Capitol Circus

Update: Stating the Obvious

2011-01-13T12:31:00.002-05:00

To my few, occasional readers—amazingly, there still are a few—allow me to state the obvious:

Because of life beyond the blog, particularly my pursuit of a master's degree in military history at Norwich University, new blog posts will likely be extraordinarily rare until I graduate in mid 2012. As time permits and my the need to vent demands, I will post new ~~rants~~ blog posts.

Incidentally, almost two months into my degree program, my experience has been consistently good. Norwich knows how to do online learning right. I've also been pleasantly surprised at the emphasis my program places on good writing, something that is desperately lacking in academia and elsewhere.

For now, I will continue to twit (I refuse to "tweet") on most weekdays, pointing to various interesting items I find surfing the Web. These are available (usually) in the Twitter feed in the left column.

Goal of the Week: Buddle Goal Against Seattle

2010-11-01T15:42:00.000-04:00

An unbelievable strike by Edson Buddle (LA Galaxy) against the Seattle Sounders in the first leg of the playoffs. Kasey Keller, one of the best goalies in MLS, didn't have a chance. It was the only goal of the match, but what a goal.

The Laffer Cliff

2010-09-28T00:48:00.007-04:00

The idea for this post has been bouncing around in my head for months, delayed by life beyond the blog. Hopefully, the idea aged well.

Who'd have thunk it? At least one practitioner of the dismal "science" can be both entertaining and informative.

Allow me to introduce Dr. Arthur Laffer of Laffer Curve fame, an economic theory that Ben Stein used as material in his classic portrayal of a deadly boring economics teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

[The movie clip may not appear until after the jump.]

But Dr. Laffer is neither boring nor deadly. In March, I was privileged to attend a lecture by Dr. Laffer. It was an hour well spent. He was the complete opposite of the boring economics teacher.

The simple idea behind the Laffer Curve is that at some point raising taxes becomes counterproductive because people will react to the higher tax rate by producing less, which will mean the government will have less to tax and therefore receive less revenue.

In his lecture, Laffer applied this idea to the upcoming massive cumulative tax hikes on January 1, 2011. He listed a number of the tax increases. The tax rates on personal income, dividends, capital gains, and estate will go up, in some cases sharply, unless Congress extends the Bush tax cuts, which seems unlikely. Unlike in past years, Congress has not adjusted the AMT (alternative minimum tax) for inflation, meaning that it will affect more taxpayers next year--another tax increase. The Medicare tax rate will also go up, and many other tax increases or policies that have essentially the same effects as a tax rate increase will go into effect on the first of the year. Of course, Obamacare will add additional taxes on top. The net effect is a rather large tax increase on January 1, 2011--what I (and apparently others) call the Laffer Cliff. (I suppose there could be two interpretations of what the cliff represents: If the cliff is the rise in tax rates, the economy will run into its face on January 1. If the cliff depicts economic activity, the economy will run over the edge of cliff on January 1.)

Contrary to most economic models, people and businesses change their behavior in response to the economic environment. In the current environment, those who can will move as much income and other taxable activities from the high-tax year (2011) to the low-tax year (2010). Those with the most income will also likely have the most and best tax accountants, who will do a good job in maximizing these transfers. Thus, the largest producers in the economy will adjust the volume, timing, composition, and location of their income to minimize their tax exposure--they would be foolish not to.

At the macro level, Laffer estimated that this could shift 3 to 4 percent of U.S. GDP from 2011 to 2010. If Laffer's right about the magnitude--I'm confident he's right about the direction--then the current GDP growth (3.9 percent in the 1st quarter of 2010 and 4.9 percent in the 2nd quarter) is anemic without the economic activity displaced from 2011. This also means a drop of 6 to 8 percent when the economy goes over the cliff.

I guess the message is to hold on tight. The new year could be a rough ride.

Further Reading
Arthur Laffer, "Return to Prosperity: How America Can Regain Its Economic Superpower Status," video, lecture at the Heritage Foundation
Arthur Laffer, "Tax Hikes and the 2011 Economic Collapse," Wall Street Journal
Arthur Laffer, "The Laffer Curve: Past, Present, and Future," Heritage Foundation
"Six Months to Go Until The Largest Tax Hikes in History," American's for Tax Reform

Rediscovering Capitalism: Lessons from the Mistakes of Marxist-Leninism

2010-07-28T22:37:00.003-04:00

Disclaimer: I copyedited this book, and the author is a friend and colleague.

More than a year ago, a colleague asked me to help copyedit a book she was writing: Rediscovering Fire: Basic Economic Lessons from the Soviet Experiment to Eliminate the Market. When she explained the idea behind the book--using the Soviets' experiences as a series of experiments to demonstrate fundamental laws of economics (i.e., capitalism)--I was intrigued, in part because of my background in Soviet and Russian studies. In a fit of generosity, I agreed, which I came to partially regret later when my schedule became ridiculously busy due factors outside of work. (I was already quite busy at work.)

When I actually began working on it, the regret disappeared. Her idea was as good as it had sounded. Repeatedly, the Soviets had destroyed the market and its mechanisms only to realize that they needed to recreate them to make the Soviet economy function at all. Naturally, their attempts to mimic market forces through central planning were at best half measures, which promptly failed, leaving the leaders to rediscover and reinstitute market forces under various thin disguises. The whole episode of Soviet economic experimentation would make a wonderful comedy if it had not condemned millions to misery and even death.

The book is well worth a read.

I take some pleasure in the cover by John Cox. I referred Guinevere to John Cox, a favorite cartoonist and caricaturist of mine, who has an eye for absurd.

Note: If you see any typos in this book, I don't want to hear about them. They are obviously the publisher's fault. :-)

Related Links
On Amazon.com: Guinevere Liberty Nell, Rediscovering Fire: Basic Economic Lessons from the Soviet Experiment to Eliminate the Market (2010).
John Cox Art, website

"Board at your own risk"

2010-07-23T18:48:00.001-04:00

Photo courtesy of WMATA

Something unique happened on my commute home, which is usually a bad thing, but not so much today.

When I boarded a Metro train at Union Station, the driver started warning passengers that the air conditioning was out in all six cars of the train and that it was a "hot train." She continued by warning that anyone with a medical condition should get off and wait for the next train.

Hot Metro cars are nothing new to me, but an entire train is and so were the warnings. Either this driver was seriously concerned about the welfare of her passengers or Metro may actually be getting serious about improving customer service. Hopefully, both.

But this was not the end of the warnings. She topped everything with "Board at your own risk," which I found quite funny and refreshingly direct. The irony of a train driver urging passengers not to board her train was delicious. I don't even remember if she followed silly Metro practice of referring to the passengers as "customers," which has always annoyed me as a needlessly imprecise term.

If I'd been going a longer distance, I would have waited for the next train. Hot cars can be quite exhausting. Instead, I enjoyed watching the other travelers react to the driver's warnings as they boarded at each station.

If the driver came up with this routine on her own, she should be immediately promoted to management, which appears to need some clear thinkers.

Related Reading
Dr. Gridlock, "Miserable weather for Metro," Washington Post
Unsuck DC Metro blog

To twit or not to twit?

2010-07-07T08:58:00.000-04:00

First, my ~~apologies~~ condolences to Shakespeare for mangling his words in yet another way.

For years I have avoided online social networking like the plague it is. I have responded to invitations to join Facebook with barely disguised disdain, and the idea of using Twitter repulsed me. How can anything substantive be shared in 140 characters or less? Truly, the users appeared to be twits (silly peevish persons or fools per Webster's). The whole thing seemed like a joke on the users, thinly concealed by defining "to tweet" as the verb form of using Twitter.

What can I say--I surrendered to peer pressure. Shortly after returning from my tour of Israel, I joined Facebook to keep in at least minimal contact with my new friends from the tour. A few days ago, I gave into the "final" ignominy by setting up a Twitter account for this blog to allow me to easily share links to items that catch my interest. (It actually is quite simple.)

Yet I still have my limits. I absolutely refuse to "tweet," which seems too cute by half.

I will "twit" (to subject to ridicule or reproach) instead, particularly the politicians in Washington who frequently act like twits.

Who knows how I will capitulate next? Maybe I'll buy a smartphone and start downloading apps.

Update: Lawlessness in the U.S. Department of Justice

2010-07-01T20:22:00.003-04:00

This has been bubbling for a few days, and DOJ has "responded" to J. Christian Adams' charges. Apparently, DOJ officials feel they can't afford to ignore, even though the "mainstream" media has ignored it so far.

Adams responded to the smears:

The problem with smearing me is that there are many others who know the truth inside the Department. Documents which they refuse to turn over pursuant to subpoenas from the Civil Rights Commission prove it. Testimony from other DOJ employees, which they refuse to allow, would also prove it.

Where is the mainstream media? This should be fairly easy to corroborate.

Source
"DOJ Slimes Whistleblower Adams in Panthergate Case," PajamasMedia

Lawlessness in the U.S. Department of Justice

2010-06-28T14:37:00.002-04:00

An op-ed by J. Christian Adams, a former voting rights lawyer in the U.S. Department of Justice, levels some damning charges at the Obama Justice Department, particularly the Civil Rights Division and the Voting Section. The charges appear to be internally consistent and consistent with known facts.

The flashpoint was the decision to dismiss the case against the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation in Philadelphia at the polls on election day in November 2008. By all reliable accounts, the government had a strong case, but an Obama appointee and another DOJ lawyer ordered the dismissal against the strong objections of the lawyers pursuing the case.

While one apparent miscarriage of justice is bad enough, this incident may evidence deep-seated corruption within the Civil Rights Division of the Obama Justice Department. Adams reports that "instructions were given that no more cases against racial minorities like the Black Panther case would be brought by the Voting Section." In other words, certain minorities are above the law. This is neither justice, nor "equal protection of the laws" (14th Amendment). A scarier question is: How widespread is this corruption in the Justice Department?

Hat tip: Hot Air

Further Reading
"DOJ Attorney resigns due to…racism?" HotAir
"Court: Obama's DOJ Lacking Transparency," The Judiciary Report

World Cup Controversies, Gaffes, and Highlights

2010-06-24T11:20:00.003-04:00

The World Cup always creates controversy--that's part of its charm. Predictably, it began months before the first game with the traditional grousing about the ball. Each World Cup has its own ball. This year it's Jabulani, which means "to celebrate" in isiZulu.

The World Cup is now in full swing, and group play (the round-robin stage) has already produced its share of highlights and lowlights. The three that follow caught my attention. (Yes, I'm obviously biased toward the U.S. team.)

Utterly Amazing Goal by Maicon (Brazil v. North Korea)

Video link (ESPN)
This goal seemed to defy the laws of physics, and Maicon did this at a full sprint. What a great way to start off the World Cup . . . unless you're from North Korea.

British Goalie's Howler (England v. U.S.)

This should not have been a goal. It almost makes you feel sorry for Robert Green, the British goalie.

Video link (ESPN) for when FIFA takes down the YouTube video.

U.S. Game-Winning Goal Disallowed (U.S. v. Slovenia)

Even more suspect is that he couldn't explain his call. No one was offsides and there didn't appear to be any real fouls.

Apparently, FIFA was not impressed with the referee and excluded him from the list of referees for the next round. But the blown call may have had a good effect. Combined with the U.S. team's win in stoppage time yesterday, it seems to galvanized support for the U.S. team among Americans.

More Reading
"Controversy over Worldcup ball," Watchprem
"World Cup referee who robbed U.S. may be out," USA Today

The Euro's Dive: The Story in a Chart

2010-05-26T12:56:00.003-04:00

In five months, the euro has lost about 20 percent of its value versus the U.S. dollar. Granted, the euro was probably overvalued in December--partially because of increasing discontent with U.S. dollar and the increasing irresponsible U.S. fiscal policy--but the euro's decline strikes me (a slightly informed observer) as something more fundamental than a market correction to an temporarily overpriced currency. If the stock of a publicly traded company dropped like this, its investors would be extremely worried.

The euro's sharp decline seems to reflect increasing skepticism about the euro zone's (and even the entire European Union's) ability to weather serious economic problems. The real tests of a currency and a country--or in this case a quasi-superstate heavy on bureaucracy--come during times of trouble, not the relatively smooth sailing since the end of collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. The cracks are already appearing, such as the German taxpayers' increasing unhappiness with bearing a disproportionate share of the cost of propping up the Greek economy and the rest of the euro zone.

It will be interesting--intellectually, politically, and economically--to see how this economic storm changes the euro and the EU. Quite frankly, I seriously doubt that the EU has the institutional capability to respond effectively to these economic troubles.

On the brighter side, if the euro continues to drop, I may be taking my next trip to Europe much sooner than I had expected.

Additional Resources
For the Euro-USD exchange rate, see Yahoo! Finance.

Karl-Heinz Schnibbe: Mourning the Passing of Hero

2010-05-23T20:34:00.001-04:00

Upon returning from my trip abroad, I was saddened to hear that Karl-Heinz Schnibbe had died on Sunday, May 9, in Salt Lake City--65 years plus one day after the Third Reich surrendered. I never personally met Mr. Schnibbe, but the story of him and the other members of the Hübener Group has inspired me for years. He was the last surviving member of the Hübener Group.

My interest began with the book The Price, Schnibbe's autobiography of his experiences in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The book was a gift from my parents when I was a teenager. It continued with Huebner, a play in God's Fools, a book of plays by Thomas Rogers, which was a birthday gift from my brother. Huebner probably had the greatest effect on me because in it Dr. Rogers, later a professor of mine at BYU, brought to life the dilemmas of conscience that Helmet Hübener, Karl Schnibbe, and Ruddi Wobbe--among others--faced as Mormons trying to live their religion in Nazi Germany. Some years ago, I had the privilege of seeing Huebner performed at BYU, and Schnibbe was present and was introduced to the audience at that showing.

The more I have learned about the Hübener Group, the more their story has fascinated and inspired me, both for their bravery and for their willingness to act on their beliefs in standing up to a ruthless totalitarian regime.

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. [emphasis added]
—Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945

The Hübener Group
The story began in Hamburg in 1941, when one of Helmuth's half-brothers brought home a radio from National Labor Service. When the brother was drafted into the military, he left his radio behind, and Helmuth began listening to BBC broadcasts after his grandparents had gone to sleep. (Listening to foreign radio broadcasts was a treasonable offense in Nazi Germany, punishable by death.)

Already deeply disturbed by the injustices he had witnessed under Nazi rule, the BBC broadcasts gave Helmuth the facts he needed to counter Nazi propaganda. He began small, typing flyers that declared: "Hitler is a murderer! He is the guilty one!" and that backed those charges with facts. He distributed them secretly, tacking them to bulletin boards, putting them in mailboxes, and even into the pockets of overcoats. He latter recruited his friends Karl and Ruddi, two other teenagers in the LDS branch (congregation) in Hamburg, to help him distribute the fliers.

Helmuth's fliers became more sophisticated as he expanded their distribution system. Amazingly, only a few of the flyers were apparently turned into to Nazis, but enough to cause them great concern. The Hübener Group's downfall came when Helmuth approached a colleague at work to translate the fliers so they could reach foreign workers in the city. The colleague reported him, and Gestapo promptly arrested Helmuth and soon arrested his co-conspirators. At first, the Gestapo refused believe that a mere teenager had masterminded such as sophisticated operation, but eventually Helmuth persuaded them that he was primarily responsible, and he was executed for this efforts. Schnibbe and Wobbe were sentenced to 5 and 10 years, respectively, in a labor camp. Near the end of the war, Schnibbe was sent to Czechoslovakia to be trained as a soldier, where he was captured by the Soviet Army. He spent the next seven years in a Soviet work camp.

Moral Dilemmas
In the play, Dr. Rogers nicely portrays the moral dilemma Helmuth faced between his religious obligation to be "subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" (Article of Faith 12) and his obligation to oppose evil and lies of the Nazi regime, which were becoming increasingly evident.

The play less overtly presents the same moral dilemma in the character of Arnold Zoellner, the branch president of the LDS branch in Hamburg, who was trying to protect the members of his congregation. He joined the Nazi Party, presumably to help the church and its members. He also summarily excommunicated Helmuth after he was arrested by the Gestapo, probably to protect the German Mormons by trying to distance the church from Helmuth, who had used the branch's typewriter to type the flyers, thereby implicating the church.

Zoellner has often been condemned for abandoning Helmuth and collaborating with the Nazis, but I wonder if he did far more than could reasonably be expected in the circumstances. Helmuth's excommunication was reversed after the war because of rather flagrant procedural mistakes. (It almost certainly would have been reversed anyway, but the procedural mistakes made it all but automatic.) I wonder if President Zoellner deliberately made these mistakes. He needed an excommunication to have any chance of persuading the Nazis that the Mormons did not not pose a threat, possibly saving them from the death camps. But he also knew that the deeply flawed excommunication would not survive a review by church leaders, which hopefully would happen after the war.

I don't have the answer, but I'm reluctant to condemn most people who must live under a totalitarian regime because simply in managing to survive day to day they cannot avoid becoming tarnished by the lies the regime must perpetuate to maintain its power--a point that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has established in detail. No one can come out of totalitarian regime alive and untarnished, which is one of reasons totalitarian regimes are inherently and unavoidably evil.

I, one of many, mourn the passing of a quiet hero who survived and outlived two totalitarian regimes.

Picture: Rudolf Wobbe, Helmuth Hübener, Karl Heinz Schnibbe, ca. 1941. Courtesy of Wikepedia.

Upcoming Movie
With some pleasure, I have discovered that Truth and Treason, a film about the Hübener Group is in production, due out in 2011.

Further Reading
"German Mormon Karl-Heinz Schnibbe, who resisted Nazis with teenage friends, dies in Salt Lake City at 86," Deseret News
"Mormon who defied Hitler dies in Utah," Salt Lake Tribune

First Impressions of Israel, Greece, and Paris

2010-05-19T23:09:00.012-04:00

The mental fog is beginning to lift as my sleep patterns are returning to "normal," so it seems time to regurgitate a few first impressions from my travels in Israel, Greece, and Paris.

Quick Hits
In Israel, you can't swing a (rather thin) cat without hitting a tourist or a church (or synagogue or mosque). In Bethlehem, which is in Palestinian territory, you can't swing a cat without hitting the street merchants who swarm to sell unsuspecting tourists a wide range of generally unwanted goods. In Athens, you can't swing a dog (I didn't see any cats in Athens, but I'm told that they almost run the island of Santorini) without hitting an archaeological dig. In Paris, the city and the people are too beautiful and distracting to even think of swinging a cat (or dog). (No dogs or cats were harmed or even touched in the construction of this paragraph.)

Israel
All of the road signs were in three languages: Hebrew, Arabic, and English. Minarets were everywhere, making Israel appear more Muslim than Jewish. The landscape looks remarkably like Utah with barren hills and minimal vegetation--in other words an arid desert--except that the Israelis tend to build their cities and towns on the tops of the hills.

Greece
The protests in Athens looked remarkably like protests in Washington, DC., except that their anarchist "protesters" were throwing Molotov cocktails. I would have felt somewhat sympathetic toward the regular protesters, which were generally well behaved, except that many held signs with the hammer and sickle prominently displayed--not surprising given that the Communist Party of Greece holds about 20 seats in the Greek parliament. Yet given Soviet Communism's extremely bloody history (worse than Nazi Germany's), I put the hammer and sickle in the same category as the swastika, so I found the display somewhat nauseating and decidedly distasteful.

Paris
Paris was simply amazing. Words fail me, but I will go back given the opportunity and adequate finances.

My first experiences of Paris were of the subway and regional rail system, which is at least as large as New York City's, but much cleaner. It also runs with nearly German efficiency.

While in Paris I did not meet a single rude Frenchman (or Frenchwoman), even though I speak only a few words of French. Of course, I ate in street cafes, not in fine restaurants where you pay for the waiters to be snooty. Still, I suspect the myth of the rude Parisian is just that--a myth. Parisians are probably just as likely to be rude as anyone else is, especially when dealing with the stereotypical American tourist who acts like he owns the country. (Unfortunately, this stereotype is partly based on fact, which is one of the reasons why I avoid American tourists when traveling abroad.)

One final, important observation: French chocolate is excellent, nearly as good as Belgium or Swiss chocolate, but the difference in quality is almost undetectable.

Picture: My first view of the Temple Mount, taken from the Mount of Olives.

EU Monopoly Money

2010-04-22T12:54:00.003-04:00

In preparing for a trip to Europe, I recently exchange some dollars for what looks like Monopoly money. (It's helpful to have some of the local currency in hand when arriving in country.) Unfortunately, the euro currently trades for about 1.35 dollars, so it cost me a lot more than Monopoly money.

(But I suppose this is preferable to a time in 1994 when I withdrew 250,000 rubles from a bank and traveled halfway across Moscow to buy a train ticket to Berlin.)

While the euro bills are more colorful than the U.S. Federal Reserve notes we use as paper money, they strike me as bland and sterile. Their faces show arches, and the the backs show bridges, but not any of any recognizable historical or cultural significance. They look like currency designed by bureaucrats--an accurate reflection (and condemnation) of the European Union as a whole. The only thing marginally clever about the euro bills is that the different denominations come in different sizes, which helps the visually impaired to distinguish among them, but that has long been common practice outside North America.

I'm told that many Europeans dislike their euro bills. A friend's German mother considers them a crime against culture. Of course, that may be have something to do with her beloved Germany giving up the Deutsche mark.

I think a case could be made that the euro bills constitute a crime (or at least a misdemeanor) against humanity, but them I'm a long-time eurosceptic--not exactly an unbiased observer.

On a Tangent
Drudge has posted a picture of the new $100 bill along with hyperlinked captions that it "Looks European" and "Might as Well Be a Euro."

I just don't see it. The picture of Benjamin Franklin on the front makes it definitely American, not European, although he was much admired in Europe. As if that weren't enough, the "American symbols of freedom, including phrases from the Declaration of Independence," on the back would give EU bureaucrats and politicians a massive case of heartburn.

Source:

U.S. government press release

Links of the Day Archive

2010-04-06T13:37:00.005-04:00

Until I find a better, easier way (and the time to implement it), I'm archiving my Links of the Day in this blog post. I'll update it approximately every week.

Wednesday, June 15, 2010

World Cup Goal of the Week (for now) --YouTube

Maicon's goal against North Korea--unbelievable even after seeing it.
"Hubble Finds Jupiter’s Missing Stripe" --Wired Science

It's hiding behind ammonia clouds.

"MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address" --Real Clear Politics

Obama's lost Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Howard Fineman at MSNBC. Even Dowd dumps on him. Is there anyone left to defend him?

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

"Petraeus Passes Out During Testimony" --ABC

Listening to Senators drone on when asking their "questions" is a form of cruel and unusual punishment.
"I admit it: I was wrong to have supported Barack Obama" --Daniel Hannan, Telegraph

"His policies are serving to make his country poorer, less free and less respected. And that is a problem for all of us."
"Obama's Political Oil Fund" --Wall Street Journal

"[T]he White House runs roughshod over the rule of law."

Monday, June 14, 2010

"Abbas to Obama: I'm against lifting the Gaza naval blockade" --Haaretz

Hmmm. The Palestinian Authority and Egypt want Israel to maintain the blockade of the West Bank.
"After delays, U.S. begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill" --Washington Post

Four weeks late is better than nothing. Hopefully, the President has waived the Jones Act, a nasty piece of destructive protectionism.
"You're losing your plan: ObamaCare's true face emerges" --New York Post

The devil is always in the details, and regulations to enforce 3,000 pages of sloppy legislation contain a lot of details.

Thursday, June 10, 2010
- Cartoon of the Week --Investor's Business Daily
  
  He is the the One he's been searching for.
  
  Hat tip: Power Line
- "Thomas, Patrick, Tea, and Me" --David Rodeback
  
  Some serious thoughts on the Tea Party movement and how it could help bring about much needed changes.
- "Japanese Spacecraft Deploys First-Ever Solar Sail" --Wired Science
  
  A first step in demonstrating solar-powered space travel.
- "Helen Thomas and other weapons of mass distraction" --David Frum
  
  The demise of an unserious White House reporter, but not of unserious reporting.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
- "Once a government pet, BP now a capitalist tool" --Washington Examiner
  
  How quickly the Left turns on its supporters in the private sector. Other companies should watch and learn.
- "Obama Gives New Meaning to "Big Government"" --Jay Cost
  
  The Chief Umpire speaks.
- "Awesome: Israeli students trying to organize flotilla to Turkey" --Allahpundit
  
  I predict Turkey will suddenly rediscover the inherent right of a sovereign country to control its own border.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
- "Letting Israel hang: US undercuts ally" --John Bolton
  
  Money quote: "The really grim news is that we face at least 2½ more years of such Obama policies."
- "In New Space Race, Enter the Entrepreneurs" --New York Times
  
  A privately owned and operated space station.
- "World Cup 2010: American fans will have power in numbers" --Washington Post
  
  Tens of thousands of American soccer fans invading South Africa for the World Cup.
Monday, June 7, 2010
- "Saints In Sodom? Activists Attempted to Shield Captured Commandos On Mavi Marmara" --IMRA
  
  Kudos to the "useful idiots" who attempted to protect the Israeli commandos from the militants.
- "One Giant Leap for Commercial Space" --Pajamas Media
  
  More and more I think that the private sector, not the government of any country, will lead the exploration and development of space.
- "Why Obama’s Stimulus Failed" --Morning Bell (Heritage Foundation)
  
  Have private employers gone John Galt? I can't blame them if they have.
Friday, June 3, 2010
- National Donut Day --OpenMarket.org
  
  A call for civil disobedience against federal "nutritional reform" by eating an extra donut.
- "Turkey's Radical Drift" --Wall Street Journal
  
  Why is a NATO "ally" working with rogue states and terrorist organizations?
- "Israel refuses to commit suicide" --Krauthammer
  
  Comparing Israel's blockade of Gaza to Kennedy's blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
- "What a Surprise" --In From the Cold
  
  I'm shocked, shocked that terrorists have infiltrated Palestinian "peace" and "humanitarian" groups.
- "Anchor accuses own network of ‘embarrassing’ bias in Israel coverage" --The Daily Caller
  
  Newsman points out a number of relevant details that the media consistently ignore.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
- "Amazing shot of ISS and Jupiter… during daytime!" --Discover
  
  Some impressive space photos taken in broad daylight.
- "Carter condemns Israeli raid on Gaza-bound ships" --Associated Press
  
  Carter vigorously defends his status as worst [ex-]President ever.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
- "Obama's 2 percent solution for the Louisiana oil spill crisis" --Washington Examiner
  
  A study in federal paralysis.
- "In the Koreas, Five Possible Ways to War" --New York Times
  
  A walkthrough of five plausible and worrisome scenarios.
- "The Marmara incident in perspective" --Power Line
  
  Most of the world condemns Israel for daring to control its border.
- "A disaster with many fathers" --Krauthammer
  
  Environmentalists, BP, and federal officials share the blame. Obama is not primarily responsible, but he hasn't helped much.

Friday, May 28, 2010

"Lt John Finn, RIP" --In From the Cold

Passing of an American hero, who earned the Medal of Honor defending Pearl Harbor.
"Alleged $100M scareware sellers facing charges" --Network World
Kudos to the FBI and the Microsoft Digital Crimes Unit for dealing with these pests.
"The 30-Year Rubik’s Invasion Continues" --Wired
A momentous milestone in geek history.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

"Scramjet-powered X-51A Waverider missile breaks Mach 6 record" --Christian Science Monitor

That's fast! Mach 6 is six times the speed of sound.
"Arlen Specter's Revenge" --The Daily Beast

Payback for Obama abandoning him in the primary election?
"Study finds increased gov’t spending results in unemployment" --Ed Morrissey

The surprise here is not this demonstrable fact, but that it was Harvard Business School that (re)discovered it.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

"Changing Course in N.J." --Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ)

Christie's plan of budget freezes and no tax increases contrasts nicely with the Democrat-controlled California Legislature's $3.5 billion in proposed tax increases. See LA Times.
"More of the Same" --In From the Cold

Some background and thoughtful analysis of North Korea's latest unprovoked attack and subsequent saber rattling.
"The collapse of the euro would open the door to democracy" --Telegraph

A silver lining in the euro zone's troubles?

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

"Landmark Publication of Mark Twain’s Autobiography" --University of California Press

Per his instructions, publication was delayed until 100 years after his death. I wonder what fun surprises lurk in those pages.
"Virgin: the world's best passenger complaint letter?" --Telegraph

Some dry British wit and simply a piece of good writing.
"In Cruel World, U.S. Remains Last Best Hope" --Dennis Prager

An argument for American exceptionalism.

Monday, May 24, 2010

"Budget woes? Just don't pass one" --LA Times

The Democrats "solution" to the mushrooming budget deficit: Deny it exists by not passing a budget.
"Russia is getting its 'sphere' back" --Christian Science Monitor

Russia is expanding its sphere of influence thanks in part to the distracted Bush Administration and the naive Obama Administration.
"It’s the Sun, stupid" --National Post

Solar scientists dare to poke another gaping hole in the global warming "consensus."

Friday, May 21, 2010

"The simple truth about illegal immigration" --Orange Punch

Anything that claims to be the "simple truth" raises a red flag, but the author makes a pretty good argument that the U.S. welfare state is one of the drivers of illegal immigration.
"The Fruits of Weakness" --Krauthammer

"Soft power" diplomacy is useless without "hard power" to support it.
"Gov. Christie instantly vetoes millionaire's tax" --Philadelphia Inquirer

Finally, a governor who understands basic economics and has a backbone.
"Spanish paper: Obama driving off ‘green energy’ cliff" --Washington Examiner

The "green economy" and "green jobs" are a fraud. See also article by Christopher Horner.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

"Greek strikers march on parliament against cuts" --Reuters

Another day, another strike, and another bite out of the Greek economy. Driving away tourism strikes me as an extremely unwise move by the unions.
"Voter Insurrection Turns Mainstream, Creating New Rules" --New York Times

The Grey Lady acknowledges the disconnect between Washington and the country, but not Obama as a primary cause. Oh, well, half right is an improvement for The Times.
"Mortgage delinquencies surge to a record" --MSNBC

Hmmm. The worst may not be over yet.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

"A better night for Democrats than for Republicans" --Power Line

A balanced evaluation of yesterday's elections. Incumbents had a bad night, but the Democrats survived. November should be interesting.
"Slow Learners at the Ninth Circuit" --George Will

George Will takes the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to the woodshed.
"The EU is as doomed as its currency" --Telegraph

A rather overoptimistic prediction, but we can hope. Europe would probably be better off without the EU and its bureaucrats.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

"South Korea: North responsible for torpedo attack on warship" --Washington Post

Seoul will appeal to the UN Security Council, which will likely do nothing as slowly as possible.
"Iran's Nuclear Coup" --Wall Street Journal

Yet another failure in pointless U.S. attempts to negotiate with Iran.
"Enough Money" --Thomas Sowell

Sowell teases out some of the implications of Obama's Leftist thinking.

Monday, May 17, 2010

"How the Science of Global Warming What Compromised" --Der Spiegel

A reasonably balance look at how climate research devolved into politics.
"An Early Return" --In From the Cold

A former spook's take on Kim Jong-il's abrupt return from Beijing.
"New baby boom fosters culture clash: Parents vs. public spaces" --Washington Post

Baby skirmishes in the park and family night at the bar. Washington, DC, is strange.

Friday, May 14, 2010

"Forecast: Angry Obama with scattered rain" --Don Surber

A perspective on presidential anger.
"US faces same problems as Greece, says Bank of England" --Telegraph

This seems a bit exaggerated, but the growing U.S. budget deficit will become unsustainable in the near term.
"President Nicolas Sarkozy 'threatened to pull France out of euro'" --Telegraph

More cracks in the euro zone?
"In 2005, U.S. intelligence warned of Euro econ crisis and EU's demise..." --Washington Examiner

A "prescient" warning from the National Intelligence Council.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

"Why Americans Are Shocked & Appalled" --Tony Blankley

An argument for electing radicalized politicians, e.g., not the honorable Senator Bennett (R-UT).
"A Hidden History of Evil" --City Journal

The Soviet Communism was arguably at least as evil as Hitler's Germany. It was certainly more deadly.
"Stop Me Before I Veto Myself!" --Hot Air

Obama's ongoing comedy routine. It might even be funny if he weren't playing with our money.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

"Sounders FC to pay back its season-ticket holders" --Seattle Times

This may be a first in professional sports: One of best MLS teams will "refund" its fans for playing poorly in its last home game.
"Health-care overhaul is up against long campaign across U.S." --Washington Post

Seven more states join the "war of attrition" against Obamacare.
"Jupiter loses a belt" --TG Daily

A planetary wardrobe malfunction?

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

"Germany, France May Hurt AAA Ratings in ‘Ponzi Game’" --Bloomberg

Troubles in euro zone are weakening its economic pillars.
"The Welfare State's Death Spiral" --Robert Samuelson

The economics are catching up with socialist policies--as they eventually always do.
"Jolly Rancher lands Brazos ISD third-grader in detention for a week" --KHOU (Houston)

School officials demonstrate minimal intelligence in dealing with "minimal nutrition" foods.

Links of the Day was on hiatus from Saturday, April 24, through Monday, May 10.

Friday, April 23, 2010

"The best financial reform? Let the bankers fail" --James Grant

The opposite of the current policy of collectivizing risk.
"The Next Chapter in Space" --In From the Cold

At least the Air Force's space program is still making progress.
"Mac & the iPad, History Repeats Itself" --Bruce Tognazzini

A peak at Apple's formula for success

Thursday, April 22, 2010

"South Korean ship 'hit by North Korean torpedo'" --The Times

Will the Obama Administration support this U.S. ally or force Seoul to bury the issue in hopes of resurrecting the meaningless nuclear talks with North Korea?
"Earth Day: Smile, don't shudder" --Bjorn Lomborg

A sensible, rational environmentalist (not an oxymoron in this instance) notes how global environmental conditions have improved since the 1970s
"Before Dirty Harry, There Was Ronald Reagan" --The Atlantic

Illustrating the necessity of fighting evil.
(Terrorist?) missile attacks on Jordan and Israel --Associate Press

This can't be good.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Cartoon of the year(?) and a bonus cartoon --Michael Ramirez

"Is the US turning into a nation of freeloaders?" --John Hinderaker of Power Line.
"An Economy of Liars" --Gerald P. O'Driscoll Jr

The decline of the U.S. economy into crony capitalism.
Lies, damned lies, and government statistics --Big Government

White House caught cooking statistics on stimulus jobs.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

"Vacationing a human right, EU chief says" --Ottawa Citizen

Another foolish idea from Europe that devalues real human rights (e.g., life, liberty, property).
"What's behind the anti-Tea Party hate narrative?" --Byron York

A "political threat" (e.g., voting) versus a "physical one" (violence)--a distinction that Presidents Clinton and Obama carefully confuse.
"FDA plans to limit amount of salt allowed in processed foods" --Washington Post

One more expansion of the nanny state. Does the FDA even have the legal authority to regulate salt?
"Russia's New Push for Power" --Judith Miller

An interesting point on the timing of the coup in Kyrgyzstan.

Monday, April 19, 2010

"Why the Left Needs Racism" --James Taranto

A brief discussion of the Left's uses for racism.
"The Palestinians’ Dirty War" --Khaled Abu Toameh

The situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is more complex than it is typically portrayed. Hat tip: Power Line

Friday, April 16, 2010

"Putin wins again"--Ralph Peters

Putin is leaving the Amateur (and the U.S.) in his dust. See my previous post.
"Obama's Nuclear Posturing, Part Deux"--Krauthammer

A nuclear summit and agreement devoid of substance
"North Korea suspected in blast that sank warship"--Yahoo News

Cheonan sunk by "external explosion," i.e., almost certainly by North Korea.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

"Don't stifle growth with regulation"--Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

A few reasons why "net neutrality" on the Internet is a really bad idea.
"Arizona doctor says Obamacare will force him to close shop"--Daily Caller

Another day, another casualty of Obamacare. Hat tip: Ed Morrissy
"Waxman cancels Obamacare CEO hearing"--Washington Examiner

He can't have business leaders pointing out Obamacare's flaws to Congress. See my earlier post on the subject.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Political cartoon of the day--John Cox

"That's odd. I can just make out a throbbing cello that builds to a menacing staccato."
"How Bad Could 2010 Really Get For Democrats?"--Sean Trende

Some detailed, thoughtful analysis of Election 2010, six months out.
"Armstrong vs Aldrin on the future of the space program?"--Ed Morrissey

A compelling argument for a private-sector approach to space exploration.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

"Reaganism, New Jersey Style"--Wall Street Journal

New Jersey is becoming the place to watch real leadership in action.
"NYT: ObamaCare may have accidentally stripped Congress of health coverage"--Allahpundit

The irony is delicious. Of course, the NYT buried the lead.
"10 Simple Google Search Tricks"--New York Times

Some tips I found useful, including several I didn't know before.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Chile, weapons-grade uranium, and an earthquate--Washington Post

Something truly unique (and good): a government arms control program that works well.
Russian fingerprints on the coup in Kyrgyzstan--Washington Post

Another Russian adventure in the "Near Abroad." It could complicate resupply of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Background on the persecution of Christians in Northern Nigeria--David W. Virtue

Christianity has gained significant ground in an area dominated by Islam.

Friday, April 9, 2010

"A Message from Comrade Putin"--RushLimbaugh.com

Hilarious (and scary) parody on the START follow-on treaty.
"U.S. Shouldn't Play Nice on Nukes"--Krauthammer

Obama's "morally bizarre" and "strategically loopy" nuclear weapons policy could lead to a multilateral nuclear arms race.
"We Good Europeans"--Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN)

State-level destruction that ObamaCare will wreak.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

"Tourist hordes invade District"--Washington Examiner

It must be a slow news day in Washington, DC.
"NYT: O-Care is really No-Care"--Ed Morrissey

NYT acknowledges the necessity of "death panels" under ObamaCare, although not in those exact words.
"GOP will win House, Senate"--Dick Morris

A possibility, but probably overoptimistic. Still, Morris consistently provides perceptive analysis.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Auction of the Apollo 13 mission manual--Discover News

A cool bit of history, but definitely beyond my budget.
"Obama’s New Nuclear Policy Is ‘Either Insane or Ridiculous’"--Krauthammer

Obama's engraved invitation to our enemies to attack us or our allies.
"India is annoyed by Obama"--Newsweek

Is there a close U.S. ally or friend that Obama hasn't annoyed or offended?

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

"A Dumb Policy on Nuclear Weapons"--Power Line

Obama gets an F in military strategy.
"Race and Politics"--Thomas Sowell

Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

Four thoughtful essays on race.

Monday, April 5, 2010

"A Superstorm for Global Warming Research"--Der Spiegel

A balanced eight-part story on climategate.
The Air Force's unmanned space shuttle--Christian Science Monitor

At least one U.S. space program is still showing signs of life.

Friday, April 2, 2010

"Topeka," formerly know as "Google"--Christian Science Monitor

Google's April Fool's Day prank.
"Torpedo More Probable Cause Than Mine"--Korea Times

If a torpedo sank the ROKS Cheonan, it was almost certainly an act of war by North Korea.
"Disrespecting Foreign Allies"--Charles Krauthammer

Another take on the President's offensive against U.S. allies.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

"Bush Without the Stetson"--Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

Obama's anti-terrorism policies are surprisingly similar to Bush's, and the Left is largely quiet.
Dumb pirates--Fox News

Brilliant tactic: attacking a U.S. guided missile frigate with a skiff. Were they trying to win a Darwin Award?
"Crashing Obama's nuclear wedding"--Kim Holmes

Obama is misreading Russia's intentions, and the Senate needs to ask some hard questions about the new START treaty.

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

"Tea partiers embrace liberty not big government"--Michael Barone

A calm, coherent, and insightful discussion of the roots of the Tea Party movement.
"Obama's Treatment of Israel is Shocking"--Ed Koch

Former mayor of NYC unloads on the Obama Administration's Israel policy. Hat tip: Michael Goodwin.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

"Henry Waxman's War on Accounting"--Megan McArdle

A clearer explanation of the large charges that companies are taking because of ObamaCare
"'Change' is Not New"--Thomas Sowell

Astute observations on the "science" of man-caused climate change.
Political cartoon of the day--Michael Ramirez

A disturbingly accurate depiction of current U.S. foreign policy.

Monday, March 29, 2010

"Café de Liquidation"--Waiter Rant

Another gem from The Waiter: Murder is on the menu.
"Obama Slights Our Friends, Kowtows to Our Enemies"--Michael Barone

President Obama is apparently "resetting" our relations with every country, foe or friend.
"State Dept lawyer defends drone strikes"--NPR

Oh, the irony. This same lawyer sharply criticized the Bush Administration for "flouting" the Geneva Conventions. His fellow liberal lawyers aren't buying his new argument.

Sunday, March 28, 2010

"Thousands protest against Protesting Putin in Russian city"--Reuters

Protesting in Arkhangelsk sounds cold and brave.
The U.S.-Israel Rift--David Horowitz

Money quote: "Friends disagree," but "disagree quitetly."--Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
Skewed Poll, but ObamaCare still not popular--Ed Morrissey

At least Washington Post/ABC News provided enough of the raw data to see how badly it was skewed.

Friday, April 2, 2010

"Topeka," formerly know as "Google"--Christian Science Monitor

Google's April Fool's Day prank.
"Torpedo More Probable Cause Than Mine"--Korea Times

If a torpedo sank the ROKS Cheonan, it was almost certainly an act of war by North Korea.
"Disrespecting Foreign Allies"--Charles Krauthammer

Another take on the President's offensive against U.S. allies.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

"Bush Without the Stetson"--Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

Obama's anti-terrorism policies are surprisingly similar to Bush's, and the Left is largely quiet.
Dumb pirates--Fox News

Brilliant tactic: attacking a U.S. guided missile frigate with a skiff. Were they trying to win a Darwin Award?
"Crashing Obama's nuclear wedding"--Kim Holmes

Obama is misreading Russia's intentions, and the Senate needs to ask some hard questions about the new START treaty.

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

"Tea partiers embrace liberty not big government"--Michael Barone

A calm, coherent, and insightful discussion of the roots of the Tea Party movement.
"Obama's Treatment of Israel is Shocking"--Ed Koch

Former mayor of NYC unloads on the Obama Administration's Israel policy. Hat tip: Michael Goodwin.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

"Henry Waxman's War on Accounting"--Megan McArdle

A clearer explanation of the large charges that companies are taking because of ObamaCare
"'Change' is Not New"--Thomas Sowell

Astute observations on the "science" of man-caused climate change.
Political cartoon of the day--Michael Ramirez

A disturbingly accurate depiction of current U.S. foreign policy.

Monday, March 29, 2010

"Café de Liquidation"--Waiter Rant

Another gem from The Waiter: Murder is on the menu.
"Obama Slights Our Friends, Kowtows to Our Enemies"--Michael Barone

President Obama is apparently "resetting" our relations with every country, foe or friend.
"State Dept lawyer defends drone strikes"--NPR

Oh, the irony. This same lawyer sharply criticized the Bush Administration for "flouting" the Geneva Conventions. His fellow liberal lawyers aren't buying his new argument.

Sunday, March 28, 2010

"Thousands protest against Protesting Putin in Russian city"--Reuters

Protesting in Arkhangelsk sounds cold and brave.
The U.S.-Israel Rift--David Horowitz

Money quote: "Friends disagree," but "disagree quitetly."--Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
Skewed Poll, but ObamaCare still not popular--Ed Morrissey
At least Washington Post/ABC News provided enough of the raw data to see how badly it was skewed.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

"Let the Testing Begin"--In from the Cold

Is the sinking of a South Korean corvette also a deliberate test of President Obama? I, for all of our sakes, hopes he passes it.
"Frum Here to There"--Jonah Goldberg

The most sensible take I've read on Frum's departure from AEI. (In response to a friend's question.)

Friday, March 26, 2010

"Top 10 reasons BYU grads make great soldiers"--General Petraeus

The general did a nice job of skewering Mormon culture. I'm partial to #1 and #6.
Alleged Slurs and Spitting at House Democrats--Allahpundit and Fox News

The claims appear to be seriously overblown and, in the case of the alleged racial slurs, highly suspect. Win $10,000 if you can provide evidence of "a single racist epithet."
"Paul Krugman's Dumbest Statement Yet?"--Greg Pollowitz (National Review)
That's a pretty high (or low) standard, but Pollowitz makes a compelling case.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Health Care Reconciliation Bill Must Go Back to the House--Politico

The House Democrats will have to take at least one more vote before the ObamaCare "corrections" become law.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

U-2 Spyplane Still in High Demand After 55 Years in Service--In From the Cold

Sometimes older is better.
Senator Coburn's Amendments for the Health Care Reconciliation Bill--hat tip: Don Surber

Nine substantive amendments that should make the Democrats squirm

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

ObamaCare as the new Kansas-Nebraska Act--BigGovernment.com

(The Kansas-Nebraska Act repealed the Missouri Compromise and touched off the political firestorm that became the Civil War.)
"Socialism is a new form of slavery."--Alexis De Tocqueville (1848)

Monday, March 22, 2010

"Health Care: Cue Up the Legal Fights"--Wall Street Journal

The states and the courts will be the next battlefronts in the health care war.
"The Intolerable Acts"--The Foundry (Heritage Foundation)

A historical criticism on the legislative tyranny of the health care "reform."

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

House Health Care Vote Count--Washington Post.

Nice graphic showing how House members are expected to vote, although it curiously shows Stupak (and presumable all of the Stupak dozen) as undecided.
China's Economic Bubble--Christian Science Monitor commentary.

A stroll through China's unsustainable economic policies and how the U.S. economy will be affected when this bubble bursts.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The Clever But Unconstitutional "Slaughter Solution"--Power Line

Former federal appellate judge demolishes the legal "thinking" behind the House Democrats' latest tactic.
The air is getting cleaner--Ed Morrissey

EPA buries report on improving air quality.
ObamaCare still 10 votes short in the House--Ed Morrissey

Monday, March 15, 2010

"Obama's Proposal is the Illusion of 'Reform'" --Robert Samuelson.

Dismantles some of the conventional "wisdom" behind ObamaCare.
"Bunker busters headed to Diego Garcia"--Don Surber

"Having all that hardware located with range of Iran—and letting Iran know it—beats 10,000 UN resolutions."

Saturday, March 13, 2010

PopSci Archives

Popular Science's 137-year archive on the Web for free, courtesy of the magazine and Google

Friday, March 12, 2010

Charles Krauthammer: Deep thoughts about the rotation of power in a democracy
"I am not afraid of my Toyota Prius"

Toyota recall: an alternative explanation of the sudden accelerations

The First Fallout from ObamaCare

2010-03-27T07:27:00.015-04:00

Mike shot in Operation Ivy (1952)

We are just beginning to experience the fallout from ObamaCare, and the effects won't be confined to the health care sector.

As required by ~~federal regulations (or perhaps laws--I'm not completely sure which)~~ SEC rules, Caterpillar has announced that it will take a $100 million hit in 2010 due to "additional taxes stemming from newly enacted U.S. health-care legislation." John Deere, another manufacturer of construction equipment, has announced that it expects to take a $150 million hit because of ObamaCare. AT&T has announced that it will take a "$1 billion non-cash charge for the current quarter." 3M plans to take a $85 million to $90 million charge related to ObamaCare. These losses will continue to pile up as more publicly traded companies report major changes in their financial situations. (This is one instance where a federal ~~regulations~~ rules are actually serving a public good.)

As these hits accumulate, the effects will rampage through the economy causing destruction far beyond the health care sector. In the construction industry alone, which is already struggling to put it mildly, these losses will destroy jobs (or slow job creation), increase construction costs, and give Caterpillar and John Deere yet another incentive to relocate operations outside the United States. Perhaps we should call ObamaCare the American Jobs and Businesses Destruction and Deportation Act.

Apparently, a subcommittee in the U.S. House of Representatives has called a number of these companies to give testimony about their "assertions," which is about a year too late. It would have been nice if Congress had examined the "unintended" economic effects before they passed health care reform. Were I a betting man, I would offer even money that several subcommittee members will rail against the corporate executives for daring to point out that ObamaCare will have devastating economic effects. Don't they know that Congress repealed the inconvenient laws of economics when they passed ObamaCare?

As if this weren't enough, ObamaCare has already begun destroying parts of the health care sector. Physician-owned hospitals currently under construction may never open because of the nonmedical bureaucratic requirements that must be met under ObamaCare before opening a physician-owned hospital. Essentially, federal bureaucrats will decide whether each new proposed hospital is needed according to a series of arbitrary thresholds set in Washington. The obvious winners in this bureaucratic nightmare are traditional hospitals, which will face less competition and less pressure to innovate and better serve their patients.

Restricting hospital construction will also reduce the number and availability of hospital beds--just one of the more obvious ways that ObamaCare will begin to ration health care. Limiting the number of doctors is another.

I wonder how many doctors will retire or take up different professions because ObamaCare will make practicing medicine no longer desirable or profitable to them. How many will set up shop in other countries to serve American medical tourists? Over the longer term, how many prospective medical students will choose other professions because practicing medicine is no longer worth the expensive education, hard work, lousy hours, bureaucratic red tape, and reduced pay? I can't say that I'd blame them.

Update on March 30, 2010
The Washington Examiner mentions that Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules require companies to report "write-downs in the same quarter that a tax change is enacted."--Chris Stirewalt, "What thrills the Left will scare away the center"

Note: Perhaps using the picture of a hydrogen bomb explosion to illustrate the effects of ObamaCare is a bit much, but it's a beautiful picture, albeit of a very deadly weapon.

Hat tip: Rush Limbaugh website for the article on physician-owned hospitals.
Photo courtesy of National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Site Office

Further Reading:
Dennis Kneale, "7 Prickly Questions for ObamaCare," CNBC
"Timeline of Major Provisions in the Democrats’ Health Care Package," Republican Members of the House Ways and Means Committee

Rehashing the ObamaCare Debacle

2010-03-23T23:28:00.004-04:00

The health care "reform" bill was and is a debacle, but not the way I had hoped it would be.

I should know better than to try to predict how Congress will act , much less how specific members of Congress will vote when under concerted pressure from the President and their congressional leadership. (See my previous post: Obamu's Health Care Debacle.) But I let my hopes cloud my political judgment.

The vote in the House was disappointing, but it should not have been surprising to see Representative Stupak sell out his stated anti-abortion beliefs for an essentially meaningless executive order. A presidential executive order cannot change a law—in this case, the Senate health care bill—although it can affect to some degree how a law is enforced. However, an executive order carries no guarantees. President Obama or any future President can withdraw it at any time without any warning.

I assume that Stupak at least knows this, so despite his protests that he was acting on principle to protect the lives of the unborn, he knows that the executive order is worthless. This leads me to the conclusion that he was just looking for political cover.

In fact, as of tonight, President Obama has not signed the executive order on abortion funding, even though he did sign the health care bill today. "Stupak predicted Obama would sign the order later this week." This smells of political gamesmanship. At the very least, Obama is purposely delaying the signing to remind Stupak who is in control and to punish him for pushing things to this point. I expect Obama will eventually sign it, but the games he's playing make me wonder what threats Obama and the Democratic leadership made against Stupak and the other House Democrats who dared to defy him: Primary challenges? Airing some dirty laundry? Withholding federal funding for projects in their districts?

The one good thing that "happened" is that the Democrats decided to follow the Constitution by actually voting on the Senate health care bill instead of following the Slaughter strategy of deeming it passed. Although, it's a pretty low bar when merely following the procedures laid out in the Constitution is the best that can be said about a vote.

The one certainty that has emerged from this mess is that the debate and the political battles will continue. Whether or not ObamaCare will ever be repealed is much less certain, even with all its fatal flaws.

"On Health Care Day, Obama Skips Signing Executive Order on Abortion," Fox News

Goal of the Week: Adam Johnson v. Sunderland

2010-03-17T22:21:00.000-04:00

And now for something completely different . . .

This may seem almost sacrilegious during March Madness, but a few days ago I caught the last few minutes of the soccer game between Sunderland and Manchester City, two teams in the Premier League, probably the best soccer (the British would say "football") league in the world.

The game was already in stoppage time, and Sunderland was seconds away from upsetting Man City by a score of 1-0. Then Adam Johnson ruined their day by tying the game with an absolutely brilliant goal, curving the ball into the upper left corner of the goal. The goalkeeper and the defender on the line had absolutely no chance of stopping it.

For the video, see the Soccer Portal or the Manchester City website. Truly an amazing strike.

Guarding Against the Dangers of Good Intentions

2010-03-16T20:01:00.005-04:00

When lacking wisdom oneself, its often helpful to ~~steal from~~ quote wiser people. In this case, Daniel Webster said a few things in 1837 that are remarkable on point in the current debate about health care, among other things:

I believe the power of the executive has increased, is increasing, and ought now to be brought back within its ancient constitutional limits. I have nothing to do with the motives which have led to those acts, which I believe to have transcended the boundaries of the Constitution. Good motives may always be assumed, as bad motives may always be imputed. Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of power; but they cannot justify it, even if we were sure that they existed.

It is hardly too strong to say, that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intention, real or pretended. When bad intentions are boldly avowed, the people will promptly take care of themselves. On the other hand, they will always be asked why they should resist or question that exercise of power which is so fair in its object, so plausible and patriotic in appearance, and which has the public good alone confessedly in view? Human beings, we may be assured, will generally exercise power when they can get it; and they will exercise it most undoubtedly, in popular governments, under pretences of public safety or high public interest. It may be very possible that good intentions do really sometimes exist when constitutional restraints are disregarded.

There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters. They think there need be but little restraint upon themselves. Their notion of the public interest is apt to be quite closely connected with their own exercise of authority. They may not, indeed, always understand their own motives. The love of power may sink too deep in their own hearts even for their own scrutiny, and may pass with themselves for mere patriotism and benevolence. (From a speech in New York, March 15, 1837) (paragraphed for readability)

Hat tip: David Rodeback (my brother)

I'm becoming quite fond of Google Books, copyright issues notwithstanding.

Obamu's Health Care Debacle

2010-03-13T13:51:00.010-05:00

obamu: (v.) To ignore inexpedient and inconvenient facts or realities, think “Yes we can, Yes we can,” and proceed with optimism using those facts as an inspiration (literally, as fuel).

(Source: Japanese Teachers’ Network in Kitakyushu)

What are they thinking?

President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress are either making a massive tactical error or . . . well . . . nothing. I'm at a loss to present another viable explanation.

My evaluation is not unique. Others have compared the futility of it to Pickett's Charge, which probably destroyed any chance of the Confederates to win the Civil War.

The President has gone "all in" on health care, essentially betting all of his chips on the Senate's health care bill. The plan is to have the House of Representatives pass the Senate bill as is, thereby avoiding a conference committee, which would hammer out a compromise bill that both the House and the Senate would have to vote on again. The Administration realizes that the they need to limit the number of votes and thereby the opportunities to amend the bill. Otherwise. the push for comprehensive health care reform will likely collapse.

However, a look at the political landscape in Washington and the forces marshaling on the various fronts of the political debate indicates that the President has--to extend the poker metaphor--gone all in against "the nuts," the best possible hand in the situation. Even more surprising is that President Obama has not noticed this or is ignoring all of the "tells" that show that he has the losing hand. Yet given how obsessively Obama and the Democrats have focused on health care to the exclusion of almost everything else for the last eight or nine months, perhaps this tactical error should not be that surprising.

The numbers have simply broken against the Democratic leadership. The House bill (H.R. 3962), which included a "public option" and strictly prohibited public funding of abortions, passed by a vote of 220-215 on November 7, with only one Republican--Representative Joseph Cao (R-LA)--voting for the bill. On December 24, the Senate passed its version (H.R. 3590), which does not include a public option, but does allow public funding of abortions, by a straight party-line vote of 60-39. For the Administration, the razor thin margin in the House vote is particularly problematic.

Since Christmas Eve vote, the landscape has shifted dramatically, beginning with the political earthquake of Scott Brown (R-MA) winning the U.S. Senate seat that was considered property of the Kennedy family. He won largely by campaigning against the health care bill. While his win broke the Democrats' filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, the real damage may be in the House, where already nervous Democrats now realize that almost no seat will be safe in the November elections.

It is extremely doubtful that any additional House Republicans will cross the isle to vote for the Senate bill, and Cao has already vowed to vote against it. Three House Democrats who voted for the House bill in December are gone: Representative John Murtha (D-PA) died on February 8, and Robert Wexler (D-FL) and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) have since resigned. Representative Eric Massa (D-NY), who voted against the House bill, resigned on March 9. (We'll ignore the accompanying soap opera, which probably hasn't helped the bill's chances.) In contrast, Nathan Deal (R-GA) has postponed his resignation so he can vote against the health care bill. Assuming nothing else has changed, this puts the vote count at 216-215.

However, a coalition of 12 House Democrats who voted for the House bill have threatened to vote against the Senate bill, and their leader, Bart Stupak (D-MI), seems particularly determined, although the White House has apparently "peeled off" a few of the Stupak dozen. This means that the White House has lost its margin of error in the House, and while it can definitely bring great pressure to bear, views on abortion are notoriously impervious to normal types of political pressure. Conceivably, the House could amend the Senate bill to prohibit abortion funding, but that would almost be as good as voting it down because the Senate would have to pass the amended bill, which will be nearly impossible in the no longer filibuster-proof Senate.

Talk about promising the Stupak dozen to pass a reconciliation bill (basically, a bill that fixes a previous bill) that prohibits public funding of abortions is a diversionary tactic. Presumably, the Stupak dozen realize this. In spite of attempts by Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) to somehow pass the bill without actually voting on it--a truly remarkable democratic innovation--the health care bill must become law before the House can vote on a reconciliation bill. Yet once the Senate bill becomes law, the Senate has no incentive to pass the reconciliation bill, even if the House passes it, and the Stupak dozen will be left with nothing to show for their principles.

Quite simply, the House Democrats don't have the votes, and there isn't any reasonable prospect of getting them with polls showing that the public doesn't want this health care bill, President Obama's approval rating in the basement, and the Tea Party loudly voicing its disapproval.

The whole situation reminds me of a quote by Napoleon Bonaparte: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” Perhaps casting the Democrats, especially their leadership, as enemies is a bit harsh, but not by much in this specific instance. Their health care "reform" bill would put one-sixth of the U.S. economy under government control. It would limit health care choices, stifle medical innovation, add trillions to national debt, and further suppress the economy.

Thus, it should be not surprise that I hope they fail, and fail miserably. Given how the votes are stacking up, I am quite confident that they will fail, but still succeed in further infuriating many voters who are already offended at Congress's efforts to enslave them.

I intend to enjoy the spectacle, culminating with a shellacking in November.

Of course, I could be wrong.

Hat tip for "obamu" definition: Don Surbur

Blog Upgrade

2010-03-12T22:30:00.003-05:00

I'm in the process of upgrading the blog. A few things should be immediately obvious, such as I've switched to a three-column layout. Other changes will be behind the scenes, such as I've figured how to directly post a Google document as a blog entry. I'm still experimenting, so more things will change.

One of the things driving these changes is that I keep a list of links to interesting items that I might want to write about. I usually stumble across two or three a day, but life beyond the blog allows me to blog about only a very few. In the new layout, I'll list these in the left column, most recent items at the top.

Another consideration is that until recently I haven't been able to blog during the day because I could potentially endanger the Heritage Foundation's tax exempt status if I used foundation resources (e.g., computer and Internet connection) to blog. My new toy--a netbook--has changed that. I now have private Internet access whenever I want it. So now I can blog on my breaks. We may all come to regret this.

Praise for the U.S. State Department

2010-02-27T12:22:00.000-05:00

I am frequently critical of U.S. Department of State and the federal government in general, but in this instance, praise is due to the Passport Services Directorate in the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs.

On February 4, I mailed my passport renewal application to the processing center in Philadelphia. Much to my surprise, yesterday, February 26, I received my new biometric passport in the mail. The application had recommended allowing up to three months for normal processing of a renewal application (I didn't pay for expedited processing).

In this instance, government efficiency was definitely not an oxymoron. In fact, the turn-around time of three weeks, including one federal holiday, is impressive given the two major snow storms that hit the East Coast during that period. The federal government in Washington, DC, was officially closed for four days (and barely functional on several others). Presumably government offices in Philadelphia were also closed much of that week.

So in this case, the government workers deserve a round of applause.

Photo courtesy of Wikipedia.

ObamaCare by the (Real) Numbers

2010-02-26T15:15:00.005-05:00

I made a point of ignoring the health care summit yesterday, but this slipped through my defenses.

In this clip, Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) does a masterful job of dissecting and exposing the phony math behind the Senate's health care bill, which serves as a useful proxy for the President's proposal, except that the President's proposal would be even more expensive and destructive. This is arguably the clearest and most concise explanation that I've seen of the numbers in the health care debate.

The President was not amused.

Note: In "fairness" to the President and the Senators who voted for the Senate's bill, phony math is normal operating procedure on the Hill. Such gimmicks are not unique to the health care debate. It's just that massive amounts (trillions of dollars) in play in health care reform magnify the effects of these accounting gimmicks.

Hat tip: Power Line

Giant Step Forward in Missile Defense: Successful Test of Airborne Laser

2010-02-14T22:04:00.000-05:00

On February 11, the Missile Defense Agency announced the successful test of its airborne laser (ABL) against two missiles launched an hour apart. But its matter-of-fact press release does not even allude to the earthshaking implications of deploying such a weapon, which should worry such perennial troublemakers as North Korea, Iran, and Russia.

At present, the U.S. has deployed only a rudimentary missile defenses against ballistic missiles, which can destroy them in the midcourse and descent stages. Even those defenses have massive holes in them, some of which would have been plugged by the "third site" in Poland and the Czech Republic. Regrettably, President Obama unceremoniously canceled the third site in return for a bowl of cabbage soup from Russia. (See my previous rant: Is Putin Even Playing in Our League?)

The ideal missile defense system would hold ballistic missiles at risk during their entire flight, from liftoff (boost phase) to the ascent and midcourse phase, when they maneuver and the warheads separate for reentry, to the terminal or descent phase, when the warheads fall toward their targets. Destroying a ballistic missile during boost phase is the most difficult type of intercept because of the short response time needed and because this would often require intercepting the missile over enemy territory. However, a missile is most visible and most vulnerable during boost phase. In particular, the hot plume of gases expelled from the rocket engine makes the missile easy to detect during the boost phase. Another advantage is that the warheads are still attached to the missile during boost phase, so destroying the missile in boost phase will also prevent the warheads from reaching their targets.

With detection during boost phase well within the capabilities of existing sensors, the ABL solves the remaining challenges with its range of hundreds of kilometers and its ability to strike at the speed of light. Presumably, the range of future versions will be limited only by the curvature of the earth's surface. Unlike the U.S. military's current missile interceptors, which can "hit a bullet with a bullet," the ABL only has to achieve the equivalent of hitting a speeding car with the beam from a flashlight--a much simpler and much quicker operation.

Effective Deterrence

The ABL could also serve as a powerful deterrent because it can destroy the missile over the territory of aggressor state. The U.S. could deploy the ABL over international waters or in the airspace of a country next to the rogue state (e.g., North Korea and Iran). Within a minute or two of the missile launch, the ABL could destroy the missile, which would probably still be over the territory of the rogue state, leaving that country to deal with the effects of its own missile's warhead(s)--whether they are nuclear, chemical, biological, or simply conventional weapons.

Thus, the ABL would drastically alter the potential aggressor's risk-benefit calculations by sharply reducing the chances of a successful attack and by radically increasing its chances of being hit or at least harmed by its own weapon. The ABL could conceivably tip the balance enough that many rogue states (or aspiring rogue states) would choose to abandon their current missile technology or not invest in it in the first place, because the ABL had rendered the ballistic missile an unreliable delivery system.

Budget Games

The timing of the ABL test was convenient and probably not coincidental. The ABL program is probably fighting for survival against an administration that treats missile defense like just another bargaining chip. Last year, in addition to President Obama reneging on promises to Poland and the Czech Republic to build the third site, Defense Secretary Robert Gates cut funding for a second ABL from the FY 2010 defense budget. Congress will soon begin debating the FY 2011 defense budget. Hopefully, the successful test will insulate the ABL from further penny-wise-dollar-foolish cost cutting in missile defense.

Image from U.S. Missile Defense Agency

Additional Reading
U.S. Missile Defense Agency, "Airborne Laser Testbed Successful in Lethal Intercept Experiment"
Chris Gaylord, "Airborne laser shoots down missile in mid-flight," Christian Science Monitor
Previous blog entry: Is Putin Even Playing in Our League?

Obama Free: More Change and Hope in Union Station

2010-02-13T07:21:00.001-05:00

An update to my post "Change and Hope in Union Station" on August 18, 2009.

By the end of December, all of the Obama merchandise had disappeared from the kiosks, along with several of the kiosks. As of two or three months ago, the kiosk that had prompted the original blog post was no longer selling any Obama merchandise--pro, anti, or neutral. In January, the final bastion of Obamania in Union Station fell when the Obama shrine (See top picture), a.k.a. My Obama Shop, closed for good. I don't know whether the lease had just expired or it had gone out of business. Both seem likely. It was open for about one year, but I rarely ever saw anyone in the shop, including the alleged attendants. Unless it received stimulus money, the owner certainly didn't turn a profit.

Union Station is now largely Obama free, with the exception of the usual political souvenir shops and one innocuous kiosk in the food court where you can have your picture taken with President Obama in the Oval Office or various other locations. Actually, they take your picture and then photoshop it into a picture of the President. This is a high tech variation of the tourist standard of having your picture taken with a cardboard cutout of the President and/or First Lady. And this kiosk is actually doing some business.

The space previously occupied by the Obama shrine is also displaying economic activity. It appears that a photo shop will soon open there. (See bottom picture.)

This is what I consider a true sign of economic (and political) recovery.

Hat tip: Doug Heye, "Forget Polls, Here’s Tangible Proof the Obama Honeymoon is Over," U.S. News and World Report

Washington Buried Under Two Feet of Global Warming

2010-02-06T18:49:00.003-05:00

At present Washington, DC, is buried under two feet of snow, and it is still snowing. Even in Idaho, this would qualify as a major snow storm. In Washington, where the sight of a few snowflakes can bring the capital to a screeching halt, this almost qualifies as a natural disaster, with some people tagging it "Snowmaggedon" or "Snowpocalypse." Adding to the silliness, lawyers in downtown DC organized a snowball fight using Facebook and Twitter, with the invitations predictably accompanied by a liability disclaimer.

Well, one bit of silliness deserves another, to wit, the title of this blog, which (falsely) implies that the current snowstorm disproves the theory of anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming (AGW). At most, the current snowstorm constitutes one data point, which by itself can prove little more than Washington has a lot of snow at the moment. (AGW appears to be self-destructing quite nicely, without the current snowstorm's help.)

However, the title does illustrate the weakness of many the "arguments" used to buttress AGW. These arguments frequently try to use individual weather events to "prove" climate change (the current politically correct, albeit possibly more accurate name for AGW). "Warmists" seem driven to seize upon every major storm, hurricane, or tornado as further "proof" of AGW. Such arguments are at best . . . fatally flawed.

Weather by definition is a short-term phenomenon, dealing with the conditions at specific times and places, while climate deals with long-term trends. A series of weather events over a few months or years proves effectively nothing about the climate.

Over the years of the global warming debate, I have developed a rule of thumb that any discussion of global warming or climate change that fails to account for at least 100 years--preferably 1,000 years--of data is immediately suspect because it resembles a weather report more than a credible discussion of the climate. Interestingly, 2,000 years of temperature data for the Northern Hemisphere appear to undermine the claims that the warming trend of recent decades is unique and, therefore, to be feared. The data seem to indicate that temperatures were at least as high during the Medieval Warm Period as they appear to have been in recent years.

Curiously, the surface temperature data used to document the recent warming may have been skewed by selection bias, making the temperature averages appear higher than the actual temperatures were. A recent study, which I have only skimmed, appears to detail this and many other significant flaws in the data used to "prove" global warming.

As for myself, the current surface temperature outside is much too low for my comfort. I'm hoping for the warming trend that comes with an early spring.

Picture: View of my backyard today about 4 pm.

Sources:
Roy Spencer, "2,000 Years of Global Temperatures," 2010.
Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts, "Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception?" Science and Public Policy Institute, January 29, 2010.

Additional Reading:
Roy Spencer, Ph.D.
Science and Public Policy Institute
Climate Depot

China Rising

2010-02-05T06:13:00.014-05:00

And now a bit of shameless self-promotion . . .

But first, a disclaimer to protect my employer (and me): The views expressed in this post and on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Heritage Foundation.

It's nice getting published.

On Tuesday, the Heritage Foundation published a paper written by me and Mackenzie Eaglen, Research Fellow for National Security at Heritage: "Submarine Arms Race in the Pacific: The Chinese Challenge to U.S. Undersea Supremacy."

The idea for the paper came from reading a newspaper article on Australia's plans to double its submarine fleet as part of a larger shipbuilding program. What caught my attention was Australian officials explaining this decision in terms of China's rapid naval buildup, especially its submarine fleet, and declining U.S. naval power in the Pacific. I started poking around and discovered a pattern of other countries in the region strengthening their navies, presumably reacting to the growing Chinese threat. The hidden irony in the title is that the "submarine arms race" is not between China and the U.S., but it is a multilateral race between China and Australia, India, and several Asian countries. If this were an athletic race, the China and the U.S. would be roughly even, but China is sprinting forward while the U.S. is walking back to the ~~finish~~ starting line.

In the paper, many of the conclusions are deliberately stated in neutral terms or left unsaid. One reason is that credible conclusions must be supported by solid arguments and facts, both of which are in short supply in regard to communist China. In some ways China is more inscrutable than the Soviet Union ever was. However, some of the implications are clear, including that China is a growing threat to freedom in the region and to the United States and its friends and allies.

I do not expect a hot war between China and the U.S. in the next couple of decades, but I suppose a war by proxy is a possibility. And China will certainly use any military advantage it may acquire as leverage to draw its neighbors more tightly into its sphere of influence.

A related consideration is that the Chinese government tends to take the view (decades and centuries), and it plans and acts accordingly. This approach differs dramatically from the behavior of democratic systems, such as the United States, which has trouble planning beyond the next federal budget cycle or remembering anything that happened before the current budget cycle.

Writing the Paper
Researching and writing the paper was actually quite fun, when I could find the time to do it. It was pleasant change to actually write something from scratch rather than try to fix someone else's writing. I began working on the paper in earnest last May, but was interrupted frequently and for weeks at a time by my real job. Thanks to several colleagues, especially Mackenzie and Dean Cheng, it became a much better paper than I ever could have written by myself. I'm particularly thankful to Dean for catching what would have been a particularly embarrassing factual error.

On a different note, going through the editing and publishing process myself did make me more sympathetic toward the authors whose papers I edit. I expect that sympathy will last at least to the end of this week.

Note: Those who actually look at the paper will notice that I'm listed as the second author, even though it's no secret that I was the primary author. But I am quite happy with the arrangement, it part because she contributed significantly to the paper. She is also listed first for the practical reason that it's better for Heritage that a full-time defense expert answer any press inquiries (which are routed to the first author listed). Mackenzie argued that I should be listed first, but I'm quite happy to let her deal with the press. Handling the press isn't part of my portfolio as an editor--for that matter neither is writing on defense issues, but that can actually be fun.

Picture: Chinese Kilo-class submarine, courtesy of Wikipedia.

Revised 2/5/2010 12:11 pm

The Treasury's $5.5 Trillion Lump of Coal for the Taxpayers

2010-02-03T07:45:00.001-05:00

On December 24, the same day that the Senate passed its obscenity of a "health care" reform bill, the elves at the U.S. Department of the Treasury quietly made the taxpayers liable for an estimated 5.5. trillion in home loans, or about one-half of all home mortgages.

The Treasury worked this bit of magic by simply adjusting the formula it uses to determine how much financial support the Treasury is allowed to provide. This required no action by Congress, although Congress could intervene if it wanted to. Support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had previously been capped at $200 billion each, but the new "flexible formula" effectively removed those caps until 2012.

The one "bright" spot in all of this is that these loans are backed by real assets (31 million mortgaged homes), unlike the trillions of dollars of liabilities in promised entitlement payments (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid), which are backed by the faith and credit of the U.S. government (i.e., the taxpayers). Experts don't expect the companies to use even the $400 billion allowed under the caps, but continued high unemployment and a slowly growing economy could easily lead to more defaults and foreclosures than expected, and taxpayers would end up paying an even larger bill.

The ongoing debacles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac demonstrate one of the frequent flaws of public-private partnerships. They remain "private" as long as they are running a profit, but when begin to run in the red, they become "public," and the taxpayers are left holding the bill.

In the case of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the wisest course would seem to be to break up both companies and sell off their assets at market rates, which would eliminate the taxpayer liability. Then, except for maintaining basic regulations, Congress and the rest of the federal government should stay out of the housing market, which they clearly do not understand.

Update: There's even more bad news. Apparently, Fannie and Freddie have trillions of dollars in nonperforming loans that are off the books. Fannie's estimated maximum exposure is $2.4 trillion; Freddie's is $1.5 trillion, according to today's report from The Street.

"Treasury removes cap for Fannie and Freddie aid" Seattle Times, December 24, 2009
U.S. Treasury Department, "Treasury Issues Update on Status of Support for Housing Programs," December 24, 2009

Hat tip: Thomas A. Saunders III at all-staff meeting at the Heritage Foundation

The Running Joke on the Taxpayer

2010-01-27T08:40:00.007-05:00

In the run-up to tonight's State of the Union speech, the media have been reporting that President Obama will call for a "spending freeze" on discretionary spending. In plain English, this means that Obama will call for "freezing" the spending of the portion of the budget that Congress has not already committed to spend (e.g., defense, education, transportation), while allowing entitlement spending (Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare) to continue to grow at unsustainable rates.

Although not a completely meaningless gesture, it will have minimal real effect as illustrated by the chart below. If entitlement spending is allowed to grow as projected, it will consume all federal revenue by about 2052, crowding out all discretionary spending. Of course, federal government will reach a crisis well before then because much discretionary spending is not truly optional. Even The Washington Post has noted that the proposed "freeze would shave no more than $15 billion off next year's budget...barely denting a deficit projected to exceed $1 trillion for the third year in a row." (link)

Substantially raising taxes to cover the increasing spending is not a viable option for at least two reasons. (1) High taxes are already a drag on the economy. Raising them enough to pay for entitlement spending would send the economy into a downward spiral, which would ultimately reduce tax revenue. (2) In the modern world, governments have found it nearly impossible to extract more than 20 percent of GDP from their countries, regardless of how draconian their tax codes. The U.S. tax code has already almost reached that limit.

Adding another dimension to the joke, "spending freeze" in Washington usually doesn't mean the same thing as it does outside the Beltway. In federal budget speak, a "freeze" means increasing spending based on inflation and population growth (or other factors build into the budget baseline), but not adding any more spending on top of the automatic spending increase. In the real world, families cannot automatically increase their spending to account for inflation or a new baby, but then few people would ever claim that Congress lives in the real world.

Chart source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/BudgetChartbook/If-Tax-Revenue-Is-Held-at-Historical-Levels.aspx

The Age of Obama: Krauthammer on Obama's Foreign Policy:

2010-01-20T12:25:00.003-05:00

On Tuesday, Charles Krauthammer spoke at length on the President's inept and dangerous foreign policy. I blogged in September on a vaguely similar line--"The War President"--but Krauthammer discussed those issues and more in greater depth and with much greater insight and eloquence than I could ever muster.

Video from Heritage

Text (slightly edited)

On a personal note, I was surprised to see him in a wheelchair. I was unaware that his health had deteriorated. His mind certainly hasn't.

Orwell's Dictionary (American edition)

2010-01-09T22:03:00.006-05:00

Washington is a strange place that can be very deceptive to the politically inexperienced. At the risk of offending or angering those who are less cynical than me, I offer the following as a rudimentary guide for translating Washingtonspeak, which is closely related to newspeak.

Words in Washingtonspeak often have the opposite meaning of the same word in English. In a similar vein, I have found it generally safe to assume--unless conclusively proven otherwise--that any apparently clear statement by a politician means the opposite and that any legislative bill will produce the opposite effect of the purpose claimed in its name (e.g., the most recent stimulus bill).

One caution: politicians and government officials will routinely mix Washingtonspeak with English to hide their real meaning from the voters.

clean: an inefficient process, which often leads to more pollution than it allegedly prevents.
consensus (in the context of climate change and global warming): a political compromise camouflaged as a scientific "fact."
dialog: 1. a "conversation" with yes-men or gagged opponents; 2. a conversation among participants on one side of a debate.
divisive: 1. anything exhibiting independent thinking; 2. expressing conservative views. See Power Line, "What's Divisive?"
green: adjective or prefix used to make something inefficient or useless seem productive.
inclusive: including only supporters.
jobs bill: government expansion bill.
government mandate: tax, e.g., the individual health care mandate and penalty.
smart: an adjective or prefix used make something foolish or ill-advised to appear wise.
special interest: any group out of favor with the speaker or that can serve as a convenient scapegoat.
transparent: secret or private. "There has never been a more open process for any legislation in anyone who's served here's experience." --Speaker of the House Pelosi's response to CSPAN request to broadcast the closed-door negotiations on the health care bill. See James Taranto (under "Private Party" subhead).
unilateral: a foreign policy that involves multiple U.S. allies, e.g., claims that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was unilateral.

This list may be revised and expanded as circumstances and my mood dictate. "Health care reform" is one obvious candidate, but the definition is unclear to me at this point, except that it has little to do with providing quality health care to the masses.

Political Cartoon of the Day

2009-12-11T10:03:00.002-05:00

To echo John on Power Line, Michael Ramirez seems to have Obamacare pegged:

Link: "Speaking of Slavery"

Pearl Harbor: Two Mysteries Solved

2009-12-10T21:43:00.014-05:00

Accounts of the the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor usually focus on the two waves of Japanese carrier-based warplanes that attacked the U.S. Pacific Fleet in the morning of December 7, 1941. Rarely is any attention given to the five Japanese midget submarines that were ordered penetrate Pearl's harbor defenses and attack the U.S. fleet. Four of the midget subs have been found, but mystery has shrouded what happened to the fifth, at least until just recently.

The five midget submarines were carried by five "mother" submarines to within 10 miles of Pearl Harbor and launched in the early hours of December 7. Midget A (U.S. Navy designation) was sunk by the USS Ward, a destroyer on patrol outside the harbor entrance, about 6:45 am by the first shots fired in the Pacific theater. This sunken submarine was located in 2002 by a team from Hawai‘i Undersea Research Laborator. Midget B penetrated the harbor, but was rammed and depth-charged by the destroyer USS Monaghan, sinking it. It was raised in 1942. Midget C suffered mechanical difficulties and ran aground. It was captured the next day on the east side of Oahu along with one surviving crew member, who became the first Japanese POW. The sub was later used in U.S. war bond drives. Midget D launched its two torpedoes at the cruiser USS St. Louis off the coast of Oahu, but missed. The cruiser returned fire and apparently sank it. U.S Navy divers located in 1960 during a training exercise.

The fate of Midget E has been unknown until recently, but at 10:41 pm that night, its mother submarine received a radio message indicating a successful surprise attack. A recent report in the Los Angeles Times seems to confirm this and may require a slight rewrite of history:

[A] variety of new evidence suggests that the fifth fired its two 800-pound torpedoes, most likely at the battleships West Virginia and Oklahoma, capsizing the latter. A day later, researchers think, the mini-sub's crew scuttled it in nearby West Loch.

A disaster at West Lock in 1944 destroyed LSTs (Landing Ship, Tank). In the cleanup, the wreckage of the LSTs and Midget E were dumped in the ocean south of Pearl. Pieces of the sub were discovered in between 1994 and 2001, but were not recognized as the fifth midget sub until recently.

The discovery of Midget E appears to resolve a second mystery: why the battleship USS Oklahoma rolled over when she sank, killing hundreds of crewmen. (See picture.) The other battleships that were sunk that day sank on an even keel, except for the USS Arizona, which blew up. A hit from a submarine-launched torpedo, rather than from an aerial torpedo appears to explain this.

This discovery may be only a minor footnote to military history, but it illustrates several points that are relevant today. Two dedicated men willing to sacrifice their own lives can cause a lot of death and destruction. Their successful attack was probably responsible for killing the majority of the 429 men that died on the USS Oklahoma that day. Fortunately, the other torpedo was a dud or that tragedy might have been repeated on the USS West Virginia.

More importantly, it illustrates the skill and bravery of the servicemen (and women) who go into harm's way to protect us. If the crew of the minesweeper USS Antares, which alerted the USS Ward, had not been alert or if the crews of the other ships had not sunk three of the midget subs, more men could easily have been killed and more ships sunk. I am deeply thankful to those who are serving in the U.S. armed forces and the millions that served before them and in many cases made the ultimate sacrifice.

Picture of the USS Oklahoma courtesy of the National Archives via Wikipedia.

Hat tip: George Smiley at In From the Cold.

Additional Reading:
Thomas H. Maugh II, "Pearl Harbor mini-submarine mystery solved?" Los Angeles Times
James P. Delgado, "Japanese Midget Submarine HA-19," National Park Service

LBB: A Perfect Storm

2009-12-08T22:51:00.000-05:00

Wow, it's been more than a month since my last post, and that was just a plug for a thought-provoking paper that someone else wrote.

I normally try to blog at least once a week, preferably more often, but life beyond the blog (LBB) intervened with a vengeance. A crunch (actually a succession of crunches) at work, a persistent case of the flu that turned out to be a nasty case of allergies (who knew that allergies could cause a fever?), a freelance project that mushroomed beyond control, and a few other things developed into a perfect storm that left me a bit . . . distracted, but I'm back now and feeling somewhat human again.

Expect my next real post in a day or two. Washington is such a target-rich environment that I can't stay silent forever. With Congress in town there's always some silliness or stupidity that needs to be skewered, and I'm more than happy to oblige.

—Jon

The Great Recession Explained

2009-11-03T08:15:00.000-05:00

A few weeks ago I edited a paper "Understanding the Great Global Contagion and Recession" by Heritage Foundation analyst JD Foster that made a lot of sense to me, even though it was a bit above my head. I don't normally promote papers that I edit on this blog, but this one particularly impressed me and answered a few questions I have had about the current recession. I consider it well worth reading (and rereading).

Here's the abstract:

The Great Global Contagion and Recession was largely the result of a sustained global savings glut combined with excessive monetary accommodation by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. These two complementary and reinforcing forces artificially depressed the price of risk globally, leading to the widespread mis-pricing of assets and misallocation of investment. These effects were enhanced by rapid financial innovation and breathtaking arrogance of leading financial market participants in believing that they understood these innovations. It was also facilitated by a succession of policy failings, most importantly the failure of the United States and Europe to modernize their financial regulatory structures to keep pace with developments in financial markets.

Signs of the Fans

2009-10-31T00:04:00.001-04:00

The fight between Redskins fans and Redskins owner Daniel Snyder is escalating, and it's crossed over from the blogosphere to the mainstream media.

Immediately after I started writing this evening, my Tivo unpaused causing me to catch the last few minutes of 11 o'clock news on WUSA Channel 9. They reported on signs confiscated from Redskins fans and announced a new feature to display "all the signs and messages the team won't let you bring into the stadium." The station also favorably mentioned the owner of the Cleveland Browns (1-6), who has expressed support for a fan protest against the team, saying "We deserve the protest." Such realism and humility (or at least the PR smarts to fake them) is refreshing.

Michael Wilbon of The Washington Post has weighed in condemning the censorship and criticising the ownership's foolishness in attempting to censor the fans. (Unlike many who posted comments on his blog, he didn't confuse the issue by trying to claim that the censorship was a violation of the 1st Amendment. Fed Ex field is private property, so Snyder can enforce pretty whatever speech code he wants. Yet while the censorship is perfectly legal, it certainly isn't smart.)

More banned signs. My favorite so far is "Dan, Why Do We Have to Sneak This Sign In?"

Ultimately, the Redskins ownership appears to be in a fight they can't win. They simply can't outsmart thousands of angry fans. For example, some fans have proposed a scheme to paint a larger sign "Fire Snyder" using simply the color of fans' clothing.

The only questions are when will Snyder realize he can't win and whether he can negotiate a tolerable surrender.

The Dreadful Redskins

2009-10-27T21:24:00.002-04:00

And now for something completely different.

The biggest dispute in Washington, DC, is not about health care reform, but about football. The Washington Redskins play a unique roll in the nation's capital. They give the residents, who come from every state in the country, something apolitical to talk and argue about—filling a desperate need in this overpoliticized city. There's a palpable change in mood of the city on the day after a Redskin's win.

This year Washingtonians have abundant reasons to complain about the Redskins, who are now 2-5 after a lackluster showing on Monday Night Football. As for myself, I'm a fair-weather Redskins fan, so as a marginally interested bystander I'm feeling no pain, but I sympathize with many friends and acquaintances who are suffering, especially since there's no end in sight.

Three of the Redskins' losses came against previously winless teams. Pathetic only begins to describe their performance. The cast of scapegoats includes the usuals—the coach and the quarterback—but there seems to be a growing consensus that the problems are systemic and that Daniel Snyder (the owner) and Vinny Cerrato (vice president of football operations) are primarily responsible.

Snyder bought the team in 1999 by outbidding the son of Jack Kent Cook, the well-liked previous owner who build the current stadium entirely with private funding. Ten seasons, a 78-89 record, 6 head coaches, and 10 starting quarterbacks later the team seems to be on the verge of collapse, and many fans are now in open revolt. Each week seems to bring a new protest.

On Sunday, October 4, fans were encourage by local sports radio show to wear paper bags over their heads. Stadium security responded, presumably on orders from the owner, by confiscating the paper bags along with many signs, especially any critical of the owner—not exactly the brightest PR or the classiest move. The next Sunday brought an attempted stadium blackout, with calls for the disgusted fans to wear black to the game.

Leading up to last night's game, two well know community figures spoke out. First, John Cook, son of Jack Kent Cook, fired a broadside, charging that "Snyder destroyed the reputation of this franchise" and "gutted the organization." Then, John Riggins, former Redskins running back and Hall of Famer, called on fans to stay home from the game to send a message to the owner.

Anti-Snyder websites are proliferating, and one group is even collecting donations for an anti-Snyder ad campaign. This has the makings of a long, bitter dispute with many casualties and no winners, and last night's loss did not help.

It makes me glad that I'm a really more of a Denver Broncos fan.

"Snyder Steals Your Bags," NBC 4 (source of the picture above, copyright
"Burgundy & old pain," Washington Post
"Riggins Tells Skins Fans to Stay Home," NBC 4

Executing the Geese That Lay Golden Eggs

2009-10-23T00:11:00.003-04:00

I was planning to write on something nonpolitical for a change, but life beyond the blog and the Obama administration intervened.

On Wednesday, the media reported that the Obama administration will issue a diktat sharply cutting executive pay at Citigroup, Bank of America, American International Group, General Motors, and Chrysler. Beyond the constitutional issues (Where exactly does the Constitution authorize the President or Congress to do this?) and legal issues (breach of contract etc.), this makes no economic or business sense. This leads me to the conclusion that either the Administration is more incompetent and ignorant than I already suspect—which is high hurdle for this administration—or that politics is driving this decision.

First, the Economics. A company is usually best served by hiring and retaining the best people, especially at the top. I have worked in several companies. Some have achieved this to some degree and are generally successful companies. Other companies didn't even seem to try and suffered the appropriate consequences. Pay, in whatever form, is an essential key to hiring and retaining the best people. Therefore, anything unrelated to business concerns that restricts pay is a potential cause of inefficiency, both for the business and for the economy as a whole. In the worst case scenario, it can cause the businesses to fail and weaken an entire economy.

As for the targeted corporations, the Obama administration is essentially signing their execution orders or at least doing its very best to kill them. All of these corporations are in precarious situations and therefore need the best leaders they can hire, yet the special master in the Treasury Department has picked this time to cut executive salary in these companies by an average of 90 percent and total compensation by about 50 percent. Any self-respecting (and competent) executive would quit rather than agree to work under such conditions.

Most of the corporations are in trouble because of their own poor decisions and in due course the market would have punished them. However, Bank of America's problems appear to stem mostly from its shotgun acquisition of Merrill Lynch, with the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Department of the Treasury holding the shotguns (albeit under the Bush administration).

The Politics. Unlike many in the Obama administration and Congress, I don't believe that corporations—and by extension their executives—are inherently corrupt and evil. (Perhaps my use of "evil" is inaccurate. I'm not certain the Obama administration even acknowledges the existence of evil, at least in the traditional sense.) I don't believe corporations are inherently good either, but that is beside the point.

Assuming that not everyone in the Administration flunked Economics 101, we're left with either the decision makers in the Administration know exactly what they're doing and don't care—perhaps it's a populist tactic—or they truly intend to destroy these companies or at least weaken them for some purpose.

If any of these companies still has a survival instinct, this mess will end up in court. I hope so. I'm a very satisfied banking customer with Bank of America.

"U.S. Said to Order Deep Pay Cuts at Bailed-Out Companies," MSNBC

"U.S. to Order Pay Cuts at Firms That Got Most Aid," New York Times

The Presidency About Nothing?

2009-10-10T23:20:00.001-04:00

Friday morning, I was stunned as were most Americans including the President himself to hear that the Norwegian Nobel Committee had awarded the Noble Peace Prize to President Obama. One reporter neatly summarized my feelings: "He won! For what?"

The President's response so far has been appropriately low-key and humble. His best move would be to thank the committee for the honor, but decline to accept the award because he has not yet begun to lead. At the very least, he should decline to accept the award until he leaves office, following the precedent set by President Theodore Roosevelt.

The Saturday Night Live skit last week may have been a bit harsh in its critique of the President's record of accomplishments so far: "Nothing. Nada. Almost one year and nothing to show for it." But SNL's timing couldn't have been better, coming after the President's failed Copenhagen campaign to bring the 2012 Olympics to Chicago and setting the stage for him to receive an increasingly meaningless award. Tonight, I may actually have to watch SNL live for the first time in decades. They may be onto something.

While the SNL skit may have been harsh, it wasn't far from the truth. Excluding talk, at which Obama excels even for a politician, Obama has accomplished very little. He outsourced the "stimulus" bill to Pelosi et al., who larded it with pet projects and very little economic stimulus. Obama has yet to propose an actual health care reform bill or commit to a specific plan, instead allowing multiple versions to proliferate in Congress in the resulting leadership vacuum. In fact, from one perspective his foreign policy initiatives—"resetting" relations with Russia, reneging missile defense agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic, promising better relations with Muslims, and generally apologizing for Yankee imperialism to anyone who will listen—seem as vacuous as his domestic policy.

In fact, his policies as President seem to following the same pattern as his presidential campaign, which was based on the substance-free "Hope and Change" and "Change We Can Believe In." This allowed voters to fill his slogans with their own preferred content, believe that this was what Obama was seeking. During the campaign he carefully avoided dispelling these personalized notions, allowing him to be all things to all voters, at least until he took office.

The whole situation reminds me of the brilliant sitcom Seinfeld, which was pitched as a "show about nothing," More precisely is was a sitcom about minutia in everyday life. In the last two weeks, the Obama presidency has increasingly become a presidency of the minutia of a failed Olympics campaign and a laughable Nobel Peace Prize.

I'm not quite ready to declare it a presidency about nothing, but I'm beginning to wonder . . . and hope. I would much prefer a do-nothing President who allows America to decline slowly than a President who efficiently dismantles the U.S. economy and Pax Americana—which isn't happening yet.

Here's a toast to incompetence (or indecision) in the Oval Office. It seems the least of the possible evils.

Book Overview: ConUNdrum

2009-10-03T10:23:00.000-04:00

Brett Schaefer, ed., ConUNdrum: The Limits of the United Nations and the Search for Alternatives (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009), 371 pages.

First, a disclaimer: I copyedited this book, so I'm slightly invested in its success and probably a little biased.

I have read a lot of papers and books on the United Nations, written from many perspectives. This book is the most balanced, persuasive, and innovative of them all. While it was written primarily to inform policymakers, it should be accessible to the interested reader. A week ago it ranked #1 on Amazon.com in three categories: United Nations, treaties, and international law.

The UN is not "indispensable," but it can be useful and even helpful at times. In the book's ten chapters—each deals with a different policy area—the authors identify what the UN has done right (there actually are some examples), what it could do better, and what it should stop trying to do.

For example, peacekeeping missions under the UN imprimatur tend to be more palatable to all sides of a conflict and are therefore more likely to succeed in keeping the peace. However, the UN needs to be more careful when selecting which peacekeeping missions to authorize.

In international health, the WHO needs to refocus on the areas where it has a "comparative advantage." Like almost every UN organization, it is suffering from "mission creep," which distracts it from doing those things it should do and prevents it from doing them well. Many other international and national organizations have appeared on the international scene in recent decades and proven themselves more effective at addressing primary care needs, among other things. Conversely, WHO is uniquely positioned to coordinate and coalesce efforts internationally.

UN efforts in human rights, arms control, and environmental policy have consistently been unproductive and have often undermined real progress in these areas. The U.S. and other concerned states use other avenues, creating them if necessary, to address these areas. For example, the Proliferation Security Initiative—a voluntary, multilateral effort to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction—has proven more effective and flexible than any UN entity could ever hope to be.

Visual Reminders of the GULAG Archipelago

2009-10-01T08:03:00.014-04:00

The Heritage Foundation (my employer) has turned its seventh floor auditorium and foyer into a crowded art gallery for a unique collection of paintings by Nikolai Getman, and two days ago I was able to take a break from work and look at each of them.

The 50 paintings depict chilling scenes of the Soviet Union's extensive system of forced labor camps. Perhaps the paintings are best described as the visual equivalent of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago, in which Solzhenitsyn documented the brutality and systematic evil of the camps and the totalitarian government that created and perpetuated them. The collection of paintings also reminds me of the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, with the distinction that they deal with the millions of living unpersons that populated and often died in the Soviet labor camps.

In 1946, Getman was sentenced to forced labor for being present when another artist drew a caricature of Stalin. He survived eight years in Kolyma, one of the most infamous Soviet labor camps. After his release, he painted a series of 50 paintings about life and often death in the GULAG. His paintings were publicly displayed in Russia after the Soviet Union collapsed. The Jamestown Foundation brought the collection to the United States and recently gave it to the Heritage Foundation. Heritage is displaying them as part of a series of events to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. (See press release.)

If you have a chance, I highly recommend that you come to the Heritage Foundation to see these paintings that document some of the crimes committed by Soviet Union in the name of Communism. If that is not possible, you can see a few of the pictures in the exhibit brochure and at this online arts gallery.

On a related note, if you're ever in Moscow, take a moment to see the Solovetsky Stone, a monument "To prisoners of the GULAG," next to Lubyanka, the former headquarters of the KGB. (It's now occupied by the Border Guard Service and one directorate of the FSB, the KGB's successor organization.) In 1994 when I was living in Moscow, I was quite pleased—and saddened by the lost lives it memorialized—when I stumble across this understated, powerful monument located across the street from one of the gateways to the GULAG archipelago.

The Onion: Nadir 0f Western Civilization to Be Reached This Friday at 3:32 P.M.

2009-09-25T20:00:00.006-04:00

Link: "Nadir Of Western Civilization To Be Reached This Friday At 3:32 P.M.," The Onion, September 25, 2009

Did you notice? Did you celebrate?

I guess it's all uphill from here.

Is Putin Even Playing in Our League?

2009-09-25T19:58:00.003-04:00

In some sports, teams commonly play pre-season or exhibition games with teams that are not at the same professional level. In college, mens basketball teams will often play national teams teams from other countries. In soccer, such games are even more common. In fact, the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup, the oldest soccer competition in the U.S., is open to all teams from amateur to professional, which has lead to some quite entertaining and embarrassing upsets.

Similarly, in international relations, different countries operate at different levels. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—arguably constitute the highest level. (Although, the G-8 might better reflect true international power and prestige.) Developing countries might constitute a mid-level or semi-pro league, and the perpetual political and economic basket cases would be the amateur level.

Yet even among its international "peers," the United States is the lone superpower, albeit much less dominant than a few years ago. China and Russia are aspiring superpowers. China is about 20 years into a massive military buildup . . .
and Russia is using increased oil revenue to rejuvenate its military in an effort to recapture much of the glory and influence—but not the ideology—of the Soviet Empire. Conversely, irresponsible U.S. economic and monetary policies may end the dollar's global dominance since World War II.

In recent years, Russia in particular appears to be outplaying everyone else, except for China (perhaps the topic of another post on another day). In August 2008, Russia invaded Georgia, a strong U.S. friend and former Soviet republic, catching the Bush administration off guard and distracted. Russia has since essentially annexed two Georgian provinces, which are occupied by Russian "peacekeepers." The U.S. and much of the rest of the international community have objected strenuously, but in general their outraged words have been "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." (Macbeth 5.5)

Russia's latest diplomatic coup was the U.S. decision not to deploy a ground-based missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, which has positioned Russia to increase its influence in Eastern Europe. (See previous post.) The Obama Administration may have traded this appalling concession for the hope of Russian help in dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, which seems an extremely bad bet for the United States. Russia appears to be using Iran to destabilize the Middle East, much like China is using North Korea to destabilize East Asia, although Russia has the additional advantage of not bordering its pawn.

In fact, Russia's military objections to the missile defense "third site" in Poland (and radar in the Czech Republic) lacked merit from the beginning, except as a tool to worry Western politicians. The plans called for deploying 10 interceptors in Poland, which would be about as effective in defending against a Russian missile attack as a mosquito against an attacking T-72 tank. Russia has hundreds of missiles armed with thousands of nuclear warheads. The third site's utility lay in defending Europe (and the U.S.) against a few missiles launched from Iran or other rogue states. Of course, the Russian government was well aware of this, but Putin didn't allow this simple truth to interfere with the Russian government's official sense of outrage at alleged American and Western offenses. The real, unstated Russian objection was that the third site would tie Eastern Europe even closer to the U.S. and vice versa.

I'm left with the strong impression that Putin has elevated Russia's "game" to that point that Russia is no longer playing in same geopolitical league as the United States. A less charitable explanation is that the U.S. has been relegated to a minor league for poor performance in the international arena.

Additional Reading
Agence France Presse, "Dollar under scrutiny at G20 summit," Yahoo! News
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, "HSBC bids farewell to dollar supremacy," The Telegraph
Associated Press, "Obama: Missile defense decision not about Russia," Yahoo! News

Title of the Week (Month?)

2009-09-18T21:06:00.001-04:00

"Shrieker of the House"
James Taranto is, of course, referring to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

The War President

2009-09-18T08:28:00.004-04:00

WARNING: Don't read further if you want to think happy thoughts today.

Yesterday, President Obama announced that the U.S. was reneging on its commitment to build a missile defense system—the "third site"—to defend Europe against ballistic missile attacks from the Middle East.

This is not a surprise. But that doesn't make it any less disheartening to the Americans, Poles, and Czechs who think about and understand such things. Adding insult to insult, he announced it on the 70th anniversary of Russia's invasion of Poland, which was guaranteed by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. While I'm not yet ready to call this latest perfidy a Putin-Obama Pact—it's more of an anti-pact—I can't help but wonder if it won't have similar effects on Europe and the world. Given the Obama administration's . . .
demonstrated nearsighted hindsight, I won't be the least surprised if he gives a "peace for our time" speech in the near future.

Am I overreacting? The President said in his speech today that his "new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems, and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program." This all sounds potentially good, but even a cursory reading of his speech suggests that this approach is deeply flawed. He mentions a new intelligence assessment that emphasizes the threat of short-range and medium-range Iranian missile, but discounts long-range missiles. Yet, Iran shows no sign of slowing down its missile program, as the IAEA admits (among other disturbing things) in a confidential report. For a variety of reasons, the time to build a missile defense is before the opponent deploys the missiles. Ideally, the missile defense deters the opponent from even developing and deploying the missiles by minimizing their potential effectiveness.

The kicker is that Obama felt obligated to label the new approach "smarter," which is an immediate red flag. Anything that is deliberately labeled "smart" almost certainly isn't, especially in Washington, DC. There are other red flags in the speech, such as multiple times he implied that the land-based interceptors deployed in Alaska and California (the first two sites) are unproven, outdated, and inflexible. Apparently the President hasn't heard of these two sites, which are demonstrating "spiral development" in missile defense with some success.

Domestically, canceling the third site in Europe smells like a dodge to prepare for gutting missile defense at some later date when everyone is distracted by something else. In U.S. foreign policy, it is of a piece with cozying up to Venezuelan President (i.e., dictator) Hugo Chávez, trying to reinstall Manuel Zelaya as president of Honduras after he was constitutionally removed from office, agreeing to talks with Iran after Iran rejected the U.S. conditions for starting talks, and agreeing to bilateral talks with North Korea. (Does anyone seriously believe that the talks have any chance of accomplishing anything positive without China, North Korea's patron, at the table. Of course, they probably wouldn't accomplish anything with China at the table.) President Obama seems to be following a Bill Clinton-style foreign policy of appeasing U.S. enemies and potential enemies in effort to delay any international blowups until after his administration leaves office so that he can concentrate on domestic matters. How much like a politician; how unlike a statesman.

The lessons for Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, et al. is that the U.S. is becoming a paper tiger. Gentle pressure relentlessly applied—authoritarian governments can be quite effective at this—will eventually bring America to its knees.

The lesson for U.S. allies on the front lines—e.g., Georgia, the Baltic States, Poland, the Czech Republic, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan—is that American promises cannot be trusted in the face of determined opposition. They should either immediately start massive military buildups or begin negotiations for a peaceful surrender to salvage whatever they can.

The lesson for Americans is to prepare for at least one major war within the next 10 to 15 years. (This is the best option.) Hence, I "optimistically" hope that President Obama is a "war President" because his actions to date and likely for the rest of his administration will inexorably lead the U.S. into at least one major, bloody war, but probably not one that will start during the Obama administration. A worse view is that we should prepare to surrender many of our freedoms for the sake of world "peace" as China, Russia, and/or some other entity imposes its will on the United States.

Additional Reading

Baker Spring and Mackenzie Eaglen, "Obama Administration's New Missile Defense Plan Is a Losing Proposition," The Heritage Foundation. Baker is a well-known authority on missile defense.
"Dismay in Europe as Obama ditches missile defence," The Times (London).
Fox News on the confidential IAEA report.
Bret Stephens, "Obama Is Pushing Israel Toward War," op-ed, The Wall Street Journal.

Hat tip: Drudge Report for the noting the 70th anniversary.

Remembering 9/11

2009-09-11T21:57:00.010-04:00

Each of us has memories of that terrible day eight years ago. These are some of mine.

That Tuesday morning I was at home in my apartment in Foggy Bottom, three blocks west of the White House. I had planned to go jogging that morning near the Pentagon on the Mt. Vernon Trail, but as usual, I was running late. My first indication that something was wrong was that my Internet connection had suddenly become glacially slow. A few minutes later . . .
I saw a headline on a news website indicating that a horrible accident had occurred, and I turned on the TV. (It's curious how in times of crisis we must often revert to older technology.)

By then, both towers were burning, and reports were coming in of smoke on the National Mall and possible attacks on the Capitol, the Washington Monument, and the Pentagon. I briefly considered the possibility that an attack on the White House could endanger me, but concluded that the three blocks of buildings between my apartment and the White House would probably shield me from any conventional explosion. Even so, I closed the blinds on my windows (all facing east toward the White House) to help deflect broken glass if the windows were blown in. I later opened the blinds, realizing they would be useless against any force strong enough to shatter a window.

After a few minutes of taking in the chaos on TV, I stepped outside to see for myself what was happening. I walked a few blocks east to the Potomac River, thinking I'd have a better view there and because walking west toward the White House seemed particularly unwise at the time. From the shore of the Potomac, I was stunned to see huge clouds of black smoke drifting east across the river from the Pentagon. This was war.

For some reason, I didn't stay long and returned to my apartment. On the way I briefly talked with another college student, who told me that one the towers had fallen. My disbelief turned to horror when I arrived home and learned from the TV that both towers had fallen.

After that my memories are less vivid. Sometime later that day, I received an e-mail from my brother calmly inquiring if I was still alive—or some such phrasing. (My Internet connection was still slow, but still "functional." The phone line was constantly busy.) I replied promptly and asked him to tell our parents and sister that I was still among the living and in no danger (although probably not in those exact words) and that I'd call them later when I could get through. Through the rest of day I remember exchanging e-mails with several close friends to confirm that they were unharmed and to reassure them that I was OK.

Later that afternoon, I went jogging over by the Pentagon as originally planned. The streets and highways were blocked by police and military, but they were letting pedestrians through. I distinctly remember seeing a number of medical personnel walking away from the Pentagon looking thoroughly exhausted. At that point, I though better of trying to approach any closer and turned around.

Several scenes from the days that immediately followed stick in my mind. National Guardsmen armed with machine guns were stationed with their Humvees at every intersection of K Street in the business district, which was both disturbing and humorous. It was disturbing because until then the only time I'd seen guards with machine guns posted in a city was at subway stations in Moscow on the days leading up to May Day in 1994. It was humorous because there seemed little threat of a riot by the lobbyists and lawyers that inhabit K Street.

For the next several days, I had trouble waking up on time. I loathe alarm clocks and avoid using one. While living in that apartment, the automobile traffic consistently woke me up between 7 and 8 am—or rather the motorists honking their horns woke me up. For the rest of week, I rarely heard a car horn anywhere in the city, and this from a city that seemed to have adopted the Manhattan creed of "I honk, therefore I am." Several mornings, I looked out to see that 20th Street was its usual early morning parking lot, but that it was unnervingly quite—not a horn to be heard. Even weeks and months later, Washingtonian drivers seemed rather subdued and unusually courteous.

The other deafening silence was at Reagan National Airport. While living in Foggy Bottom, I frequently went to Gravely Point Park, immediately north of the airport. It was a great place to watch the airplanes fly perhaps 100 or 200 feet overhead on their landing approach and to see the occasional game of rugby, which I still don't quite understand, although it can be quite entertaining to watch. For the next several weeks until National Airport reopened, the park was unusually peaceful, but I was glad when the planes returned.

The last memory I share is of part of a conversation with a close friend several weeks or months after 9/11. We were discussing how 9/11 had affected us and our friends. A common friends of ours had been working down the hall from the impact point in the Pentagon. She escaped physically unharmed, but I expect she will have nightmares for the rest of her life. Until 9/11, I had seriously doubted I was capable of deliberately killing someone. I told my friend that I doubted no more. My experiences of 9/11 and its aftermath had awakened in me a deep, extremely focused, and controlled anger that could be quite deadly to anyone who dares attack my country, my people. That anger is still there, although it's not as close to surface.

9/11 Links
The Black Day —911 Memorial Site: a powerful compilation of photographs from 9/11.
Inside 9/11: National Geographic's series on the terrorist attacks.

Obama Speaks

2009-09-10T23:31:00.012-04:00

As has been my practice with presidential speeches since the Clinton administration, I read the texts of President Obama’s last two speeches instead of watching or listening to him speak. One reason is that it allows me to consider what is said more carefully and critically, and I generally rely on the pundits to inform me on how well the President gave the speech.

Most of this is a mental self-defense mechanism. Reading a speech reduces the emotional impact, allowing me to concentrate on the substance, if there is any. In the 1990s, the mere sight or sound of President Clinton began provoking such a visceral response that I found myself immediately changing the channel whenever I saw him speaking. Listening for any length left me feeling like I’d just been slimed. President Bush’s mangled diction reinforced this habit, and President Obama’s overexposure has encouraged me to continue.

Speech to Schoolchildren. [link] My first reaction to hearing that the President would speak to schoolchildren was that the nation didn’t need the President indoctrinating children—that’s their parents’ responsibility and privilege. But a coworker wisely suggested that the speech would probably be harmless. It was. In fact, it was a quite good, and I found nothing overtly objectionable in it. I’ll leave discussion of the “imbecilic support materials” and the poor timing to better writers with more time and interest.
Yet the speech had a subtle, paternalistic undertone, which is common when liberals speak to the huddled masses. The President did an excellent job of suppressing this until the next-to-last paragraph. In this paragraph, he said “I expect you” three times, meaning he (Obama) expects the student “to get serious,” “to put in your best effort,” and to do “great things.” These are appropriate expectations from a parent, a teacher, an ecclesiastical leader, and others directly responsible for a child, but from the President this seems skewed. If I were still a teenager, I’d be demanding, “Who does he think he is, my Dad? He was elected President, not Parent-in-Chief.” Perhaps I’m overreacting.

Speech to Congress. [link] I’m much less impressed with his speech to Congress, even after ignoring the dubious statistics and the disturbing ignorance or misrepresentation of economic realities. I’ll leave it to my colleagues at Heritage and other thoughtful experts to dissect his numerous false or exaggerated claims, but I know enough to know that most of the claims in his speech are deeply flawed (to put a charitable spin on them).
What I found notable—but not surprising—was that the President essentially admitted that he dislikes democratic government, e.g., “partisan spectacle,” “blizzard of charges and counter-charges,” “bickering,” and “confusion.” I’m actually somewhat sympathetic on this point. Democratic government is a messy business. As Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried.”

Obama also trotted out the usual cast of villains—insurance companies, employers, radio and cable talk show hosts, and his “Republican friends”—but conveniently ignored the biggest villain: the federal government. Of all the players in the health care arena, the federal government has played the most destructive role in undermining health care in the United States. By limiting the federal tax break to employer-provided health insurance, Congress has tied health insurance to employment, ensuring that workers lose their health insurance when they change (or lose) their jobs. Obtaining health insurance through one’s employer may have made sense when people rarely changed jobs, but it certainly doesn’t in the modern economy. Similarly, by imposing community rating requirements and mandating certain benefits, states make health insurance unaffordable for many of their residents.

What the President mistakenly called a “collective failure” is primarily a government failure.

A Tocqueville Conservative

2009-08-28T14:13:00.017-04:00

I have often described myself as a classical liberal, to tweak and confuse both my liberal and my conservative friends. (Yes, I have friends on both sides.) In a recent post, my brother waxed eloquent on the weaknesses of American democracy and coined the apt phrase "Tocqueville conservative"—at least I've never heard anyone else use it before.

The entire blog entry is worth a read, but here's a short preview:

The opposite of the classical liberal, the modern liberal believes that if a thing is good, then government should find a way to provide or mandate it.... The Tocqueville conservative, who is akin to the classical liberal, believes not only that freedom (liberty) is good and that unrestrained government is its natural antagonist, but also that there are ways to provide effectively for the needs and wants of a people through voluntary associations.

RIP Ted Kennedy, the Liberal Lion

2009-08-28T08:17:00.012-04:00

I was somewhat surprised and saddened to hear that Senator Kennedy had passed away. He was one of the first politicians that I noticed once I became aware of politics. This was all but inevitable given his larger-than-life presence as the de facto leader of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. I credit him for fighting tirelessly for what he believed, which generally was in direct opposition with my political views. But such consistency and dedication demands respect, and I gladly give him that, even though I oppose most of what he tried to accomplish. I also give him credit (which Senator Kennedy probably wouldn't want to accept) for running against President Carter in 1980 and weakening his reelection bid, which probably helped Ronald Reagan win the presidency. I don't know if Reagan would have won without the Senator's help, but I'm glad we never had to find out.

My strongest impression of Senator Kennedy actually comes courtesy of a former professor of mine. He was a strong Democrat teaching in Utah, and he was also a realist with a sense of humor. Rather than waste his presidential vote in Utah on the Democratic nominee, he would have some fun with his neighbors by voting for the Communist Party nominee, leaving them to worry who was the communist sympathizer in their midst. But I digress.

The connection to Senator Kennedy was not via the Communist Party, but a comment the professor made to me and some other students. He made a point of highly praising the Senator for his speech at the mid-term Democratic convention in 1978, in which he called out liberal Democrats and urged them to stand up for what they believed. I never bothered to look up the speech until yesterday--the Internet was still in its infancy at the time--but it lives up to its billing.

It's a magnificent speech and probably gave President Carter a severe case of heartburn. Perhaps some day when I can stomach it, I'll look for a video or audio clip to get the full effect. Much of his speech dealt with health care and would fit quite nicely into the current debate. Yet it also suffers from the same utter disregard of basic principles of economics that characterizes many of the current health care proposals. But perhaps that best expresses my thoughts of the Senator: I admire his idealism and his relentless pursuit of his ideals, just not his ideals. Rest in peace, Senator.

Related Links
Caricature by John Cox at http://www.johncoxart.com/2009/08/ted_kennedy_19322009.html. For the full size, click the thumbnail.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, "Health Care for All: A Right Not a Privilege," December 9, 1978.

Spending "Too Much" on Health Care?

2009-08-25T20:59:00.007-04:00

Foremost in most arguments in favor of health care reform is the assertion that Americans are spending too much on health care and that they should spend less. In Washington-speak, this is called "bend[ing] the health care cost growth curve down." In America, individuals or some groups may or may not be spending too much on health care, but to make such a claim on behalf of entire United States is presumptuous and logically flawed.

For elected federal officials (e.g., President Obama and certain members of Congress) to make this assertion is particularly arrogant because they apparently assume that the federal government (1) should intervene in the health care decisions of every individual American and (2) has the authority to do so.

Such claims also generally commit the error of looking at only one side of the equation (what is paid) while largely ignoring the other side (what is purchased). As a matter of principle, I may grumble at a doctor's bill, but if I believe I received good service for my money, my grumbling will be minimal.

Health care needs and wants vary from person to person, inevitably changing the health care equation for each person. Furthermore, an individual's health care needs will also change over time. For example, the wife of a couple starting a family will likely require prenatal care, while a retired couple will likely require care geared toward the diseases and annoyances of old age. Even individuals in identical circumstances will prefer different levels or types of care. One retiree requiring extra care may prefer to live with family members who will provide that care, while another retiree with the same needs may prefer to live in an assisted living facility. These are incredibly complex decisions that directly and intimately affect lives of individual Americans.

For government to even attempt to tell an individual how much he can spend on his own health care strikes me as a particularly insidious form of tyranny. Such decisions should remain with individuals and the people closest to them (usually their families).

Apologists for such medical tyranny often argue that such government-mandated rationing is simply a variation of how limited resources are allocated in a market economy, but they apparently don't realize that this comparison actually refutes their argument. They would give the government a health care monopsony (one buyer--the mirror image of a monopoly, which has only one seller) to enable it to set the prices for medical services, much as it does in Medicare. In most cases, because the government is seeking to reduce expenses, the government would set prices below what the market would normally bear, which would create both a shortage of supply and an excess of demand in that service. The government would gain both by paying less for each service and by paying for few numbers of that particular service. Some people would gain by paying less for a service, but others would be forced to go without because of the shortage of supply. In the worst case scenario, the government monopsony could simply refuse to pay for a service--essentially setting the price at zero--and very quickly no provider would offer the service.

In a market economy, individuals would purchase health care services based on what they need and can afford to purchase weighed against other things they want to do with their money. In the end, more people would be served, but at a greater total cost. In many cases, people would probably wish to spend more but would be restrained by their circumstances.

Admittedly, both of these scenarios are highly simplified, lacking the messy details of real life, but they strongly suggest that any government monopsony that "saves" money must therefore ration health care. The committees that fix these artificially low prices would truly be "death panels" in their effects, just less visible than a panel that rations health care services for individual patients.

Slight Tangent
I take issue with Mr. Krauthammer's criticism of the usage of "death panels"--Sarah Palin's "shrewdly timed metaphor," as Ms. Paglia aptly called it. [See link and warning below.] Ironically, after asking "Sarah Palin to leave the room," he then finishes making her case against government-subsidized end-of-life counseling, albeit using less incendiary language.

Further reading:
Robert A, Book, "Illusions of Cost Control in Public Health Care Plans," The Heritage Foundation.

Charles Krauthammer, "The Truth About Death Counseling," The Washington Post

Camille Paglia, "Obama's Healthcare Horror," Salon.com [Warning: rated at least PG-13 for explicit language. Ms. Paglia's is often a good read, but not for the politically or socially squeamish.]

Correction: "NOPE"

2009-08-18T22:11:00.008-04:00

How embarrassing . . . a glaring mistake on my first "substantive" post.

Today, my colleague, who shall remain unnamed and smug, took some satisfaction in pointing out that I had identified the wrong anti-Obama button. I couldn't find the same button on the Web, but her button looks more like the one to the left, except that "Keep the Change" is printed twice in arcs around the edge, above and below "NOPE."

I plead editor's block.

Change and Hope in Union Station

2009-08-18T00:52:00.012-04:00

Last week, a colleague walked into my office excited about a NoBama button (similar to this one) [See correction in the next post.] that she'd just bought at a kiosk in Union Station. What's remarkable is not that she was excited or had bought an anti-Obama button, but that she could buy it in Union Station. Since well before the inauguration, Union Station has offered a wide variety of Obama paraphernalia, with anything that might offend the Obama faithful banished from sight. The Obama worship climaxed during inauguration with numerous kiosks selling a nauseating assortment of Obama t-shirts, buttons, key chains, and other merchandise.

In recent months, most of the Obama kiosks have disappeared, but an Obama store/shrine opened just outside one of the main entrances to the Metro (subway) system—presumably one of the prime retail spots in Union Station. Fortunately, this is not the entrance that I frequent.

My colleague's NoBama button sparked my curiosity, so I took a break and walked over to Union Station to see what other subversive material was available. Much to my surprise, almost half of the items at a kiosk near the front entrance were now anti-Obama, including two of the four t-shirts prominently displayed: “NoBama. Keep the Change” and "Don't Blame Me. I Voted for McCain-Palin." Until recently, this kiosk had sold only pro-Obama items, so I have tried to ignore it when walking by.

I asked the attendant about the anti-Obama items, and she said that they had been carrying them for about a month and helpfully added that they had sparked a lot of interest and had been selling rather well. The next day, armed with my camera, I tried to take a picture of the kiosk, but the attendant (a different one) told me I couldn’t take a picture. I doubt she could have made it stick legally--it is a public area--but I didn’t want to make a scene so I complied. Instead, I took a picture of the Obama shrine (see above), where the attendants were less vigilant. Perhaps they thought I was one of the faithful.

If nothing else, this is a return to normalcy with opposition viewpoints again displayed in Union Station. (The opposition was always well represented during the Bush Administration.) Apparently, the anti-Obama forces have strengthened to the point that at least one merchant dared to break the monopoly of Obama paraphernalia to make an honest dollar--a small victory for capitalism in the nation's capital and a sign of hope.

Blog Reset

2009-08-14T23:08:00.007-04:00

About a year ago, I started this blog with two mundane entries. I added a third several months later. Looking back today, I decided to "reset" things in honor of Secretary of State Clinton. The entries were not that interesting, and this blog will be better without them. (I hope.)

My original purpose--to write on things that catch my interest--is still the same, just a little more focused. While the previous entries didn't quite fit, ~~but~~ they were useful practice. So since I'm making the rules here, they're gone and I'm starting with a clean slate, which is more than I can say for U.S.-Russian relations despite the Obama Administration's wishes.

My first substantive entry will be tomorrow. I've already written it, but I'm letting bit age a bit before I post it. More will follow on a semi-regular basis. Once I post them, though, I'll leave them up unchanged, except for minor corrections of typos. I will make substantive corrections and additions as needed, but clearly indicate what I've changed from the original post.