To the shores of Tripoli

Fire of Liberty



President Bush is expected to appoint Marine General Pete Pace as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. With this nomination to chair the JCS, General Pace will be the first Marine to ever attain this spot thus ushering the Marine Corp into greater prominence. It's about time that a Devil Dog Marine gets the nod. We'll see Pace run a tighter ship and get things done more efficiently like his brethren in the Marines and hopefully the Corp will find a greater voice in upgrading their equipment and budget. So Semper Fi, General Pace. Here's a little bio of the brave Marine:

After basic training in 1968, he was sent to Vietnam as a rifle platoon leader. He later served in Korea, was a commander for two years during the intervention in Somalia, and was head of the U.S. Southern Command.

He became vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs on Oct. 1, 2001, in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Earlier in his career, Gen. Pace's assignments included an unusual combination of staff and command jobs. After his return from Vietnam in 1969, he served as head infantry writer at the Marine Corps Institute in Washington, then as security detachment commander at the Camp David, Md., presidential retreat.

After he reached the rank of brigadier general in 1992, he became president of the Marine Corps University. It was during that assignment that he was sent to Somalia as deputy commander of Marine forces. He reached four-star rank in 2000.

I'd say the President is making a great choice. The added bonus is that Rumsfeld has voice his support for Pace.

Fire of Liberty: Tyranny's Worst Nightmare

Fire of Liberty

Michael Ledeen has a terrific piece over at National Review Online on how the tyrannies of the World-namely North Korea, China and Iran- are facing a slow but sure decline due to the people's desire for freedom. While these revolutions are not presented in the Western media as full-blown revolutions on the scale of Georgia, Ukraine, Lebanon or Kyrgyzstan, the leadership in these nations are fully aware of how revolutionary the situation has become. Throughout the cities of these three tyrannical regimes you have various reports of people rioting and protesting in the streets and the regimes failure to keep them under control because the system of government is morally corrupt and the desire for freedom trumps tyranny everytime. The forces of freedom are marching in these nations and the people will eventually find a way to end the machinations of evil that these regimes promote.

I think Ledeen laid the situation out clearly with his concluding paragraph. See if you like it as well:

Five hundred years ago Machiavelli insisted that tyranny is the most unstable form of government, and he warned that the most dangerous development for any tyrant was the contempt of his own people. That dramatic tipping point is now very close in China, Iran, and North Korea. All that is required to get there is a steady flow of the truth from outside their borders, guidance for those who undertake the struggle against the tyrants, and constant reminders — backed up with modest action — that we are with them.

Ledeen should know, he wrote a book on Machiavelli. I'd say that I belong in the same school of thought as Ledeen in the battle of freedom against these forces of evil. As long as I am able to breathe and type, I will continue to keep the flames going in the freedom cauldron here at Fire of Liberty until the jack-boot of tyranny is removed from the backs of these people.

UK's Slippery Slope of Relativism

Fire of Liberty

It seems that the UK is slowly but surely sliding down the slippery slope of eugenics with its most recent court ruling. According to this article in The Daily Mail, the UK government has ruled that the parents of an 18 month old baby named Charlotte (who has severe health issues that could cause her to stop breathing) have no right in deciding the fate of their child. Since Charlotte is deemed to be in "severe pain" by the Doctors at St. Mary's Hospital in Portsmouth, they have argued that it would be worse on the patient if they tried to resuscitate the child. I'd have to say its a sad day for the people of the UK and the World in general that doctors can take all decisions out of the parent's hands because they think their decision is better than the parents. While the doctors can easily decide to pull the plug because "science" says so, these parents have to sit by and see their child die before their eyes.

The big question I have is since when did a parent lose the right to choose what's best for their child. I can understand the parents losing these rights if they had died, put the child in a orphanage or abused the child and had her taken away but all these people did was have the child prematurely in a hospital and having a lot of medical problems. I guess this is a clear example of why the UK's National Health Service is more dangerous to the people than previously thought. You can clearly see that a government run entity like St. Mary's is being pushed to the limits like most government run hospitals and generally have long waiting lists for the precious beds/care that the hospital has. Therefore, the impersonal government run NHS looks at this case as something that eats up special time and space which could be better used for more healthy people thus Charlotte is deemed expendable because the "Doctors say so."

I guess socialized medicine is the first step towards Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Remember, this is the same nation that allowed someone to abort their child because they had a cleft-lip and would be deemed highly disabled, though it could be corrected by a simple surgery. I guess this is what happens when you have a culture enthralled with the concept of relativism. We are living in dangerous times where science is trumping what is morally right. While I'm no Catholic, I'm on board with Pope Benedict XVI in his concern and fight against this evil known as relativism. This case is just one more example of why I believe so.

As you've probably read, the article in The Daily Mail notes several times about Charlotte "suffering." Well let's look at another view on suffering:

[Cardinal Ratzinger:] Today what people have in view is eliminating suffering from the world. For the individual, that means avoiding pain and suffering in whatever way. Yet we must also see that it is in this very way that the world becomes very hard and very cold. Pain is part of being human. Anyone who really wanted to get rid of suffering would have to get rid of love before anything else, because there can be no love without suffering, because it always demands an element of self-sacrifice, because, given temperamental differences and the drama of situations, it will always bring with it renunciation and pain.

When we know that the way of love–this exodus, this going out of oneself-is the true way by which man becomes human, then we also understand that suffering is the process through which we mature. Anyone who has inwardly accepted suffering becomes more mature and more understanding of others, becomes more human. Anyone who has consistently avoided suffering does not understand other people; he becomes hard and selfish.

Love itself is a passion, something we endure. In love experience first a happiness, a general feeling of happiness.

Yet on the other hand, I am taken out of my comfortable tranquility and have to let myself be reshaped. If we say that suffering is the inner side of love, we then also understand it is so important to learn how to suffer–and why, conversely, the avoidance of suffering renders someone unfit to cope with life. He would be left with an existential emptiness, which could then only be combined with bitterness, with rejection and no longer with any inner acceptance or progress toward maturity.

This is from an excerpt of an excellent book by Benedict XVI (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) called God and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald. I'd have to say this man will make a great Pope and a champion for the people in a fight against evil.

US Energy Bill: It's About Tme to Pass it.

Fire of Liberty

With gas prices nearing three dollars in some parts of the nation, President Bush has called for the passage of his energy bill, which has been stalled for some four years in the US Senate. While a select set of Senators are more than likely going to start hemming and hawing about gas prices and tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to reduce the price of gas, they fail to pass the energy bill which allows measures to fix these problems. One area that the bill addresses is on the lack of refineries in this nation because of the fact we haven't built a new refinery since the 70's and the ones we have are at full capacity. Just look what this article in The Financial Times has to say about President Bush's call for the passage of the bill:

Mr Bush raised the spectre of the 1970s oil crisis, when petrol was rationed in the US, to put pressure on lawmakers. “Congress [has] a responsibility to make sure America never returns to those days,” he said.

Thursday's vote comes amid growing public concern in the US about record fuel prices. “Millions of American families and small businesses are hurting because of higher gasoline prices,“ Mr Bush told the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Washington.

Republicans argue that high fuel prices demonstrate the need for greater domestic energy production, through measures such as drilling in Alaska, increased natural gas extraction from the Gulf of Mexico and expansion of nuclear power.

“We have got to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy,“ said Mr Bush. “This is a matter of economic security and it's also a matter of national security.”

Mr Bush highlighted parts of the bill aimed at increasing energy efficiency and promoting renewable sources. But critics say the legislation is weighed too heavily in favour of fossil fuels. Mr Bush warned lawmakers not to load the bill with too many concessions to industry. “With oil at more than $50 a barrel, energy companies do not need taxpayer-funded incentives to explore for oil and gas.”

The House of Representatives is expected to approve the bill today but it faces stiffer scrutiny in the Senate, which has blocked energy legislation in each of the past four years. Mr Bush said he wanted Congress to pass the bill before the summer recess in August.

“With consumers hurting the way they are at the pump, we're hoping Senate Democrats will stop the obstruction,” said Dennis Hastert, Republican Speaker of the House. Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic leader, said the bill was bad for consumers, tax-payers and the environment.

I'd have to say that the President might actually get this one passed. Four years of delays is too long for a nation to wait for a sensible energy policy. When there is legislation on the table that will be beneficial if passed, the US Senate doesn't play. This is typical from this small grouping of oddities known as the US Senate. Hopefully the gas prices will force the American people to demand the passage of this good bill.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Debacle

Fire of Liberty

If you've been reading the papers or listening to the news, you are probably aware of the current dust-up in the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee on Under Secretary of State John Bolton's confirmation as our new UN Ambassador. While you probably already know that various subordinates and others who have an axe to grind against him have come forward with crazy accusations to derail his nomination. Though all of these claims have amounted to simple misunderstandings and have been fleshed out to be untrue in open hearings, the people opposed to Bolton have continued to find ways to derail this loyal American. Just look at the most recent allegations by Melody Townsel (A partisan liberal who most recently organized Mothers against Bush in 2004) which appeared in the news-cycle prior to the Sunday morning talk-shows. Here's what The New York Sun reported on Mrs. Townsel on April 18, 2005:

In the interview yesterday, Ms. Townsel said, "There is no question that I have been a vocal and outspoken critic of this administration and I am a very liberal Democrat. But it is equally no secret that I had a run-in with John Bolton."

When asked why she did not make this matter public in 2001, when Mr. Bolton's nomination for his current post as undersecretary of state was being considered by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, she said that at the time she had retreated from politics and was raising young children.

She also said there were no other eyewitnesses to what in the letter she said was a pattern of abusive behavior, but that others working on the project were familiar with her account.

"There were people aware of the harassment, but they are not willing to come forward because they have existing business with the government," she said.

Ms. Townsel's allegations appeared over the weekend in the Los Angeles Times, the Houston Chronicle, and numerous Democratic-leaning Web sites, such as Daily Kos and The American Prospect's web log, Tapped.

"My story seems to track so closely with other people," she said. "I really thought this would be a small log on the fire, I did not think it would be this big. Nothing in my story is all that out of track with the other stories out there." She also said she was contacted on Friday by the minority counsel of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

While various members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who are adamantly opposed to Secretary Bolton jumped on this story and raked Bolton's name through the coals and basically took the chairman's gavel out of Senator Lugar's hands forcing a 3 week recess, the truth to Mrs. Townsel's partisan accusation is coming to the light.

Thanks to the guys over at National Review, Mrs. Townsel's story doesn't even match up with the facts (It's generally this way with stories that emanate from Senator Biden's office to the LA Times). Here's what Rich Lowry had to say about the whole affair over at The Corner:

The head of the firm, IBTCI, that was involved in the Moscow incident, when Bolton allegedly chased and threw things at Melody Townsel, has written a letter to the foreign relations committee about the controversy. We’ve posted the whole thing (it’s roughly written), so you can judge for yourself. Here is a key passage:

To the best of my knowledge, Ms. Townsel had limited contact with Mr. Bolton, who at the time she claims was hostile to her, was working on another project for IBTCI in Moscow (Healthy Russia 2000). Ms. Townsel's recollection of what transpired, ten years later, is impossible to square with the fact Mr. Bolton was not engaged by our firm to have any contact with her on any issue related to her activities in Kyrgyzstan. In fact, later Mr. Bolton became our legal counsel to represent our interests before the U.S. Government in response to Ms. Townsel's efforts to try to grab our contract. Her claims against Mr. Bolton make no sense but are consistent with her belligerent attitudes towards others.

In fact, Ms. Townsel's professional performance is central to understanding her behavior and her extreme hostility to anyone associated with our company. As a Team Leader, she attempted unsuccessfully to charge the U.S. government for disallowable costs. She became enraged and abusive when our Business Manager, Auditor, and Executive Vice President each questioned these activities/costs, The situation was so serious that we had to post an expatriate from Head Office to our project office in Kyrgyzstan to ensure that proper accounts were maintained as we bad lost confidence in her business and billing practices.

Her poor performance, treatment of other employees and attempt to take over our contract became issues; and thus I was required to step in and remove her from her position. Mr. Bolton's role with IBTCI was unrelated. to her activities at the time. At no time did we ask, or seek Mr. Bolton's intervention with her. I certainly did .not hear, contemporaneously; from any other employee in Moscow that anything occurred between Mr. Bolton and Ms Townsel in Moscow, Consequently, it is difficult to understand how Ms. Townsel could make such accusations with any veracity.

How in the World is this cause enough to delay/derail Secretary Bolton's nomination.(I forgot that this is Washington, soundclips and politicians who know how to get their message out.) While these Senators get their sound-bytes and undermine a man who could get results in a organization that most Americans give less than a fig about in the first place. The reason that the UN has fallen into a morass of insignificance is because their wasn't a strong US Ambassador to push some buttons. As long as we send people to the UN who continue to use pleasantries and are viewed as wimpy diplomats, we will never get anything meaningful to our national interests accomplished in this mad-house. I hope the President knocks down some doors or talk the ears off of Senator Lugar for letting such a debacle occur in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, before cameras at that(Lugar looked like he forgot his vitamins). He also needs to remind his fellow Republicans how this undermines the party and urge them to approve the man. (Lincoln Chaffee needs to be reminded that he's running for the Senate- There are other Republicans in RI). We shouldn't let Boxer and Kerry determine who the President selects as his Ambassador's, for God sakes the Republicans are in charge of the committee. Expect more to come.

Along with this, check out this editorial on Bolton by the editors of National Review Online, good stuff.

Judaism & Catholicism: Battling Against Relativism

Fire of Liberty

David Klinghoffer has a wonderful piece over at National Review Online on how Jews and the newly elected Pope Benedict XVI have more things in common with each other than people least expect. While certain members of the ADL might differ, Klinghoffer argues that both Judaism and The Catholic Church are duel partners in a fight against the devil known as relativism. Both of these monotheistic are in a quest for the one true way, while the outside forces of these two faiths-namely Judaism and Christianity-like the media and the secular culture are trying to undermine such quest via their desire to make all people's views count. Instead of waxing theologically, I thought you'd prefer to read Klinghoffer's views. Here's a sample:

Pope Benedict XVI has his truth. Jews who believe in Judaism, as opposed to relativism, have ours. The pope and the Jews can't both be right — but that fact, that there can only be one truth, is a singularly important truth in itself, arguably more important than any of the doctrinal points on which Jews, Catholics, and other Christians differ. Let's hope the Jewish community can rise to meet the new pope, seeing in him the fellow believer in truth that he is, offering him our sincere congratulations and good wishes for a blessed and successful papacy.

I'd say that Klinghoffer puts it about right. By the way, check out Klinghoffer's new book Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning Point in Western History.

Cedar Time

Fire of Liberty

President Bush reached out to the Lebanese people and offered his vocal support for the freedom loving Cedar Revolutionaries. He seems to have his promotion of freedom/democracy down, if only he could do so on certain domestic issues.

An Exciting Day for History

Fire of Liberty

"Every generation has looked up to him as the Great Emancipator, the hero of unity and the martyr of freedom. Children have learned to follow his model of integrity and principle. Leaders have read and quoted his words, and have hoped to find a measure of his wisdom and strength. In all this, Lincoln has taken on the elements of myth.
"And in this case, the myth is true," Mr. Bush said.

This was part of President Bush's speech at the dedication of the newly built Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum in Illinois yesterday, which I found in The Washington Times. See here about the events yesterday. From my reading, President Bush couldn't have put it any better. It fun to see a president marveling at such a historical giant. I guess it's an even greater experience when you occupy the same office that Lincoln did 140 years ago. As a consumer of history, this is an awesome event.

For more on the Library, go here.

Protectionist Racket

Fire of Liberty

This article by Stephen Moore and Phil Kerpen over at National Review Online, clearly demonstrates how the imposition of tariffs on sugar clearly hurts the economy, sugar users (people/businesses) while lining the pockets of Big Sugar. When will these people in Congress realize that these protectionist measures hurt rather than help America.

"Non" is the People's Choice

Fire of Liberty

While May 29 is almost a month away, it looks like the people of France will vote "non" on the EU Constitution. See what the polls say:

Of voters who have decided how they will vote, 55 per cent said they would reject the EU treaty and 45 per cent said they would back it, according to the poll by the TNS-Sofres research group for Le Monde newspaper, RTL radio and LCI television.

Twenty-eight per cent were undecided on how to vote in the May 29 referendum.

Could Chirac see his envisioned EU Superstate become a mere chimera at the hands of the French. I sure hope so.

El Hefe II: Trying to Pull Strings in OAS

Fire of Liberty

This isn't good news for the Organization of American States. Seems that El Hefe II (Hugo Chavez) is playing power politics with the selection of the new president of the OAS. He favors a fellow traveler from Chile while the democratic wing (US) backs the Mexican candidate. I hope that Chavez doesn't get the choice to decide who the next OAS president will be, if he does expect reverses in the democracies in South America.

UK Elections

Fire of Liberty

This is why the folks in the United Kingdom should check the Tory box in the May 5 election. Blair has been a loyal ally in Iraq but Gordon Brown sits in the wings of Parliament waiting to sweep in and the UK won't be able to compete economically World wide. So go for Tory, the UK's future depends on it.

Also, look how large segments of the media in the UK are trying to sabotage the Tories. I think this leader from The Daily Mail sums it up best.

Pope "Snoop-Dog" Benedict XVI: Kickin it Real

Fire of Liberty

Here's Jonah Goldberg's take on the big dust-up in the MSM about the election of Benedict XVI in his latest syndicated column. In an earlier post, I noted how the media is aghast that the Pope would actually stick to Catholic doctrine. Jonah pretty much dissolves all of this concern with the following paragraphs:

As the Vatican's chief defender of theological doctrine, it's no surprise he's already being condemned as a "traditionalist" and a "hardliner." Of course, if some of the modernizers had their way, a new pontiff would be announced with the declaration, "We got pope!" Or maybe "The pizzy is in the hizzy!" Then Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake would bump and grind a bit before His Holiness rolled out in a newly pimped-out Pope-mobile.

But my guess is that won't be happening any time soon, and not just because Ratzinger's the new pope. Some believe there is a radical left wing in the Catholic Church that seeks to unravel the teachings of John Paul II, but this is an exaggeration of the Western - particularly, the American - press. The notion that you could find any cardinal eager to change church policy on abortion, for example, is simply a fantasy concocted by liberal journalists. Excepting, perhaps, the issue of distributing condoms in Africa, it's hard to think of a hot-button social issue that divides the church's leadership a fraction as much as American editorial pages seem to suggest.

Like I said, it's funny to see the media discover that the Pope will keep to Church teachings/doctrine and not become the "everything goes" Pope.

Cuba: A Caribbean Tyranny

Fire of Liberty

Bob MacDonald has a great column in today's Toronto Sun on the horrific state of affairs in Cuba under the jack-boot of Castro's tyranny. As always the Cuban government has had another UN resolution passed which condemned them of gross human rights violations. McDonald notes that even while the various governments-namely Canada-who help pass this resolution, they continue to have relations with the thugs in Havana and allow their citizens to vacation and spend their money in the Cuban hell-hole. Though most people go to Cuba you have individuals who fall in love with Cuban people and stay to help them through the plight that El Hefe has subjected them to. Take a look:

One Canadian who has been doing just that for the past seven years is Toronto-area resident Don Bilodeau. He went as a tourist, married a Cuban nurse, and has been doing yeoman service for years bringing much-needed aid worth millions . He's spent an estimated $100,000 of his own money.

He and his cohorts have brought in medical supplies such as badly needed medicines, vitamins, wheelchairs, doctors' and nurses' "scrubs," crutches, walkers, canes, etc. Plus items like bicycles, baseball equipment, soccer balls and basketballs.

"But the one thing I have always insisted is that I be present when the items are handed over to the Cuban people. I don't want it ending up in the black market," he said last week.

And there's the rub. Despite his best efforts, he's had numerous run-ins with Cuban immigration authorities -- but especially customs officials who fined him and grabbed the much-needed supplies.

Bilodeau recounted several instances where Cuban customs officials promised he'd be present when his supplies were being unloaded -- and then failed to notify him.

Earlier this month he had an ugly experience in which he felt doublecrossed when he was fined for overweight on the supplies he was carrying. He had enough and came home with the Cuban airline holding his passport on the flight.

His opinion: "If Canada stopped supporting such an evil, crooked government, the country would collapse. People would be free and they would be the richest country in the Caribbean."

Thank God we have people like Don Bilodeau who truly understand what's going on in the "Worker's Paradise" of Cuba. It's far better than Steven Spielberg, Martin Sheen, Kevin Costner, Oliver Stone and the other liked minded Hollywood types that traipse down to Cuba to hob-knob with Castro and mouth the Cuban party line. I just hope Castro expires soon, so the Cuban people can get back their freedoms and finally come out of the cold.

Benedict XVI: A Pillar of the Catholic Church.

Fire of Liberty

While the various talking heads, columnists and newspapers bandy on about how Pope Benedict XVI is a "hardline conservative" or an enforcer of "Conservative Catholicism" because he's opposed to the pull of society on issues like female priests, gay marriage, married priests and the acceptance of moral relativism. Heaven forbid that the head of the Catholic Church would actually practice the teachings/doctrines of the Church. Its funny watching the press fret on and about a Pope who is unwilling to accept the fact that other religions are the pathway to salvation. If you're the head of a Church that says Jesus Christ is your personal savior and his way is the only path, you're more likely than not going to continue espousing such views. Don't expect Benedict XVI to say anytime soon that Vishnu or Budda is the ticket to Heaven.

This argument on Benedict XVI opposition to the whole concept of relativism can probably be best described by this wonderful article by Michael Novak over at National Review Online. While you should read the whole piece, I thought I'd share with you the paragraphs that caught my eye:

No great, inspiring culture of the future can be built upon the moral principle of relativism. For at its bottom such a culture holds that nothing is better than anything else, and that all things are in themselves equally meaningless. Except for the fragments of faith (in progress, in compassion, in conscience, in hope) to which it still clings, illegitimately, such a culture teaches every one of its children that life is a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing.

The culture of relativism invites its own destruction, both by its own internal incoherence and by its defenselessness against cultures of faith.

This is the bleak fate that Cardinal Ratzinger already sees looming before Europe. His fear is that this sickness of the soul will spread.

For Cardinal Ratzinger, moreover, it is not reason that offers a foundation for faith, but the opposite. Historically, it is Jewish and Christian faith in an intelligent and benevolent Creator that gave birth in the West to trust in reason, humanism, science, and progress, and carried the West far beyond the fatalistic limits of ancient Greece and Rome.

To the meaninglessness of relativism, Ratzinger counter poses respect for the distinctive, incommensurable image of God in every single human being, from the most helpless to the seemingly most powerful, together with a sense of our solidarity with one another in the bosom of our Creator. This fundamental vision of the immortal value both of the individual person and the whole human community in solidarity has been the motor-power, the spiritual dynamic overdrive, of an increasingly global (catholic) civilization.

It would be nice if the people in the MSM would stop mouthing their criticism about the new Pope and read Benedict XVI's (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) work or pieces like Mr. Novak's. Unfortunately, we live in a World whose media consists of people who's thought processes are generally permeated with relativistic thinking. Expect more condemnation to come by the press. While the media will harp, I'll sit back and reflect on how momentous the conclave's decision actually is. I wish Benedict XVI a good and long reign. (It'd be funny if he ruled into his 90's)

Yes, Virginia, their is a way to Lower Gas Prices

Fire of Liberty

Here's a good Op/Ed by Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (R) of Florida on how to lower gas prices.

Nutty Pop-Culture

Fire of Liberty

Here's a good thought to ponder when you see some kid wearing a Che T-Shirt or talking about watching The Motorcycle Diaries.

The Great Debate Society

Fire of Liberty

Mark Steyn has a great column on the Bolton confirmation hearings in Sunday's edition of The Chicago Sun-Times. It seems that the Senate Foreign Relations committee is full of people who battle for sound-bytes on the national evening newscasts or cable news instead of getting anything effective done. I guess that's why the Senate is known as the great debate society of America. Here's a bit of Steyn's masterful work:

Still, in the ever accelerating descent into parody of the Senate confirmation process, nothing is too trivial. By the time Boxer and Co. are through huffing about the need for anger management lessons, Two-Hips Bolton will be able to walk into every saloon in Dodge and the meanest hombres will be diving for cover behind the hoochie-koochie gals' petticoats before his pinky's so much as brushed his waist.

If the Senate poseurs and the media wanted to mount a trenchant critique of Bolton's geopolitical philosophy, that would be reasonable enough. But there's not even a pretense of any of that. Instead, his opponents have seized on one episode -- an intelligence analyst in a critical position with whom Bolton and others were dissatisfied -- and used it to advance the bizarre proposition that every junior official should be beyond reproach, and certainly beyond such aggressive ''body language'' as putting one's hands on hips. Or as Peter Beinart, editor of the New Republic, complained to the BBC the other night: Bolton was ''disloyal to his subordinates.''

It's been obvious for three years now that the torpid federal bureaucracies -- the agencies that so comprehensively failed America on 9/11 -- are resistant to meaningful reform, but Beinart, in demanding that the executive branch swear fealty to the most incompetent underling, distills the ''reform'' charade to its essence: We'll talk reform, we'll pass reform bills, we'll merge and de-merge and re-merge every so often, we'll change three-letter acronyms (INS) to four-letter acronyms (BCIS) just to show how serious we are, and a year or four down the line we may well get real tough and require five-letter acronyms.

I wish that more of these Senators would take a better look at what they look like to the American public. Luckily we have sane writers like Mark Steyn who boil all the problems into his great columns.

Chinese Strawmen Tactics

Fire of Liberty

Peter Brookes has an excellent column in yesterday's New York Post on the current spat between China and Japan. While the media currently mouths China's line about Japan causing the problem via the publication of "textbooks," and the constant demonstrations of thousands of Chinese people, the Chinese are going about their merry way in creating situations that could exacerbate the situation between these Asia Giants. This is typical with most authoritarian nation's like China, where the leadership controls all protests and uses the media to make the World look the other way while they do something bad. Brookes shows in his column how the Chinese government has initiated an aggressive policy towards Japan. See for yourself:

China's increasing anti-Japanese sentiments have spilled over into U.N. matters, too. Beijing rejected any Japanese bid for a U.N. Security Council (UNSC) seat under recently proposed reforms of the international body.

As a UNSC permanent member with veto rights, Beijing's opposition would block a Japanese bid. While supporting India, Germany and Brazil, China claims that Japan, the U.N.'s second largest donor, doesn't have the "moral qualifications" for a seat.

China's military buildup is also spurring an Asian arms race, pushing "pacifist" Japan to reconsider its defense policy. Many of the more than 750 Chinese missiles now aimed at Taiwan are capable of reaching Japan (and American forces stationed there) as well.

Persistent rumors that the French will sell China Mirage fighters with advanced air-to-air missiles, and maritime patrol aircraft (if the E.U. arms embargo is lifted) has gotten Tokyo's (and Taipei's) rapt attention.

If I were Japan, I'd make sure that I was on guard for any tricks on the behalf of the Chinese. The actions of the past few weeks clearly demonstrates why Japan has to update their defense forces /strategic objectives to abate the rising Dragon. Expect this to be the beginning of a long struggle between the authoritarian Communist Chinese and the freedom loving democracy of Japan. My money is with Japan.

Capitol Hill Craziness

Fire of Liberty

Here's an example of what happens to a problem like gas prices or the environment when the government starts meddling. President Coolidge once said "Four-fifths of all our troubles would disappear, if we would only sit down and keep still." I wish someone would fill in the Republican Senators who have presented the two bills that they belong to the "small-government" party, which dispise onerous regulations that stifle prosperity. How about passing effective legislation like the President's energy bill, permanent tax cuts, or budget cuts.

The Future of Western Civilization

Fire of Liberty

Paul Jackson has a wonderful column in today's Calgary Sun which focuses on Herb Meyer's phenomenal DVD The Siege of Western Civilization. Meyer's phenomenal DVD lays out the three great threats to Western Civilization which are Islamic terrorism, moral decay and plunging birthrates. While Islamic terrorism and the moral decline of Western society (look at the news, listen to music, watch TV/Movies) are great factors in the possible collapse of our civilization, the most underlying problem that's running below the radar is the slow but steady decline in birthrates throughout Japan, Europe and the US. While people can rattle off thousands of excuses like careers, time, money, or lack of patience for not having children, they generally fail to realize that by delaying or not having children their only hastening the decline of our society. After reading these paragraphs from Jackson's column, I understand how alarmed Meyer is at the decline in birthrates throughout the Western World. See for yourself:

The replacement level to keep a population intact is 2.1 babies: One baby to replace a father, one to replace a mother, and the 0.1 because some children die before they reach adulthood, and some adults don't have any children at all.

In Western Europe today the birthrate is 1.5, some 30% below replacement level. Meyer notes if this continues when his college age children reach his age there will be 70-80 million fewer 'Europeans' than there are now.

"Three H-bombs and a plague couldn't accomplish that."

Japan's birth rate is 1.3%, which means in 20 or 30 years time, there will be 50-60 million fewer Japanese. How would you like to be a producer of baby food or baby carriages in Japan?

This, says Meyer, has devastating economic consequence because without a replacement population manufacturing plants, shopping malls, and schools will be empty.

Western Europe (and Canada) have sought to fight the falling birth rate by mass immigration, often from countries that do not adhere to the values of western civilization. Hence its continuing collapse within our midst. Since Japan's culture is not open to foreign immigration the economic consequences are already far worse than in Western Europe, where the economy has simply stalled. In Japan, it has crashed.

The U.S. birth rate is about 2%, just below replacement rate, but that is falling, too. The U.S. has about six to eight years to reverse the trend, predicts Meyer.

So from what I gander, the people of Western Civilization need to wake up and take control of their own destiny by starting families with lots of children. It about time we get back to having large families again. Take it from me, I know all about large families. My Great-Grandmother on my father's side of the family had 16 children, and my Grandmother (father's side) had 12 children. I realize this is too much for some people, so just aim for two kids. So start saving Western Civilization.

French Hen-House

Fire of Liberty

The French government is having a row of a time with the overwhelming opposition to the EU Constitution. Seems that Chirac and his cabinet are at each other's throats, so much that he's threatened to ditch Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin due to his failure to effectively push the "yes" vote May 29.

Romania seeks Personal Freedom

Fire of Liberty

It seems that the Eastern European nations won't take the flak from the French like the Spanish and the Dutch have. Just see the current dust-up between Romania and France, which can be found in this article in The Financial Times:

Members of Romania's centre-right government, in a series of interviews with Brussels-based journalists, made it clear they saw themselves in the Atlanticist, free-trade bloc which Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, called New Europe.

“Traditionally we have worked together with London and Washington,” Mr Basescu said, most recently by sending troops to Iraq, and he resented French criticisms of that policy.

He said Jacques Chirac, French president, caused offence in 2003 when he told EU candidate countries to “shut up” over Iraq, and that Michel Barnier, French foreign minister, recently compounded the insult when he said Mr Basescu did not have “a European reflex”.

“Romania is a country which has respect for itself,” he said. “France is one our main supporters, but at the same time we do not like these kind of declarations.”

Asked which economic model he would pursue, he said it would be a “more liberalised” system. “We want to have a state with minimal involvement in the economy,” he said.

As long as large nations like France and Germany think they can boss around small nations like Poland and Romania, they will never be able to form a United States of Europe. These small nations endured countless years of the Soviets bossing them around during the Cold War and don't feel like giving over such freedoms again to the likes of France. It amazing how a nation and its people who have been under the jack-boot of tyranny flock towards freedom and the US and away from bossy types like Chirac. I especially love the line about an economy with limited government activity. I have a feeling they'd reject the EU Constitution if given a chance. They understand the freedom factor, unlike the elites who push the EU Constitution.

Holland: The Freedom Quotient

Fire of Liberty

It looks like the Dutch are also having a rough go convincing its people that the EU Constitution is something that's good. According to this article in The Financial Times, the Dutch government is scrambling to get out the "yes" vote for their June 1, 2005 referendum on the EU Constitution. After seeing these poll results, I truly understand this drastic scramble from Brussels:

The government's most recent survey, carried out in the last two days, showed a narrow majority intends to vote Yes. But a sizeable number of people have yet to decide. However, a recent poll for Twee Vandaag, a Dutch news programme, showed 24 per cent in favour, 23 per cent undecided and 53 per cent opposed to the treaty. D66, the leftist junior party in Mr Balkenende's centre-right administration, has bemoaned the lack of media interest in the treaty.

I'd say that the people of the Netherlands are demonstrating that they're smarter than the bureaucrats who hold court in The Hague. I guess the Dutch people are a little miffed with a 400 page constitution, which creates a government that has people instead of a people with a government. When you take the citizenry from the whole quotient-as with this constitution- you will get such an outright rejection by the people if they ever get to vote in a referendum like this. Could it be possible the people of France and Holland could do the whole thing in? I hope so.

Marines Give 'em Hell in Iraq

Fire of Liberty

Here's a shining example of what kind of outstanding individuals who make up the "Devil Dog" Marines. This is an testament of how tough and determined our gallant warriors in Iraq are at defeating the Islamic terrorists that threaten to undermine the Iraqi/US mission of spreading freedom throughout Iraq. Just read what USA Today says about the heroic actions of Marine Lance Cpl. Joshua Butler:
“

"Butler — that day, that Marine — that's the critical error the insurgents made,"” Capt. Frank Diorio says. “"They thought they could keep the Marines' heads down. But he gets back up.”"

Butler, 21 and an Altoona, Pa., native, fired through the windshield of the first suicide bomber as he rammed a white dump truck through a barrier of abandoned vehicles the Marines had improvised. Barreling toward the camp's wall, the truck veered off at the last moment under volleys of Butler's gunfire.“I shot 20 or 30 rounds before he detonated,” he says.

Knocked down by that blast, with bricks and sandbags collapsing on top of him, Butler struggled to his feet only to hear a large diesel engine roar amid the clatter of gunfire. It was a red fire engine, carrying a second suicide bomber and passenger. Butler says both were wearing black turbans and robes, often worn by religious martyrs.

Amid the chaos of that first bomb blast, supported by gunfire from an estimated 30 dismounted insurgents, the fire engine passed largely undetected on a small road that leads from town directly past the camp wall, according a Marine report.

“I couldn't see him at first because of the smoke. It was extremely thick from the first explosion,” Butler says. When the fire engine cleared the smoke, it was much closer than the dump truck had been.

As the driver accelerated past the “Welcome to Iraq” sign inside the camp's perimeter, Butler says he fired 100 rounds into the vehicle. The Marines later discovered the vehicle was equipped with 3-inch, blast-proof glass and the passengers were wearing Kevlar vests under their robes.

Semper Fi!!!

African Epidemic

Fire of Liberty

With the passing of John Paul II and the current conclave, you've had the various talking heads on CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and the Big three networks carry on about the Pope as well as the Vatican failing to confront the HIV/AIDS epidemic in sub-Sahara Africa by promoting abstinence and refusing to allow the usage of condoms. Well, according to this piece by Michael Fumento @ Tech Central Station, the Vatican was on the right track by refusing to accept the fallacy that condoms were the solution to the HIV/AIDS battle. Fumento notes that while a plethora of studies steadily show sex as being the main culprit of such an epidemic, a group of three scholars have decided to climb out of the Ivory Tower and show that the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa via sexual transmission only accounts for a 1/3 of the infections. Here's what Famento reveals about what these three renegades say account for the other 2/3:

The chief reason it's so hard to spread HIV vaginally is that, as biopsies of vaginal and cervical tissue show, the virus is unable to penetrate or infect healthy vaginal or cervical tissue. Various sexually transmitted diseases allow vaginal HIV infection, but even those appear to increase the risk only by about 2-4 times.

So if vaginal intercourse can't explain the awful African epidemic, what can? Whatever the role homosexual and bisexual intercourse may play, almost certainly greater -- and more controllable -- contributors to the African epidemic are "contaminated punctures from such sources as medical injections, dental injections, surgical procedures, drawing as well as injecting blood, and rehydration through IV tubes," says Brody.

You don't even need to go to a clinic to be injected with HIV: Almost two-thirds of 360 homes visited in sub-Saharan Africa had medical injection equipment that was apparently shared by family members. This, says Brody, can explain why both a husband and wife will be infected.

For those who care to look, there are many indicators that punctures play a huge role in the spread of disease. For example, during the 1990s HIV increased in Zimbabwe at approximately 12 percent annually, even as condom use increased and sexually transmitted infections rapidly fell.

I'd have to say that the pundits/activists who say that we need to distribute more condoms to prevent the ongoing epidemic in Africa should shy away from the mantra "Sex=HIV/AIDS in Africa," and look at the work of these three scientists. If you look at the facts, you'll be surprised to see that maybe the "Anointed," might not know what they've been espousing for a decade and a half. It's about time individuals like this rock the boat. The question before the house is: Will the policy makers be willing to listen to this differing view?

Bon Voyage to The Public Interest

Fire of Liberty

Here's a great article in April 25, 2005 issue of The Weekly Standard by David Skinner which is an appreciation for The Public Interest, whose doors are closing after a lengthy forty year run. While the conservative World has lost a great friend in the culture war as well as the public policy spectrum with the closing of The Public Interest, it has a legion of writers and readers who will carry on with the fight in other magazines/journals, blogs, and think tanks. It has already been a launch pad for intellectuals like Charles Murray, James Q. Wilson and an inspiration to policy makers like Newt Gingrich and the 1994 Republican Congress on the Welfare Reform Policies. Luckily, we have the archive at The Public Interest to enlighten the folks who have never had the privilege of reading such a wonderful journal. Also check here for an archive which goes back to 1993. The journal will be missed and I hope someone introduces a second coming of such an intellectually stimulating journal in the near future. Until then, Thanks to the people of The Public Interest and their impact on the debate.

The EU Constitution: A "Non" Starter.

Fire of Liberty

Talking about Europe's future, here's an eye-opening Editorial in The New York Sun and the upcoming EU referendum in France. If you've been paying any attention to the upcoming referendum, you're should be aware that French President Jacques Chirac and his allies (In France & Europe) are in a panicked frenzy on getting a yes vote after polls showing 56% to 59% of the public against the EU Constitution. See here, here and here. While Chirac and his friends fight a public relations campaign to preserve the utopian EU superstate's' constitution, the NY Sun has decided to join the "non" campaign due to the fact that the constitution is harmful to the memberstates' sovereignty as well as ignite and massive gulf between the US & Europe that will make the Iraq squabble look like child's play. Just read what the editorial staff has to say:

We have the sense that, while the proposed European Constitution allows for some independence among nations in foreign affairs, the constitution up for ratification would have made it, were it already in effect, much more difficult for America to have gotten the kind of support in the current war that it has received from, say, Poland or Italy or even pre-3/11 Spain - or, for that matter, Britain. It strikes us as being in America's interest to see the French vote "non" and for America and Britain to focus their energies on building the kind of American-Anglo condominium that was being talked of by Mrs. Thatcher after her famous speech at Bruges.

We say that well aware of the history of barbarism among the Europeans, whose lands are dotted with graveyards to those who died for the monarchies and bigotries that have gone on the march every few decades. We understand that the idea of a European union was animated partly by the hope of, finally, conquering the savage strain among the Europeans from which so many here in America barely escaped. But plowing through the nearly 200 pages of the European Constitution, one can't help but sense that the whole enterprise has become a contraption much like the United Nations, one that is, in the end, going to be a disappointment and a cover for a new round of mischief. If the French vote "non" the bet here is that it won't be only the French people who will sigh with relief.

You know that the prospects of Chirac achieving a victory for the "yes" campaign, especially when Tony Blair backs away from holding a referendum on the EU Constitution in the Fall of 2006. It seems the EU construct is hitting a bad patch of highway and might hit a dead end if France rejects the constitution. Blair's probably scared the British public would put the last stake in the EU's heart. I shouldn't be so happy but I really funny to see that the people of Europe demonstrating their better judgement over the bureaucrats in Brussels. Thank God.

Also check out this commentary on the "non" campaign.

Europe's Future

Fire of Liberty

George Will has a interesting article in The Washington Post over the future of Europe. He notes that if Europe continues its trend of declining birth rates and a further rejection of religion for secular humanism, it will only find itself sinking into a crumbling mess with no relief in sight. Here's some of Will's wonderful piece:

Europe itself is withering. The day of John Paul II's funeral, the European Union's statistics agency reported that the decline of birthrates means that within five years deaths will exceed births in the EU. By 2013, Italy's population will begin to decline; the next year, Germany's will begin to decline. After 2010, Europe's population growth will be entirely from immigration. By 2025, not even immigration will prevent declining fertility from accelerating what one historian calls the largest ``sustained reduction in European population since the Black Death of the 14th century.''

In his new book The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God, George Weigel, biographer of John Paul II, argues that Europe's ``demographic suicide'' will cause its welfare states to buckle and is creating a ``vacuum into which Islamic immigrants are flowing.'' Since 1970, the 20 million legal Islamic immigrants equal the combined populations of Ireland, Denmark and Belgium.

I assure you that the much vaunted EU will fall on its face if it doesn't grasp the decline of its population and religious devotion throughout the member states of Europe. When you look the other way and ignore such failings in your own society, you could be headed to the horrors of the "Reign of Terror" that emerged during The French Revolution. During this time, traditions were done away with or diminished and religion was outlawed by the vile Robespierre and his Committe of Public Safety which eventually resulted in blood running in the streets of France. Though I doubt that Europe will ever dissolve into such madness of the guillotine, they will experience a significant decline in their culture unless they embrace their traditional culture. Once you lose your culture, you lose your whole identity on this World. The same thing also awaits this nation if it slides more and more towards secular humanism. Hopefully we have oracles like Will and Weigel who have alerted us to this rising storm.

Reflections on Our Future

Fire of Liberty

Here's a good article by Paul J. Cella over at Tech Central Station on the ever-lasting insight of Edmund Burke. Burke-one of my favorites-saw the future horrors of the World that would emanate from the "Great Terror," while others rejoiced the French Revolution. His perceptions of the World are still useful in the problems that we face today. Will the leaders and influential figures of this nation take heed of Burke's ideas, we'll see.

C-SPAN Sunday

Fire of Liberty

Watch Thomas Sowell on C-SPAN's Q&A tonight at 8:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. It's well worth the hour. See here for more. Also, check out Bob Dole on C-SPAN 2's After Words at 9 p.m., talking about his new book One Soldier’s Story. A good way to spend a Sunday night, I'd say.

Come on Down to South Park - Conservative Movement's Mecca?

Fire of Liberty

Here's a good review over at Tech Central Station by Edward B. Driscoll Jr on Brian C. Anderson's new book South Park Conservatives, which shows a new generation of conservatives who abhor political correctness much like the gang on South Park. Though these foul mouth cartoon grade-schoolers are a long way from the likes of Russell Kirk, William F. Buckley Jr, Phyllis Schalfly, Paul Weyrich and the countless other founders of the American Conservative movement, they have help to establish a new movement of the right.

As an editor of the Manhattan Institute's City Journal, Anderson has spent a considerable amount of time pondering and writing on the ever present movements in the American culture. In the August 2003 issue of City Journal, Anderson would suggest that the right was gaining the upper hand in American culture in this article, which noted that the right seems to dominate many facets of our culture. Whether its cable news successful Fox News, AM Radio with superstars like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, G. Gordon Liddey, Mike Gallagher, Neal Boortz, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Larry Elder and many others, along with a bevy of think tanks, Internet sites, magazines(small numbers but many) as well as books, the right tends to dominate. While the right has only infiltrated Hollywood in a very minute area, it has had an impact on the animated antics of Stan, Kyle, Cartman, Kenny. Though the show's creators are far from being conservative, they understand the right's disgust of the madness of the PC ninnies who have infected our TV shows and Universities. Just read what Driscoll had to say about Anderson's new conservative sub-division:

"In my book", Anderson recently told me, "the term refers to a kind of irreverent post-liberal or anti-liberal attitude or sensibility, one very in tune with popular culture. But it's not a coherent, fully developed political philosophy. You do find this attitude among a lot of younger Americans, as I show in my concluding chapter, which is based on lots of interviews with right-of-center college kids."

Those right-of-center college students, for the most part, aren't Alex P. Keaton-clones, decked out in Ralph Lauren double-breasted navy blue blazers. They're more likely to look like every other college kid: jeans, sneakers, and T-shirts advertising their favorite rock groups. (On the other hand, as Anderson notes in his book, campus South Park conservatives usually smell better than their bathing-optional counterparts on the left). But there's one thing that South Park campus conservatives abhor: "Political correctness drives them nuts", Anderson says. "In interviewing students, for instance, it was clear how much the PC conformities of the campus Left turned them off."

Though this movement is a long away from producing earth-shattering treatises like Buckley's God and Man at Yale, Richard Weaver's Ideas have Consequences, Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind, or Goldwater's Conscience of A Conservative, they definitely understand the ideas that these father's of the modern conservative movement were trying to disseminate. As long as these kids of the South Park generation continue to see beyond the PC filter that the Left seems to push down the mainstream cultures' throat in the TV shows, movies and the Universities, the conservative movement will endure. Thanks to Brian C. Anderson's observations, the conservative movement has discovered a new subset in the movement of the Right.

If you think your part of the South Park Conservative movement, please find time to read all of the books above. You'll thank me for such advice some ten years from now.

Tories Taking a Stand

Fire of Liberty

With the UK elections only a few weeks away,the Tories seem to have got a major boost in the most recent poll in The Sunday Times. While other polls like the Tory friendly, Sunday Telegraph shows Labour with a ten point lead over the Tories and The Sunday Mail's showing a three point lead for Labour, the Times shows the Tories gaining. According to the poll, the Tories have pared down the lead of Labour to one point. Here's what the paper had to say about the poll:

It puts Labour on 36%, down one on last week, the Tories on 35%, unchanged, and the Liberal Democrats on 23%, up two. The result, if repeated on May 5, would give Labour an overall majority of nearly 50 seats.

While this is no time for the Tory faithful to be popping the champagne corks, it does give them a bit of fresh air to the Howard team. This rise in the polls is probably due to the Tories constant pounding of Labour on crime, yobs, NHS and immigration. While Labour can hem and haw about what the Tories have failed to do in the last eight years (I don't know why, Labour has held the reigns of power for all this time not the Tories) the Labourites will still be the party that will be judge on May 5. One area that Labour has failed miserably to paste over with Blair's eloquent soliloquy is the issue of immigration. It doesn't help when you have administered over a government that has allowed well over 500,000 illegal immigrants to live on the Island nation. Just read what this article in The Sunday Times has to say about this poor performance by Blair's monolithic Labour party:

However, in the face of a political controversy over lax controls at Britain’s borders, experts involved were told not to reveal the figure. It includes not only migrants who have illegally entered Britain to work in the black market but also failed asylum seekers who should have been deported.

The estimate — equivalent to the population of Sheffield — is far higher than previous figures from campaigners such as Migration Watch UK and is likely to intensify the row over immigration.

Last week the Tories claimed immigration controls were a shambles after an illegal immigrant was convicted of murdering a policeman and plotting a terrorist attack with the poison ricin.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: “This government now admits that the number of illegal immigrants is at least 500,000 and it could be much more. But yet again it is covering up the truth from the public. This smacks of a desperate attempt to conceal its own facts.”

Following the Tip O'Neil adage, "Politics is Local," the Tory Party has found a issue that affects a broad cross-section of the UK. In almost every district and town in England are running into a immigration policy that has gone wild. With the numbers going up for the Tories with issues on immigration, one truly realizes that the UK's people are tired of these illegal immigrants welshing off the government via the dole, clogging up NHS hospitals, taking limited housing as well as an introduction of more anti-social/criminal elements to the British society. While these illegal immigrants continue to come ashore and subsequently bring their families into the nation illegally, they destroy the chances of hard working/deserving immigrants who are abiding the laws of the UK and filling for a Visa or asylum legally.

With such a horrific record on preventing this mass immigration, Labour has actually exposed two enormous fissures in their insurmountable political stronghold. The first is that they cannot control their borders and the second is that they have demonstrated their complete lack of accountability. (when you aren't sure of the number of immigrants in an island nation, your a very poor on your accountability skills). Unlike the poor chaps in Labour who offer mere platitudes on this issue, the Tories have sensed the concern of the people on the issue of immigration and have offered an alternative to the failed policies of the Blair government. Though they might not win the ultimate prize, the Tories are on a rise that will send a shockwave of fear in the House of Labour come May 5.

Flat Tax: A Freedom Tax

Fire of Liberty

The Economist has devoted its April 14th, 2005 issue to the Flat Tax, read here. It's about time that the magazine that is devoted to economics and financial growth throughout the World pays homage to the most simple income tax system ever devised. While a considerable amount of people like John Linder and Neal Boortz argue for the Consumption Tax, I'd argue different. Unlike the Flat Tax with its set tax rate which can be calculated in matters of minutes and mailed on a 3X5 card, the Consumption Tax calls for the scrapping of the whole tax system and the IRS (which requires the repeal of the 16th Amendment+ this requires 2/3 majority in both houses of US Congress & 3/4 majority of States) and it's just too darn confusing for most people to understand yet explain. If you want to "simplify" the tax code then a Flat Tax is the way to go. Just read what the editorial board at The Economist has to say about the implementation of this simple tax System:

Though it is impossible to be precise, that direct burden is almost certainly as nothing compared with the broader economic costs caused by the government's interfering so pervasively in the allocation of resources. A pathological optimist, or somebody nostalgic for Soviet central planning, might argue that the whole point of the myriad breaks, deductions, allowances, concessions, reliefs and assorted other tax expenditures that clog rich countries' tax systems—requiring total revenues to be gathered from a narrower base of taxpayers at correspondingly higher and more distorting rates—is to improve economic efficiency. The whole idea, you see, is to allocate resources more intelligently. Yes, well. Take a look at the current United States tax code, or just at one session of Congress's worth of tax-gifts to favourite constituencies, and try to keep a straight face while saying that.

I for one would recommend that President Bush's tax commission look at the Flat Tax as the best way to reform the bloated tax system that we have created. If we could simplify our tax system, more people would be able to keep more of their money and wouldn't have to stay up at all hours of the night looking over receipts trying to fill out their returns on April 15th. It would make life more simple for us. (Don't know what that means to H&R Block though).

Clash of Orthodoxies

Fire of Liberty

Zeyno Baran & Emmet Tuohy of the Nixon Center, have an interesting article over at National Review Online on the distinctive difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and The Russian Orthodox. Baran & Tuohy reveal that while the Eastern church has played an active role in promoting freedom throughout Eastern Europe, the Russian Church has pegged its future with the Russian Bear and its desire for stability in the status quo. Both scholars noted how a continued cold-shoulder towards democracy will only push the Russian Bear further and further away from the West, which is a long way from where the nation needs to go. Here's a small sampling of this interesting article:

Though not widely known, the structure of the Orthodox Church is highly conducive to local, responsive decision-making. Since the famous 1054 split with Roman Catholicism, the Ecumenical Patriarch (who has continued to reside in Constantinople/Istanbul over the intervening millennium) enjoys only a primus inter pares relationship with the autonomous patriarchs of individual countries. Over time, each national Orthodox Church thus became closely tied to the needs and desires of their people. However, as Ottoman political control receded over the 19th century, the influence of the Russian Patriarchate grew in keeping with the expansion of Tsarist and later Soviet power. While many churches were able to regain effective independence during the widespread clamoring for freedom that accompanied the fall of the Berlin Wall, pro-Russian elements have resisted such efforts.

In contrast, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, based in Istanbul, has acted as the leading voice in favor of freedom and democracy in the Orthodox world. A prominent promoter of interfaith ties and environmental issues (he has, somewhat unusually, been labeled “the green patriarch”), Bartholomew I has taken a special interest in the anti-authoritarian movement that has steadily gained steam in Orthodox countries over the last two decades. Standing at the center of coordination among all the Orthodox, he strongly supported the independence of the church in Estonia, which led to a major split within the Orthodox Church (between Russian and Greek churches). Today he is the key to the independence of the Georgian and Ukrainian churches, as well.

This "clash of orthodoxies" might not send shivers down most people's spine but It does have a major impact on the Russian people. With the ever-increasing heavy handedness of Putin and his party on the Russian state and the Russian Orthodox Church following the same sheet music, we could see the continued evaporation of the freedoms the Russian people gained with the collapse of the Soviet system. I wished the Church leaders in Russia would open their eyes to the dangers of appeasing the Russian state and other dictators, don't they remember any of their history. I think they might discover how dangerous it is to appease a KGB agent like Putin in Russia. God save them all.

Minutemen Project: Securing our Borders?

Fire of Liberty

If you've been watching the cable news networks, listening to AM Radio/NPR or reading your newspapers, your more than likely to have heard about the "Minutemen", a group of American citizens stationed at the Arizona/Mexico to notify the border patrol of illegal immigration. While most of the MSM have dubbed this group as nativistic "vigilantes" who hunt down illegal immigrants, responsible people like Bill O'Reilly and Larry Elder have revealed the true nature of this patriotic group. In his most recent column, radio host Larry Elder interviewed Minutemen co-founder Chris Simcox and revealed that the group is actually looking out for this nation by focusing on the fact that the borders are very porous and needs a serious influx of Border Patrol Agents. After reading Elder's column and reading what Simcox has to say about this growing problem, I'd say that a considerable amount of the American public would agree with what the Minutemen are doing on the border. Just read what Simcox had to say about his group's views on Illegal Immigration:

When I interviewed Chris Simcox on my radio program, an Oregon farmer called. He said, "Some of the people who are employing these so-called illegal immigrants get a real bad rap like . . . 'you're providing these people with jobs that other Americans should have and need.' But I'm tellin' ya, as a farmer . . . we don't have any other alternatives than to bring those people in. . . . Why should an employer turn a deaf ear to people who are willing to come here and willing to work and do the job that no American will do?"

Simcox replied, "I agree. No one can deny that there are jobs in this country that are available, jobs other people won't take. . . . We're not talking about preventing people from coming to work. We're talking about people entering the country illegally. We need to know who is coming into this country, where they're going, and their intentions. If their intentions are to work, then, by all means, we should welcome them. My plan would be that we have a way to expedite workers coming in."

I'd say that the Minutemen are far from the "vigilantes" that the MSM portray them as. If you remember from watching Westerns, vigilantes are generally a grouping of people who usually storm the local jails and either shoot their target dead, string him up in the tallest oak tree or burn the jail down with the criminal inside. This is centuries away from what the Minutemen are doing, which is reporting illegal boarder crossers to the US Border Patrol. Thank God for people like Elder and the brave citizens in the Minutemen.

From the Halls of Montezuma

Fire of Liberty

Martin Morse Wooster has a great article over at Tech Central Station on the "Devil Dog" Marines' boot camp in Parris Island, South Carolina. It's good to read such a great piece on the warriors who are the tip of our armed forces spear. Here's a sneak peek:

Another section of The Crucible teaches Corps values. The recruits perform various tasks, after being told a story about a Marine who earned the Medal of Honor. One station tells about Corporal James Mackie, who was blown up in a gunboat steaming up the James River during the siege of Richmond in 1862. A second describes the heroism of Sgt. Louis Cukela, who single-handedly charged and captured a nest of German machine-gunners in the Forest Du Prez in 1918. A third honors Sgt. Alfredo Gonzalez, who died on the fifth day of the battle for Hue in 1968 after he had carried two Marines to safety. Sgt. Gonzalez saved the second Marine's life after he was severely wounded by North Vietnamese fragmentation grenades.

The lessons these stories teach are simple, but important: These Marines started out as men like you. They sacrificed themselves to save their friends. They served their country with honor.

Light in the Darkness

Fire of Liberty

Here's a ray of light in Robert Mugabe's "Outpost of Tyranny."

Chinese Quid Pro Quo to Germany

Fire of Liberty

I guess this is why German PM Gerhard Schroder has continued his call for the lifting of the arms embargo on China. What humans will do for the personal interests.

Bolton: Our UN Man?

Fire of Liberty

Robert Novak has a great piece today on why Senator Dodd has been so tough on Secretary John Bolton during his confirmation hearings Tuesday and Wednesday. It has to do with the fact that Dodd is a great fan of Cuba while Secretary Bolton has adamantly campaigned against the horrors of Castro. It's a sad day when a US Senator and his friends find Fidel Castro more appealing than an American champion like John Bolton.

Here's several other good pieces on Secretary Bolton here and here.

Rise & Fall of Christian Europe

Fire of Liberty

Mona Charen has a wonderful column on Europe's continued decline in church attendance and the outright rejection of Christianity in the capitals throughout Europe. Even worse, the declining birthrates in these nations are slowly evaporating the Christian character of these nations because they have to seek workers to replace the aging workers which result in a great inflow immigrants from Northern Africa, thus an introduction of a Islamic faith and culture. In the column, Charen points out that such a decline has sparked George Weigel to write a book called The Cube and Cathedral. Just look what Charen had to say about the book in her column:

Culture, Weigel argues, determines civilization. Without its distinctly Christian history, Europe would not be what it is. To cite just one example, Weigel recalls the 11th century "investiture" controversy between Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII. The pope won, and the victory established an important principle that would have profound consequences for the development of what would later be called "civil society." The principle established was that the state "would not occupy every inch of social space."

If the people of Europe don't go back to their religious roots, the society as a whole will fall by the wayside. While we saw an outstanding display of religious devotion throughout Rome and Europe during Pope John Paul II's funeral, the general population has fallen prey to the alluring forces of secular humanism that has run roughshod over the great Churches of Europe. Even though Europe faces many problems, Weigel's devotion to the decline of Christianity and the rot of European culture is a good place to start in resuscitating this great nation.

Steel: A Great Tarrif User

Fire of Liberty

It looks like the White House is taking a slide on its "free market/free trade" credentials with the re-impositioning of the steel tariffs on imports of steel from Brazil, Russia and Japan. While the President and his advisors might think it's wise to continue these tariffs to help the fledgling US steel industry in Ohio and Pennsylvania, they fail to recall that these tariffs actually hurt the various industries who use steel in their products. That means that the cost of such steel will have dire affects on the manufacture of automobiles, metal buildings, metal roofing, and Lords knows whatever else that is made from steel. Just look what an editorial in The Wall Street Journal had to say about the same tariffs in 2003:

Meanwhile, the tariffs imposed a toll on the rest of the economy--in particular on steel users. U.S. manufacturers that consume steel for products ranging from cars to toasters watched domestic steel prices jump by more than 30%. The International Trade Commission, which released a report at the tariffs' September midpoint, found that in their first year the levies inflicted a $680 million hit on the U.S. economy.

A study done earlier this year for the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition went further. It found that higher steel prices cost 200,000 American jobs and $4 billion in lost wages from February to November 2002. Those 200,000 jobs were more than the total number of people employed by the U.S. steel industry itself. That's one reason more than 200 companies and organizations representing steel-consuming and related industries sent Mr. Bush a letter last month begging for relief.

For more on what steel tariffs can do to an economy just look at this by Deroy Murdock over at National Review Online. When will the White House ever learn to cleft to the concept of free trade when it comes to steel and agriculture. Subsidies and tariffs which are imposed to stave off the bleeding of a specific industry end up causing greater harm for the nation. Expert a sticker shock when you try to buy anything made of metal.

21st Century Eugenics

Fire of Liberty

Here's a interesting column in The New York Post by George Will on the ever increasing growth of 21st Century Eugenics. If this catches on in this nation like it has in various sectors of the medical community in nations like the UK and the Netherlands, we could very well be reaching Huxley's Brave New World. If the courts have any say in this, watch out!!!

Russian Bear up to Old Tricks

Fire of Liberty

It looks like Ukraine is trying its best to deal with the Russian Bear but Putin and his ministers are still playing their games with members of Ukraine newly elected government. The current dust up has to do with Ukrainian PM Yulia Tymoshenko canceling here trip to Moscow the after the Russian prosecutor-general claiming that she was wanted for corruption by the Russian authorities. As with other aspects of law and order in Russia, I can assure you that these charges are probably trumped up by the Putin government to enact revenge on the Orange Revolution that resulted in the lose of Russia favored candidate, Victor Yanukovych. While its good to have relations with Russia, I think the Ukrainians should focus the sights westward. At least we won't bite.

Darfur Update

Fire of Liberty

Max Boot (probably one of my favorite writers/historians) has a thought pondering column in today's Los Angeles Times on Sudan. After Rwanda, you'd think someone would find a way to solve the problem. I think Boot puts it best here:

As a last resort, even if they're not willing to send their own troops, the U.S. and the EU could offer to provide much more logistical support to allow the African Union to dispatch more of its own peacekeepers to Sudan. That's not asking a lot, yet it's more than anyone has been willing to do so far.

Remember how exercised everyone around the world was about the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib? Infinitely worse deeds are being done in Darfur every day. Where's the outrage? Where are the street rallies that might spur Western governments into action? Aside from a handful of journalists and human rights activists, the only Westerners who have shown any sustained interest in the Sudan are evangelical Christians, who've been exercised primarily about the fate of their coreligionists in the south. The silence of the "antiwar" masses speaks volumes about their priorities: They don't object to war crimes as long as they're not committed by Americans.

Well said.

Boltonathon Hearings

Fire of Liberty

Ken Adelman has a good article on the Bolton hearings over at Tech Central Station. Here's a peek:

From a trashing confirmation process, key senators not only get on the evening news and inflict some reputation damage on the Bush foreign policy team, but they gain if the nominee crouches in a defensive position and pledges impotence in the job.

This process worked beautifully a few months back with Larry Summers. Summers stood out for courage among his peers -- requiring African-American faculty members of Harvard to maintain intellectual excellence (instead of cutting new CDs), bringing ROTC back onto the Harvard campus, and examining whatever gender differences may exist.

The faculty outcry, resulting in an unprecedented resolution of no-confidence, has surely changed Summers. He became a serial apologist, and now will strain to avoid saying, or doing, anything controversial. Which is to say anything important.

Clash of Titans

Fire of Liberty

Ralph Peters has written a interesting column in The New York Post on the clash of cultures between the various branches of US armed forces. If your familiar with the military, you know that the Marines and the Army bear the heaviest burden fighting on the ground while the Air Force is considered a cushy job more attuned to a golf pro at the local country club. Unlike the Army and Marines who put in 16 hour days on the ground and flying helicopters here and there, the Air Force sky-jocks face very limited stints in the air (barring the airlift guys) in their multi million dollar jet with little or no opposition. Such has gotten under Peters' collar which is evident in the following paragraphs:

Morally bankrupt, the Air Force is willing to turn a blind eye to the pressing needs of soldiers and Marines at war in order to get more of its $300-million-apiece junk fighters. With newer, far more costly aircraft than the Marines possess, the Air Force pleads that it just can't defend our country without devouring the nation's defense budget.

Meanwhile, Marine aviators fly combat missions in aging jets and ancient helicopters, doing their best for America — and refusing to beg, lie, cheat or blame their gear.

I had gone out to Yuma to speak to Dog Davis' Marines about future war. The truth is they should have been lecturing to me. There is nothing more inspiring than being around United States Marines (yes, a retired Army officer wrote that). The Corps does more with its limited resources than any other branch of government. The Marines are a bargain rivaled only by our under-funded Coast Guard.

I'd have to say I'm with Peters on this one. Yes, you need the Air Force to conduct bombing runs and other tasks when needed (evident in any war) but the Pentagon has other areas to tend to as well. It would be nice if the Air Force had more of a Spartan, "Go get 'em" mentality like the Marines and the Army instead of drawing up large wish lists for jets like an F-22 which are ineffective in the current military environment. I guess that's what happens when an Air Force man is your Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, expect something different if Marine General Pete Pace gets the job.

A Sensible Energy Policy

Fire of Liberty

It looks like the British people have some sensible scientists, who are well aware of the energy problem that exists and seem to have workable solutions which are more palatable than what the wacky greens present. Such a sensible energy policy is laid out in this Op/Ed in The Times by Philip Scott, an Emeritus Professor of Biogeography in the University of London. Just look at what the professor has to say about an effective energy policy in the UK:

Nuclear power — which accounts for 17 per cent of the world’s electricity supply — has the safest record of any major form of energy production. The radiation from a nuclear power station is less than that from a large hospital (and there are fewer superbugs, too). China, Finland, France, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, Taiwan and the US, among others, acknowledge the value of nuclear power for their future. China is planning to build no fewer than 40 nuclear power plants by 2020, while Sweden and France are designing politically enlightened policies for the storage of nuclear waste. Moreover, as Sir David King, the Chief Scientific Adviser, has argued, we must encourage long-term — that’s a 40 to 50-year timeframe — research into nuclear fusion.

In addition, we have to continue to support the efficient use of fossil fuels. On conservative estimates, there are 350 to 500 years of coal reserves in the world, and, with modern technologies, such as gasification, coal is on an exciting road to clean energy.

We must be open about the limitations of “renewables”, including both intermittency of supply and their environmental downsides. Large-scale hydroelectric power necessitates the re-settlement of people, interrupts fish migration and causes loss of habitat. Micro-scale hydroelectric systems become blocked and are able to make only a marginal contribution. Tidal barrages disrupt complex ecosystems. Wind farms kill bird and bat species and despoil rare wilderness.

If the various industrialized nations would push for such energy policies instead of the budget-busting conservation schemes that provide little or no benefit and generally take up/ruin the countryside. I guess this concept is catching on and in the University at that. Maybe he's a rare bird but I think that a silent majority in these nations are for such a policy.

Supreme Court: Outside of the Lines?

Fire of Liberty

Arthur Herman, a Historian and author of How the Scots Invented the Modern World and To Rule the Waves, has a wonderful piece on the history and the original intent of the US Supreme Court over at National Review Online. Herman recalls the 1787 Constitutional Convention not only had the likes of Franklin, Hamilton, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Jay, Madison but also had a little known delegate from Philly named James Wilson. This little known delegate should be well known because he was the one who proposed that the US should have a Supreme Court. As most historians will tell you, the founding fathers were deeply influenced by Scottish Enlightenment figures like Adam Smith, David Hume, such was the case for Wilson who found inspiration for the formation of the Supreme Court from Thomas Reid.

Just read what Herman had to say about Wilson's concept and intent of this Judicial body:

Reid's common-sense philosophy laid the foundations for a living science of human freedom. Although it is almost forgotten today, it had a huge influence on post-revolutionary America — and on Wilson's idea of a Supreme Court. On the one hand, Wilson explained to his fellow delegates, such a court would uphold the rule of law: but on the other, it would not "disparage the legislative authority" or to "confer upon the judiciary department a power superior, in its general nature."

Instead, the Supreme Court was supposed to give American democracy a power it would desperately need, the power to use its common-sense judgment in a reflective way. By looking at a particular law, judges would decide whether it fit into the essential framework of the constitution, or not. This power of judging what is or is not constitutional was not something reserved for legal experts: It belonged to any ordinary citizen. Being a "judge" was for Wilson something more than just a legal or professional title. He had learned from Reid that all human beings are by their nature judging animals, who sift and evaluate the facts of experience with their common sense, and then decide and act accordingly.

After watching the inane activities and legislative rulings of the High Court in these recent years, I think the Court would be wise to look at what James Wilson intended the Court to be and not what it has become. Aside from Herman's article on the Court, you also have several books like Men In Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America, The Supremacists: The Tyranny of Judges And How To Stop It which focus on how far the Supreme Court has moved away from its original intent. I expect this to become a major focus in the upcoming months and in the 2006 elections.

Bolton: A US Champion

Fire of Liberty

David Brooks has a good column in The New York Times on the nomination of John Bolton. While he's no fan of Secretary Bolton's style and foreign policy, Brooks is on the same page with Bolton on the UN. Take a look:

John Bolton is just the guy to explain why this vaporous global-governance notion is a dangerous illusion, and that we Americans, like most other peoples, will never accept it.

Brooks pretty much lays out a case why we need Bolton to man the ship of the US in Turtle Bay. Though a handful of our most recent UN Ambassadors have fallen under the siren call of the UN, John Bolton will be a champion of the US and steer us away from dangerous rocky shores as all good captains do.