won't be as likely to smoosh it and make it so it won't chamber. Whatever you do, do NOT omit this step. For technical reasons, a primer - fired with no powder behind a normal-weight bullet - will back out of the case and tie up a revolver. In an autoloader it might come completely out and get stuck in the works. Just trust me on this. I have the technical information and I'm not afraid to use it, it would only take about two pages to explain it." ETC ETC
(A Guest Post by blogless Peter, for Carnival of Cordite)
Let's face it, few of us can really afford to shoot enough to really get absolutely confident in our skill. It's not just the ammunition costs, either. Range time is expensive and with gas costs it's even expensive driving to the range. Then when we get there, we find there are all kinds of restrictions on how we can shoot. Some ranges don't allow rapid fire, most will go into hysterics if we try to work on a draw, and Lord help you if you need to practice engaging a threat from behind.
There is an answer, actually more than one. Primer powered wax, rubber and plastic bullets. Someone who is already a handloader is at least partially set up to use these handy little wonders. Someone who isn't will need some tools and some supplies. Some you have around the house already - a small hammer, a drill - some you'll have to buy, and there are other things that can speed the process up.
The first thing we need is modified cartridge cases. Unless you are already set up to handload, start with new, unprimed cases. Otherwise it's hard to find something that is thin enough to go through the factory flash hole yet strong enough to knock the spent primer out. Most outfits sell cartridge cases by the hundred. A little later on I'll tell you where to buy them and the priming tool you'll need.
The first thing we must do is drill the primer flash hole a little larger with a three-sixteenth inch drill bit. You'll need to hold the cartridge case with a pair of pliers and work the drill with the other hand...it's really a job for two people unless you have three hands. Hold the case as close to the rim as possible with those pliers, the metal is thicker down there and you won't be as likely to smoosh it and make it so it won't chamber. Whatever you do, do NOT omit this step. For technical reasons, a primer - fired with no powder behind a normal-weight bullet - will back out of the case and tie up a revolver. In an autoloader it might come completely out and get stuck in the works. Just trust me on this. I have the technical information and I'm not afraid to use it, it would only take about two pages to explain it." ETC ETC
Rabu, 20 April 2005
Power Line: Oil-For-Food Investigators Resign
Power Line: Oil-For-Food Investigators Resign: "Oil-For-Food Investigators Resign
Roger Simon had this story first: two top investigators for Paul Volcker's U.N.-sponsored inquiry into the U.N.'s Oil-For-Food program have resigned because they thought the initial Volcker report was too easy on Kofi Annan. 'You follow a trail and you want to see people pick it up,' a spokesman for Volcker's team said. The committee 'told the story' that the investigators presented, he added, 'but we made different conclusions than they would have.' One of those who resigned was the Volcker committee's senior investigative counsel, Robert Parton."
Roger Simon had this story first: two top investigators for Paul Volcker's U.N.-sponsored inquiry into the U.N.'s Oil-For-Food program have resigned because they thought the initial Volcker report was too easy on Kofi Annan. 'You follow a trail and you want to see people pick it up,' a spokesman for Volcker's team said. The committee 'told the story' that the investigators presented, he added, 'but we made different conclusions than they would have.' One of those who resigned was the Volcker committee's senior investigative counsel, Robert Parton."
Senin, 18 April 2005
Minggu, 17 April 2005
Past Prognostications
Our Not-So-Wise Experts
A litany of past failure
by Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online
Brent Scowcroft predicted on the eve of the Iraqi elections that voting there would increase the risk of civil war. Indeed, he foresaw “a great potential for deepening the conflict.” He also once assured us that Iraq “could become a Vietnam in a way that the Vietnam war never did.” Did he mean perhaps worse than ten years of war and over 50,000 American dead, with the Cambodian holocaust next door? etc
A litany of past failure
by Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online
Brent Scowcroft predicted on the eve of the Iraqi elections that voting there would increase the risk of civil war. Indeed, he foresaw “a great potential for deepening the conflict.” He also once assured us that Iraq “could become a Vietnam in a way that the Vietnam war never did.” Did he mean perhaps worse than ten years of war and over 50,000 American dead, with the Cambodian holocaust next door? etc
Sabtu, 09 April 2005
Senin, 04 April 2005
A Western Heart
A Western Heart: "Look at Freedom House's latest report on free nations:
The report, 'The Worst of the Worst: The World's Most Repressive Societies 2005,' includes detailed summations of the dire human rights situations in Belarus, Burma (Myanmar), China, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Laos, Libya, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. Chechnya, Tibet, and Western Sahara are included as territories under Russian, Chinese, and Moroccan jurisdictions respectively.
The report is available online.
Significantly, six of the eighteen most repressive governments--those of China, Cuba, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe--are members of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), representing nearly 11 percent of the 53-member body."
The report, 'The Worst of the Worst: The World's Most Repressive Societies 2005,' includes detailed summations of the dire human rights situations in Belarus, Burma (Myanmar), China, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Laos, Libya, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. Chechnya, Tibet, and Western Sahara are included as territories under Russian, Chinese, and Moroccan jurisdictions respectively.
The report is available online.
Significantly, six of the eighteen most repressive governments--those of China, Cuba, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe--are members of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), representing nearly 11 percent of the 53-member body."
Minggu, 03 April 2005
Power Line: April 2005 Archives Berger Folly1
Power Line: April 2005 Archives: "Casual readers of the news will have no idea what to make of Sandy Berger's guilty plea. This AP story says:
Former national security adviser Sandy Berger, who once had unfettered access to the government's most sensitive secrets, pleaded guilty Friday to sneaking classified documents out of the National Archives, then using scissors to cut up some of them.
Rather than the 'honest mistake' he described last summer, Berger acknowledged to U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson that he intentionally took and deliberately destroyed three copies of the same document dealing with terror threats during the 2000 millennium celebration. He then lied about it to Archives staff when they told him documents were missing.
Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, tried to be reassuring:
Berger only had copies of documents; all of the originals remain in the government's possession, Hillman said.
The AP describes the Berger incident as 'bizarre,' and, to an ordinary reader, it must seem bizarre indeed. Why would anyone steal and destroy 'three copies of the same document,' and then lie about it?
The answer, obviously, is that all of the 'copies' were different, in that they contained different handwritten notes by various Clinton administration officials, apparently including Berger. This Washington Post story is slightly more informative:
Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003.
Rather than misplacing or unintentionally throwing away three of the five copies he took from the archives, as the former national security adviser earlier maintained, he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business.
The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an 'after-action review' prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.
Archives officials have said previously that Berger had copies only, and that no original documents were lost. It remains unclear whether Berger knew that, or why he destroyed three versions of a document but left two other versions intact. Officials have said the five versions were largely similar, but contained slight variations as the after-action report moved around different agencies of the executive branch.
So Berger removed five copies of the Clarke report, carefully destroyed three of them 'late one evening,' and returned the other two to the Archives. Obviously he reviewed the notes on the five documents and destroyed the three that contained information damaging to the reputation of the Clinton administration. I do not find reassuring the Post's suggestion that these were 'copies only' and that it 'remains unclear whether Berger knew that.' Obviously all five copies of the Clarke report were 'copies.' But they contained unique notes, and Berger certainly thought that they were the only 'copies' of those notes in existence, or it would make no sense to destroy them. I have seen no evidence whatsoever that he was wrong.
One aspect of Berger's sentence that seems almost humorous is the fact that his security clearance is suspended for three years. He wasn't going to need it during President Bush's second term, in any event, and he'll have it back in time for the new Democratic administration that, he hopes, will begin in 2009. What a penalty for attempting, apparently successfully, to destroy a portion of the historical record relating to the government's anti-terror activities in the months leading up to September 11."
Former national security adviser Sandy Berger, who once had unfettered access to the government's most sensitive secrets, pleaded guilty Friday to sneaking classified documents out of the National Archives, then using scissors to cut up some of them.
Rather than the 'honest mistake' he described last summer, Berger acknowledged to U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson that he intentionally took and deliberately destroyed three copies of the same document dealing with terror threats during the 2000 millennium celebration. He then lied about it to Archives staff when they told him documents were missing.
Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, tried to be reassuring:
Berger only had copies of documents; all of the originals remain in the government's possession, Hillman said.
The AP describes the Berger incident as 'bizarre,' and, to an ordinary reader, it must seem bizarre indeed. Why would anyone steal and destroy 'three copies of the same document,' and then lie about it?
The answer, obviously, is that all of the 'copies' were different, in that they contained different handwritten notes by various Clinton administration officials, apparently including Berger. This Washington Post story is slightly more informative:
Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003.
Rather than misplacing or unintentionally throwing away three of the five copies he took from the archives, as the former national security adviser earlier maintained, he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business.
The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an 'after-action review' prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.
Archives officials have said previously that Berger had copies only, and that no original documents were lost. It remains unclear whether Berger knew that, or why he destroyed three versions of a document but left two other versions intact. Officials have said the five versions were largely similar, but contained slight variations as the after-action report moved around different agencies of the executive branch.
So Berger removed five copies of the Clarke report, carefully destroyed three of them 'late one evening,' and returned the other two to the Archives. Obviously he reviewed the notes on the five documents and destroyed the three that contained information damaging to the reputation of the Clinton administration. I do not find reassuring the Post's suggestion that these were 'copies only' and that it 'remains unclear whether Berger knew that.' Obviously all five copies of the Clarke report were 'copies.' But they contained unique notes, and Berger certainly thought that they were the only 'copies' of those notes in existence, or it would make no sense to destroy them. I have seen no evidence whatsoever that he was wrong.
One aspect of Berger's sentence that seems almost humorous is the fact that his security clearance is suspended for three years. He wasn't going to need it during President Bush's second term, in any event, and he'll have it back in time for the new Democratic administration that, he hopes, will begin in 2009. What a penalty for attempting, apparently successfully, to destroy a portion of the historical record relating to the government's anti-terror activities in the months leading up to September 11."
Power Line: April 2005 Archives Robert Borg Racist
Power Line: April 2005 Archives: "The New York Times features a predictably fawning profile of former Ku Klux Klan Kleagle and current West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd: 'A master of Senate's ways is still parrying in his twilight.' By contrast with its coverage of the Pope's death, the Times had no problem finding quotes from supporters of Senator Byrd before press time.
Robert Byrd is indeed a valuable link not only to the Senate's past, but also to the Democratic Party's history as the party of slavery, segregation, and opposition to equal treatment of blacks. Times reporter Sheryl Stolberg obviously loves Byrd's cornpone constitutional shitck in favor of filibustering a Republican president's judicial appointees. It's a shame that Stolberg exerted no effort to put Byrd's shtick in the context it merits.
Byrd is old enough, for example, to have vowed memorably regarding the integration of the Armed Forces by President Truman that he would never fight 'with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.'
Even after his resignation from the Klan, Byrd continued to hold it in high esteem, writing to the Klan's Imperial Wizard in 1946: 'The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia.'
And Byrd is old enough to have participated in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as to have voted against it after cloture along with 18 other Democrats -- in the name of the Constitution, of course. Funny Stolberg didn't invite Byrd to take a walk down memory lane on that subject. It would have been highly illuminating. (Thanks to Deroy Murdock's excellent NRO column: 'Dems need a houseclean.')
More recently, Byrd put his eloquent voice to use in an interview with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday. Here Byrd harked back to the days of old, but with a twist, observing that 'there are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time.' Walter Williams mordantly wondered 'whether he was talking about whites who act like blacks.'
In the Times article Byrd cites the late Georgia Senator Richard Russell as his mentor and quotes the advice Russell gave him regarding the ways of the Senate. Russell was a wise man in many ways, but he was also one of the signers of the infamous 1956 Southern Manifesto opposing Brown v. Board of Education -- in the name of the Constitution, of course.
Also signing the Southern Manifesto was the late Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina. Like Byrd, Ervin was resurrected as a heroic cornpone constitutionalist in the eyes of the elite media. In the eyes of the media, Ervin was born again during his chairmanship of the Senate Watergate Committee in 1973. As with Senator Byrd today, all was forgiven.
byrd.jpg
The Times profile of Byrd is accompanied by the photo above by Doug Mills with the caption: 'Senator Robert C. Byrd, after speaking at a MoveOn.org rally last month in Washington, defending the use of the filibuster to block judicial nominees.' Only a fellow as supremely lacking in self-awareness as Senator Byrd can miss the inadvertent allusion to the black power salute of the late 1960's in Byrd's gesture, or to the 'right on' salute of the radical left of the same period, or other more remote historical precedents that Senator Byrd himself loves to invoke against his Republican opponents."
Robert Byrd is indeed a valuable link not only to the Senate's past, but also to the Democratic Party's history as the party of slavery, segregation, and opposition to equal treatment of blacks. Times reporter Sheryl Stolberg obviously loves Byrd's cornpone constitutional shitck in favor of filibustering a Republican president's judicial appointees. It's a shame that Stolberg exerted no effort to put Byrd's shtick in the context it merits.
Byrd is old enough, for example, to have vowed memorably regarding the integration of the Armed Forces by President Truman that he would never fight 'with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.'
Even after his resignation from the Klan, Byrd continued to hold it in high esteem, writing to the Klan's Imperial Wizard in 1946: 'The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia.'
And Byrd is old enough to have participated in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as to have voted against it after cloture along with 18 other Democrats -- in the name of the Constitution, of course. Funny Stolberg didn't invite Byrd to take a walk down memory lane on that subject. It would have been highly illuminating. (Thanks to Deroy Murdock's excellent NRO column: 'Dems need a houseclean.')
More recently, Byrd put his eloquent voice to use in an interview with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday. Here Byrd harked back to the days of old, but with a twist, observing that 'there are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time.' Walter Williams mordantly wondered 'whether he was talking about whites who act like blacks.'
In the Times article Byrd cites the late Georgia Senator Richard Russell as his mentor and quotes the advice Russell gave him regarding the ways of the Senate. Russell was a wise man in many ways, but he was also one of the signers of the infamous 1956 Southern Manifesto opposing Brown v. Board of Education -- in the name of the Constitution, of course.
Also signing the Southern Manifesto was the late Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina. Like Byrd, Ervin was resurrected as a heroic cornpone constitutionalist in the eyes of the elite media. In the eyes of the media, Ervin was born again during his chairmanship of the Senate Watergate Committee in 1973. As with Senator Byrd today, all was forgiven.
byrd.jpg
The Times profile of Byrd is accompanied by the photo above by Doug Mills with the caption: 'Senator Robert C. Byrd, after speaking at a MoveOn.org rally last month in Washington, defending the use of the filibuster to block judicial nominees.' Only a fellow as supremely lacking in self-awareness as Senator Byrd can miss the inadvertent allusion to the black power salute of the late 1960's in Byrd's gesture, or to the 'right on' salute of the radical left of the same period, or other more remote historical precedents that Senator Byrd himself loves to invoke against his Republican opponents."
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)