|
|
6.8.2002 1:36 AM Jack Straw thinks enlarging the EU would stop the rise of right-wing extremism. It was my recollection that supporters of Le Pen (quasi-fascist), Fortyn (nationalist libertarian), and their ilk oppose the EU. How does making the EU bigger and more important in peoples' lives stop that opposition? It looks like a labored attempt by the Labour Party to offer a reason for Britain to join the Euro and draw closer to the continent. Straw's saying that the British public should accept the Euro to stop the rise of--dare I say it--another Hitler. Straw used less infammatory rhetoric when he said, "An enlarged EU should be a buttress against extremism." EU Enlargement Vital to Defeat Far-Right Surge: Britain's Straw" [via Drudge] Sean Hackbarth | 1:24 AM Lou Dobbs has finally given this war a real name. The "War on Terror" is no more. What 9.11 started was the Islamist War. Our enemy isn't terror. That's just a feeling. Terror doesn't recruit and train people to hijack planes and fly them into skyscrapers. Terror doesn't send out men and women into crowded shopping malls, restaurants, and nightclubs and blow themselves up. Feelings don't do those things, people do. These people who attack Western Civilization are Islamists. Islamism is their ideology. To paraphrase Ludwig von Mises, Islamism are the ideas that "press the gun into their [terrorists'] hands." Bravo, Lou. You've brought some much needed clarity to this conflict. Sean Hackbarth | 6.7.2002 1:26 AM Like me, an anonymous NRO writer wonders what the purpose of a byline strike is. Sean Hackbarth | 12:32 AM Yesterday at work, I was reminded that June 6 was the anniversary of the Normandy invasion. The person who reminded me then proceeded to give me updates of the assault. Noon in Milwaukee meant is was about 6 p.m. (give or take an hour) on Omaha Beach. Hitler was still asleep--he usually went to bed at 5 a.m. His staff was too afraid to wake him to tell him of the invasion. Since he had sole control over the Panzers, those German tanks didn't engage the initial invasion. Who knows what would have happened if someone bothered to wake Hitler? By 2 p.m. Milwaukee time (7 p.m. in Normandy), the break through was having success. While this exercise is entertaining (sort of like hearing the play-by-play of a football game), I failed to appreciate those who suffered and died to begin the liberation of Europe. Those sacrifices were not in vain. "D-Day Plus 58 Years" Sean Hackbarth | 6.6.2002 10:29 PM Tom Ridge may have something more productive to do if President Bush has his way with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Instead of playing around with warning colors, Ridge would have control over the Coast Guard, Secret Service, INS, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and a bunch of other agencies. If focused properly, this new department would be a serious barrier to future terrorist attacks. How the Homeland Security Secretary (presumably Ridge) would deal with making sure intelligence was gathered, analyzed, and acted upon depends on what the legislation creating the department looks like as well as the ability of the secretary. A person in charge who could force the CIA and FBI to work together instead of worrying about turf would bring better security to the nation. But a weak secretary would be little better than the present Homeland Security Advisor--and much more expensive. Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation "Bush Seeks Homeland Security Dept." [UPDATE: Ex-Navy man, Daniel Tabb has issued the first opposition I've seen to the new department. He worries that "something is bound to fall through the cracks" if those agencies were combined under department. It's not like a whole lot of stuff fell through the cracks already. Tabb then calls the new department a "national police force" and Bush's "private army." This diatribe is just a knee-jerk reaction. Bush's plan doesn't create a new police force or army. What it does is combine currently scattered agencies under one leader with a common mission: defend America against terrorists. It's going to take a lot more than a quick, paranoid screed to question the general premise.] Sean Hackbarth | 1:41 AM Hey all right-thinking Web addicts! Heed Jonah's call and get NRO lots of votes in The Webby Awards. I do not want to see a liberal mag that no one reads anymore (Salon.com) win for "Best Print & Zines Website". Sean Hackbarth | 12:22 AM The Blue Button advocates 9.11 victims suing the American Taliban. Sean Hackbarth | 6.5.2002 11:49 PM Glenn Reynolds correctly points out that there's too little bioethical examination of neuroscience. Until reading the same issue of The Economist that Reynolds did, I never gave the ethical considerations of neuroscience much thought. Reynolds blames the underscrutiny on abortion. He writes:
Sure, more attention is made about genetic ethics because of abortion, but Reynolds doesn't consider the abortion debate to be about "actual ethics." Abortion has everything to do with ethics. It goes to the heart of ethical Man. It deals with basic questions: When is a person a person? When does human life begin? Who lives? Who dies? Who decides? Our society is plagued with these questions because they deal with Man's essence as a trancendent being. The abortions wars are at a standstill. Because of Roe v. Wade and related cases a woman can kill her child even after the baby has been partially delivered. Senate Democrats tried to keep John Ashcroft from becoming Attorney General because his pro-life position was incompatible with their abortion-on-demand stance. Millions of unborn children have been killed--this in a time of decreasing birth rates. Now, cloning and embryo harvesting are issues used by the pro-life movement to draw another line in the sand. Reynolds might call me a "nattering nabob" for opposing embryonic stem cell research, but the fight against the Culture of Death can never cease. "Brains: Good, Bad, and Modified" [via Brothers Judd] Sean Hackbarth | 10:58 PM TAM's international correspondent, Eric G. reports from London on the Queen's Jubilee:
To echo Eric's mention of British patriotism, a woman at the festivities said, "It's particularly nice to be patriotic for a change, because it has become a bit unfashionable." Now, Brits are cleaning up 50,000 wine bottles. God save the Queen. "Street Cred that Won over 1m People" "Jubilee Party Clean-up Begins" Sean Hackbarth | 3:33 AM How exactly does a byline strike help a union during contract negotiations? Wouldn't it be harming union members because they're not getting credit for their work? Or is it some symbolic action? "Post Journalists Withhold Bylines" [via Drudge] Sean Hackbarth | 2:38 AM On Monday, I was ready to go ballistic on President Bush over that global warming report sent to the U.N. The term "cave-in" and comparisons to AlGore's Earth in the Balance quickly came to mind. My screed was going to be as bombastic as those of Rush Limbaugh and James Glassman. I decided to hold back, take a deep breath, and see if I was overreacting. A great aspect of weblogging is writing an instant response to a story you're reading. A not-so-great aspect of weblogging is writing an instant response to a story you're reading. What held me back was Jonathan Adler's post at The Corner where he writes, "The report outlines some specific potential scenarios, but it carefully states all of its predictions in probabilistic terms and reiterates the National Academy of Sciences' conclusion that specific predictions about climate change are, as yet, impossible." Additionally on the blog front, Andrew Sullivan couldn't find the environmental policy U-turn. He sees it as a Howell Raines-driven story that Drudge and Rush Limbaugh hooked on to like big tuna. Mickey Kaus thinks the story is an orchestrated effort by environmental groups to hit Bush in a political soft spot. More importantly, President Bush shrugged off the report and restated his opposition to Kyoto. It doesn't really matter if Bush U-turned on Kyoto. There's no way the treaty would past the Senate. But continuing his opposition to Kyoto ticks off the Europeans--always a good thing. Looking through parts of the report, I haven't noticed any part where it wants climate change to be the "central organizing principle" of society a la AlGore in Earth in the Balance. Instead, "American ingenuity and resources" have played a large role in adapting to past climate change. Presumably, "technological change and knowledge about fluctuating climate" deal with future change. I'm glad I didn't write stuff I'd end up regretting and backtracking on. The past few months have not been good for me and the administration policy wise. Steel tariffs, a bloated farm bill, unconstitutional campaign finance reform, and a distracted war effort have made me a little nervous. At times, the administration looks too focused on fall elections rather than principled conservative governance. Priority must be placed on winning the war. Without national security, any other policy debate is moot. "Climate Changing, U.S. Says in Report" Sean Hackbarth | 6.4.2002 2:33 AM Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great About America defends the nation from anti-Americans both inside and out. It's a fine read that instantly was place on the Book of the Year shortlist. Oh, Thomas Sowell likes it too. "Great America" Sean Hackbarth | 6.3.2002 2:43 AM I'm playing the role of meme sheep and latching on to Jim Hart's "Top 5 Favorite Bands/Musicians that I Really Shouldn't Admit that I Like":
This was a hard list to put together since I'm not really ashamed of liking the music I buy and listen to. Def Leppard and the Cult go back to 80s hair bands. Steely Dan and Yes show off my more pretentious musical taste, and Daft Punk offers a nice gooey slice of cheesy dance. Sean Hackbarth | 1:30 AM The greatness of Thomas Sowell is his ability to plainly link economic costs to politics. This is political economy in the best sense. He's a part of a long line from Adam Smith, to Ludwig von Mises, to James Buchanan, to Milton Friedman. Here's a fine example of Sowell's political economy:
Economic purists would scream indignation that Sowell is mixing positive and normative economics, but he's accurate in his analysis. People run to government to "fix" problems they see the market failing to solve because they're no costs imposed on them. They want to use other people's money to solve their problem. "Priceless Politics" Sean Hackbarth | 1:13 AM I don't care if the French lost to Senegal, it's still World Cup soccer and I don't care. 1-0: I'm getting bored just thinking about it. Sean Hackbarth | 6.2.2002 11:35 PM The stream of homicide bombers has desensitized us from remembering that the Palestinians are not a monolithic group. Although opinion polls say most Palestinians support bombing as a method in their war against Israel, some accept the inherent humanity of Israelis. 25-year old Thauriya Hamamreh is one such person. She was to be another martyr sacrificing herself for the cause. But after "thinking that I would be killing babies, women and sick people and imagined what it would be like if my family were sitting in a restaurant and someone bombed them" she refused to go on her death trip to Jerusalem. With more people like Thauriya, the violence could end. We can only hope. "Palestinian Woman Bomber Bows Out of Suicide Attack" [via Celestial Companion] Sean Hackbarth | 11:22 PM Paul Gottfried noticed an anti-European strain in American conservative thought. No kidding. It didn't take much digging around in back issues of the National Review and The Weekly Standard to discover that. I would include myself with the Euro-bashers. I'm supportive of Europeans who aren't opposed to America using methods and tactics needed to win the War on Terrorism. Norweigian weblogger, Fredrik Norman is a European who understands what's required to win the war. One would be hard pressed to find a more hawkish person on the other side of the pond. If more European leaders took this war as seriously as Norman, and didn't see this as an opportunity to distance themselves from warmongering, cowboy America, then the American Right would be writing about the new convergence of American and European thinking and how it could be extended to other issues (trade, the environment, etc.). This anti-Europeanism isn't a knee-jerk reaction. It's a response to words and actions that stand in the way of American victory and security. "'Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys?" Sean Hackbarth | |
ABOUT When I'm not pondering the fate of the universe, I'm reading, writing, or selling books. Here you'll find comments on politics, culture, books, and music. Not necessarily in that order. MAILBOX sean--at--theamericanmind.com  Support democracy and human rights in Iraq! 
My Bloginality is INTP!!! WEBRINGS « LibertyLoggers » < ? wiscoblogs # > WEBLOGS WIRES AP International AP National AP Politics AP Sports UPI COLUMNISTS Buckley Goldberg Kudlow Novak Horowitz Noonan Reynolds Sowell Will NEWSPAPERS Ha'aretz LA Times Milwaukee Journal Sentinel NY Times Washington Post Washington Times MAGAZINES The American Prowler The Atlantic City Journal Commentary Enter Stage Right First Things FrontPage IntellectualConservative.com In the National Interest National Review New York Times Magazine Opinion Journal Reason Spintech The Weekly Standard NEWS 1stHeadlines ABCNews BBC CNN Cybercast News Service Drudge FoxNews MEMRI MSNBC BOOKS All Consuming The New Republic New York Times Town Hall Book Club Washington Post Weblog BookWatch TECH News.com Wired News HUMOR Mallard Fillmore The Onion ARCHIVE 
Comments by: YACCS template by HELQUIN
|