Comments on politics, the culture, economics, and sports by Paul Tuns. I am editor-in-chief of "The Interim," Canada's life and family newspaper, and author of "Jean Chretien: A Legacy of Scandal" (2004) and "The Dauphin: The Truth about Justin Trudeau" (2015). I am some combination of conservative/libertarian, standing athwart history yelling "bullshit!" You can follow me on Twitter (@ptuns).

 
Unpatriotic or treasonous?

John O'Sullivan in the Chicago Sun-Times on Dubya's critics and the War on Terror:
"How can we explain this eager suspicion of Bush against the evidence -- this drive to blame hidden enemies at home rather than declared ones abroad for the Pearl Harbors of our day? Since Pearl Harbor many Americans, especially the cultural elites and the left, have overcome patriotism. They like to think of themselves as citizens of the world above petty national prejudices. But in practice they are merely inverted patriots who tend to take the opposite side in any foreign quarrel.
They cannot, of course, take bin Laden's side over 9/11. Their alienation does not bite quite so deep. So they react in two other ways. They side with France and Germany over how to handle the war on terror. And they seek reasons to blame America for attacks upon itself. Their ire is especially excited by a U.S. administration that strikes a patriotic note like the Bush administration. But they are a greater danger to the Democrats. For if the Democrats go along with the inverted patriots in their ranks, they will discover in November just how small is the number of voters they represent."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:49 PM

 
The Public Square was not naked when Reagan stood in it

Jeremy Lott reviews God and Ronald Reagan: A Spiritual Life by Paul Kengor in Books and Culture and captures the most important point of Kengor's wonderful book:
"Though Reagan grew away from his religious upbringing, he never repudiated it. Kengor makes a decent case that certain aspects of the Disciples of Christ—its anti-Communism; its free-church skepticism of the federal government; its emphasis on the horrible this-worldly effects of sin; its insistence that faith, hope, and charity could lay waste to any problem; its belief that God had a special plan for each and every one of us—provided the major themes of Reagan's presidency."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:44 PM

 
Canada is now (Old) European

Mark Steyn's Daily Telegraph column (I blog about the column twice -- see below) yesterday has this wonderful line: "Germany, like much of Europe, has a psychological investment in longer holidays, free healthcare, early retirement, unsustainable welfare programmes, decrepit military: the fact that these policies spell national suicide is less important than that they distinguish Europe from the less enlightened Americans." Germany, indeed Old Europe, sounds a lot like Canada. The only thing that Steyn missed was the smugness of Europeans (and Canadians) over the fact that they do not execute their murderers.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:41 PM

 
Steyn on Germany

Mark Steyn's Daily Telegraph column yesterday was on Germany not really being pleased about America getting ready to get up and go and leave the Fatherland to fend for itself. Funny line about Germany trying to suck up to the U.S.:
"As to what Germany can do to make itself more attractive to the Yanks, how about this? Spend less time running around playing Mini-Me to Jacques Chirac's Doctor Evil."
Great column and a first, I think, in political punditry: quoting Daffy Duck.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:37 PM

 
Paulitics

The terribly neglected Paulitics will be back by the end of the week.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:10 PM

 
Absolutely the very last thing on The Passion

Ezra Levant defends The Passion of the Christ against baseless charges of anti-Semitism in the recently launched (and excellent) Western Standard:
"Those who went with magni-fying glasses to look for reasons to be offended by the movie will surely find their proof, or imagine it. But too many of them are publicity hounds, professional victims--of--fortune who want to ride the tidal wave of publicity Mel Gibson can generate. Too many accompanied their press releases with appeals for financial contribu-tions. When your business model is built on fighting intolerance, you tend to find intoler-ance even where it does not exist."
Where should the professional complainers look for real anti-Semitism:
"The movie is violent, of course – but how could any realistic movie of a crucifixion not be? That is not a lower-case ‘T’ that millions of Christians wear around their necks. It is a miniature replica of a device of torture that their saviour endured for them. It is a shocking story of willing sacrifice – and one that will surely convert many viewers to Christianity, or revive Christianity in the hearts of many who had forgotten it.
That is why this movie has been attacked. Not because it is anti-Jewish. Real anti-anti-Semites know that the threat to Jews in 2004 is not a Jesus-inspired pogrom in suburban Canada, but the weekly Arab suicide bombings in the streets of Jerusalem, or the nuclear reactors of Tehran, or even the debating chambers of the United Nations."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:04 PM

 
There are corrections and then there are corrections

From The Australian:
"A story headlined 'Syria seeks our help to woo US' in Saturday's Weekend Australian misquoted National Party senator Sandy Macdonald. The quote stated: 'Syria is a country that has been a bastard state for nearly 40 years' but should have read 'Syria is a country that has been a Baathist state for nearly 40 years.' The Australian regrets any embarrassment caused by the error."
(Hat tip to Samizdata)
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:58 PM

 
A pressing need to animal seat belts?

Reuters reports that Santa Fe, New Mexico is considering an ordinance that would require "pet owners to restrain their dogs, cats and ferrets in special pet seats or with seat belts while traveling in a moving vehicle." Kate Rindy, executive director of the Santa Fe Animal Shelter, who helped develop the proposed law, said "animals in open beds of trucks and cars be tethered or restrained enough so the animal can't fly out the window." Usually (or preferably) laws are passed to address actual problems. How often do animals fly out the window of cars?
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:48 PM

 
See ya later

I'll be away for the week. Doubtful I will be blogging. In my absence, I suggest five blogs:
Maderblog: covers lots of things but really good on international issues, the War on Terror, Israel and liberty.
Adam Daifallah's musings: If you can tolerate the curling stories, Adam has some great links/comments to stories about Iraq, Conrad Black, the pecularaties of the Left and the state of Canadian conservatism.
Mark Shea: He's Catholic and Enjoying It and has lots of opinionated things to say about the Church, culture and US politics.
Samizdata: British libertarians who write about everything with clarity and erudition.
About Last Night: Terry Teachout's and Our Girl in Chicago's dual arts and culture blog.
Each day there are 15-20 blogs I drop by for a glance and I try to stop at another 30-50 but the five aforementioned blogs are (aside from The Corner), the ones I don't miss even if I don't have time to be on the net.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:33 PM

 
We won't hold this against Tim Graham

Tim Graham monitors the media at the Media Research Center and he does great work there (they all do). But diet pop, Tim?:
"Diet Coke tastes icky to me, although the new lemon and lime combinations make it better. Diet Pepsi is my office drink of choice, slurped down in successive two-liter bottles. (I'm not a 'coffee achiever,' not without a pile of hot cocoa or cream in it.) Any work mate who notices my 'pop' thing (hey, I'm from Wisconsin) gets told, 'If they stabbed me and ate me, I'd taste marinated in Diet Pepsi'."
Four litres of anything can't be good for you.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:18 PM

 
Consensus was Klein was drunk

Just joking. Horrible, terrible, bad speech from the Alberta premier at the Conservative Convention. Vicki Smith says " I swear, even after a fairly long period of abstinence, the man still has 'drunk' moments in every speech he gives." That's a seconder to Daifallah.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:11 PM

 
Harper winning over people

A comment at the BlogsCanada E-Group Elections Blog:
"Mansbridge and Harper, in the interview immediately following the victory, talked about the strength of Harpers numbers in Atlantic Canada, Quebec and Ontario. Harper said his numbers in Atlantic Canada at the start were in single digits.
To end up with 35% in Atlantic Canada, strong in Quebec, and dominating in Ontario is proof that Harper either changed Conservative's views on him or he brought new people to the Party. The former is more likely.
Can he do the same with the Canadian people is the question. I think he can and he will."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:08 PM

 
Man is not perfectible

Thought-provoking column by Theodore Dalrymple in The Spectator. As someone with no particular Creed to follow, he says there is evil in the world because of Original Sin. Like I said, thought-provoking -- for believers and non-believers alike. The money line: "No social arrangements, however civilised or compassionate, will ever result in the elimination of manÂ’s desire to do evil: the best that can be hoped for is that they will limit the scope of its expression." The degree to which one believes this is the best indication of where they stand on the linear barometer of liberal-conservative with absolute disbelief in the statement a sign of that the person is a 100% nut-job liberal and absolute belief a sign of one's common sense conservatism.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:03 PM

 
Here's a winning election issue

The Liberal Democrats in the UK are, apparently, not irrelevant enough so they have proposed letting 16- and 17-year-olds watch and appear in pornography. The Indepedent reports "The party's culture spokesman, Don Foster, said that it was inconsistent to allow 16-year-olds to have children, and be treated as adults in other respects, but to bar them from watching or taking part in explicit material - which they could access, anyway, from the internet." Thankfully there was some sanity within the party as work and pensions spokesman Steve Webb opposed the change: "The question we should be asking is not whether the most mature 16-year-old can deal with the most explicit material. The question is whether the least mature 16-year-old can deal with the most explicit material." He also noted that once 16-year-olds are watching pornography (with the state's tolerance) then it will be more difficult to keep it out of the hands of 15-year-olds. But such sanity was ignored as the party conference passed it by a "huge majority." Liberal Democrats, however, had limits on their open-mindedness by proscribing bestiality, snuff films and depictions of rape.
Conservative Party co-chairman, Dr Liam Fox said the policy was "irresponsible" and would "lead to the exploitation of young people." He added: "It adds to the many ridiculous policies the Liberal Democrats have dreamed up over recent years. With all the problems facing Britain, the Liberal Democrats have once again chosen to focus on the absurd and the obscure, and their muddled approach reveals them to be sad and irrelevant."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:53 PM

 
In defense of outsourcing from Mr. Outsource himself

The New York Times reports on Azim Premji, the richest man in India and chairman of Wipro, which the Times calls "one of the biggest outsourcing concerns in the world." Premji is going into high gear to defend his lucrative business which is good for India and America. As Premji notes, "Offshore outsourcing is another example of U.S. innovativeness to stay competitive by reducing costs and cycle times." The whole article is worth reading.
What has surprised me about this debate is the ineffectiveness of conservatives (and Republicans) to counter liberal (and Democratic) arguements using their own liberal worldview against them. The Left claims to be concerned about the plight of the developing world; outsourcing is the best form of foreign aid the West can offer. Why, then, do liberals oppose providing jobs for those who are trying to improve their lot? (Of course, we know the answers: 1) Democrats care more about their union support than any principles they might have, 2) Democrats and liberals will use any arguement against this administration, even if they must be hypocrites in doing so, 3) despite the fact that people in developing nations are improving their lives, private enterprise, not government, has been the successful vehicle for acheiving this goal and 4) liberals don't really care about the lives of people in developing countries.)
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:39 PM

 
Wells on Blahlinda

Paul Wells points to this photo and remarks Blahlinda Stronach "came out on Friday night dressed as Glenda the Good Witch and announced, 'I'm throwing away my prepared text and speaking from the heart'. Here she is speaking from the heart. That piece of paper in her hand is her prepared text." As Reuters noted, that during this speech from the heart, Blahlinda read from her notes. It is one thing to tell a fib to the Canadian people; all politicians do it. It is quite another to do it with proof to the contrary in one's hands.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:29 PM

 
Klein's snore-note address

The Canadian corner of the blogosphere look at Ralph Klein's keynote address yesterday has generally agreed that it was awful. It was dull, uninspired and rambling. Adam Daifallah had the best one-liner on it: "I thought Ralph had given up the bottle but after yesterday's performance you've gotta wonder." I know that by ten minutes in, I was wanting a drink. But I don't think the speech was uniformly bad. There were a good two minutes (out of about an hour-long speech that seemed like four hours). Klein said the Liberals do not have a title to Canada, that the country ought not to be "bought and sold ... with our money." Not great, but good. Thirty minutes of this stuff and the party faithful would have been streaming out of the conventional centre electioneering. As it was, conservatives saw what is generally assumed to be one of our superstars give a rather blah performance.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:23 PM

 
Harper wins

Paul Wells has the best and kindest comment on Stephen Harper's Conservative leadership victory: "Stephen Harper did not take over this party, he won it over." Very nicely put. He has much more to say on the Harper victory that is worth reading.
Warren Kinsella predicts Harper can become Prime Minister in a minority government situation. I'm dubious about the prospects and worried about the fact that Kinsella is not attacking Harper:
"Stephen Harper is minutes away from winning on the first ballot.
...How did he do it? Because Stephen Harper's one of those politicians - like Chretien - who the pundits and politicos always underestimate (me included). He put the Progressive Conservative party out of existence. He scared off Bernard Lord, Peter McKay and no less than Mike Harris. And he has won a huge victory without making a single mistake - and without breaking into a sweat.
In an environment where voters are hungry for change - as long as that change isn't radical or extreme - Harper's bland, Wonder Bread style works to his advantage. So too his smarts, which he has in abundance. Look, for example, how he has quietly expunged many of the extremists from his party's caucus - and how he's now got the most ethnically diverse (and youthful) caucus in the House of Commons.
Could he be the next Prime Minister in a minority Parliament? You're damned right he could.
Next month I'm giving a speech in Toronto to one of those public affairs institutes - and I plan to detail how the Tories could win, and why. I'll post event details when we get home.
In the meantime, congratulations to Stephen Harper - he's done what everyone (and I mean everyone) said he couldn't.
He's become a contender."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:40 AM

 
One year later the verdict is ...

The liberation of Iraq was justified. Anyone who believes otherwise is, frankly, not worth listening to. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield defends the administration's liberation of Iraq in the New York Times: "Today, in a world of terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and states that sponsor the former and pursue the latter, defending freedom means we must confront dangers before it is too late." It is only sane to believe that it is better to confront Saddam Hussein before he has WMD capabilities than after. That's just common sense.
Regarding "blame" for the war, clearly it belongs in the lap of Hussein:
"In Iraq, for 12 years, through 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions, the world gave Saddam Hussein every opportunity to avoid war. He was being held to a simple standard: live up to your agreement at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf war; disarm and prove you have done so. Instead of disarming — as Kazakhstan, South Africa and Ukraine did, and as Libya is doing today — Saddam Hussein chose deception and defiance."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:05 PM

 
The limits of ignoring the crap in society

A reader of Mark Shea's Catholic and Enjoying Blog writes:
"We're home schoolers. Why do I care what kind of propaganda they have down at Main Street Muddled Middle School?
I care because I have an intense interest in maintaining the recognizably human shape of the world my sons (and someday grandchildren) will be growing up in."
Nicely put.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:59 PM

 
Conservative rally

I know that generally conservatives don't do demonstrations but for any of the liberty-minded that will be in the Toronto area on Saturday I pass on this important reminder from Maderblog:
"I want to remind everyone of the World Still Says Yes to Liberty rally tomorrow in Nathan Phillips Square beginning at 12:00. Thanks so much to those bloggers who have already helped to spread the word; I hope everyone else passes the message along, and that those in the GTA will go and show their support for freedom."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:49 PM

 
Conservative TV

Kelly Jane Torrance has the goods on "a wickedly funny show about politics that doesn't hate the Red States of America" at The American Spectator.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:26 PM

 
John Kerry, the Jerry Lewis of politics

Christopher Buckley was right, John Kerry is the senator from France. New York Sun has the details about Kerry's popularity there. Why? Perhaps that for Kerry, as with Jerry Lewis, something is gained in the translation.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:23 PM

 
JO'S on Spain

John O'Sullivan has a great column on the political fallout the terrorist attacks in Madrid. Will Al-Qaeda try it again?
"In the meantime, of course, al Qaeda will be preparing to determine the results of other elections — notably those of the powers most active in Iraq, namely, the U.S., Britain, and Poland. It is very unlikely that a terrorist bomb, however murderous, would help Senator John Kerry. Quite the contrary. If it seemed designed to help Kerry, it would reelect Bush.
Al Qaeda will find both Britain and Poland similarly difficult nuts to crack. In both countries the main opposition party is even more pro-American than the government, yes, even than Blair's government in Britain. So if Osama were to defeat Blair at the polls, he would get a government at least equally committed to the war on terror.
Not until the Italian elections come along will Osama find another Zapatero in the person of Romano Prodi, currently president of the European Commission, who seems likely to lead another anti-American leftist coalition against pro-American Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and who delivered a classic statement of appeasement in an Italian newspaper on Monday: 'It is clear that using force is not the answer to resolving the conflict with terrorists. Terrorism is infinitely more powerful than a year ago.' But Prodi's chance to emulate Zapatero will not arrive until 2006."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:15 AM

 
Happy St. Patrick's Day

Not just a day to drink green beer. Some links to stuff about St. Patrick.

Saint of the Day on the significance of St. Patrick: "Legends about Patrick abound; but truth is best served by our seeing two solid qualities in him: He was humble and he was courageous. The determination to accept suffering and success with equal indifference guided the life of God’s instrument for winning most of Ireland for Christ."

The St. Anthony Messenger gets beyond the legend: "No, Patrick never chased the snakes out of Ireland. Nor do we really know whether he used the shamrock to teach converts about the Trinity. But what we do know about St. Patrick is far more interesting than many of the legends that grew up around him."

Charles Colson's Breakpoint Commentary on how to celebrate today: "As it is with many Christian holidays, Saint Patrick’s Day has lost much of its original meaning. Instead of settling for parades, cardboard leprechauns, and “the wearing of the green,” we ought to recover our Christian heritage, celebrate the great evangelist, and teach our kids about this Christian hero."
Why? "Patrick had been raised in a Christian home, but he didn’t really believe in God. But now—hungry, lonely, frightened, and bitterly cold—Patrick began seeking out a relationship with his Heavenly Father. As he wrote in his Confessions, 'I would pray constantly during the daylight hours' and 'the love of God . . . surrounded me more and more.'
Six years after his capture [and enslavement], God spoke to Patrick in a dream, saying, 'Your hungers are rewarded. You are going home. Look—your ship is ready'."

T.M. Moore on how St. Patrick would not be a man comfortable in our times and why we need him for than ever: "The gospel that St. Patrick preached was firmly linked to larger issues of society and culture. He would not have condoned the separation of faith from life that seems to be so much a part of American Christianity in our day (what Dallas Willard refers to as a 'gospel of sin management'). He was bold to preach Christ and the demands of righteousness required of those who follow Him."

Nothing about St. Patrick is as powerful and moving as what he had written himself. From the Confession of St. Patrick (translated by Ludwig Bieler): "This, I presume, I ought to do, but I do not trust myself as long as I am in this body of death, for strong is he who daily strives to turn me away from the faith and the purity of true religion to which I have devoted myself to the end of my life to Christ my Lord. But the hostile flesh is ever dragging us unto death, that is, towards the forbidden satisfaction of one's desires; and I know that in part I did not lead a perfect life as did the other faithful; but I acknowledge it to my! Lord, and do not blush before Him, because I lie not: from the time I came to know Him in my youth, the love of God and the fear of Him have grown in me, and up to now, thanks to the grace of God, I have kept the faith."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:59 AM

 
Rachel Corrie's legacy

Thanks for nothing to the publicity stuntster who gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Ruhama Shattan's Jerusalem Post reflection is reprinted in the Wall Street Journal.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:45 PM

 
News from France

When you read about France co-operating with China in naval maneuvers in what is perceived to be an effort to intimidate Taiwan, you begin to care less about news that Islamists are planning to launch attacks on France.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:17 PM

 
How can this man utter the word 'credibility' with a straight face

The Guardian interviews Noam Chomsky in which we are treated to such as wisdom as this:
"The trial [of Saddam Hussein] ought to be under some kind of international auspices that have some degree of credibility, so not something which is obviously victor's justice, which, no matter how much of a monster one is, doesn't carry credibility."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:57 PM

 
Preparing for the worst, hoping for the best

Ottawa Citizen columnist David Warren:
"For Al Qaeda, it is a huge victory after 30 months of continuous setbacks. They have tried a new tactic, and it works. They have shown that by massacring large numbers of innocents on the eve of a Western election, they may persuade the survivors to vote as they wish. Count on it: they will not now abandon this tactic. And they are likely to try it in the United States as well, to defeat President Bush in November, thanks to that Spanish capitulation."
Unlike us in the West, Muslims and Arabs learn from history. The lesson of this week's vote in Spain is that when confronted with terrorism, the public capitulates. Whether or not this is the right lesson is for American voters to determine in November. We can only pray that Americans have more resolve than the Spanish. The Washington Post's George F. Will has faith in Americans: "The terrorists may draw an erroneous conclusion. They may conclude that the reaction of the Spanish electorate -- cashiering the government that supported regime change in Iraq -- would be replicated in the United States in response to a terrorist attack on the eve of the presidential election." Will says that when times get tough, Americans rally around their government. President George W. Bush will be the beneficiary. And if terrorists hit the U.S. on American soil, I think that John Derbyshire's warning that the rest of the world watch out because all restraint will be thrown to the wind, will be quite true.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:41 PM

 
With friends like these ...

Foreign Leaders for John Kerry.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:35 PM

 
New e-zine

Neat stuff at the New Partisan. Run by editor-in-chief Harry Siegel, formerly of the New York Sun, NP covers music, art, politics, sports. Lots of fun.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:56 AM

 
Jonah wonders whether the work in wooing allies is worth it

Jonah Golberg has a longish post on how Spain changed sides from staunch American ally to (effectively) protector of terrorism everywhere and concludes with this thought-provoking 'graph:
"Why grovel for allies in the first place? If, at the end of the day, only those nations which truly want to be with us can be relied upon to stay with us then why jump through so many hoops to get allies in the first place? If something needs doing, it needs to be done. If we've got help, great. If not, so be it."
Goldberg admits early in his post that part of the reason for the allies-one-day, bystanders-the-next phenomenon is that the public of each ally-state is not generally in favour of being on side with the United States. If I recall correctly, according to a series of polling done last year, only Israeli citizens would be reliable allies to the U.S.; even Canada and the UK have publics that would provide aid and comfort to the enemy rather than help the United States. The logic of Goldberg's query is that the U.S. should go it alone. Perhaps it must.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:42 AM

 
Outsourcing hypocrisy

Writing in The Nation, anti-globalization brand-name Naomi Klein complains about a Thomas Freidman's New York Times column defending outsourcing as a way of combating terrorism. I won't delve into Klein's article. All I want to do is note that The Nation used a Toronto-based writer to attack outsourcing.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:53 AM

 
On socialists winning the Spanish election on the week terrorists strike

David Carr at Samizdata: "So disaster follows hot on the heels of tragedy." Nicely put.
Jonah Goldberg in The Corner: "If al Qaeda -- or any other terrorist groups -- conclude that such attacks will be rewarded at the polls then the war on terror is in real trouble and a lot of Western allies may be in jeopardy. Moreover, if this is really what's happened, John Kerry had better stop talking about how foreign leaders want him to win. The gist of Kerry's boasting is that if he's elected 'moderates' (i.e. accomodationists) will be ascendent. That's precisely the wrong message to send."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:19 AM

 
The follies of fair trade coffee

Over at Samizdata, Alex Singleton explains what's unfair about fair trade coffee:
"The real problem with 'fair trade' is that it is based on economic illiteracy. The low price of coffee is caused by production increasing by 15% since 1990, and supply is bigger than demand. This cannot be blamed on multinational buyers of coffee. There are simply too many people employed in coffee production. With new technology, the price may well decline further. In Brazil, five people and a machine can do the work of 500 people in Guatemala. The low coffee prices are a signal to exit the market, or switch up to higher value coffee.
[Fair trade' - though it helps some farmers - encourages people to stay in the coffee market and gives them confidence to increase production. That is all very well, but this has a downside. More supply means a lower price on the world markets. Perversely, 'fair trade' makes matters worse for the vast majority coffee producers."
As always, the solution is less government and misplaced compassion.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:13 AM

 
If Blair was not unpopular enough...

His government has released a report on the costs of drinking in its Alcohol Strategy Review. The Guardian says the report proves "we are a nation of booze hounds, consuming a staggering amount of beer, wine and spirits in a destructive relationship with alcohol that is costing Britain billions of pounds a year." And they needed a study to determine this?
After the four-year review, the government has determined that Britons drink too much: "three in five men and one in five women putting away more than the maximum safe limit." Among the direct costs: "40 per cent of all hospital accident and emergency costs are linked to alcohol and that, between midnight and 5am, 70 per cent of all A&E admissions are alcohol-related. Alcohol-related treatment costs the NHS £1.7bn a year." Now, I'm always skeptical of numbers in such studies as they tend to be exaggerated as special interests that have a disproportionate influence on government are clamouring for state intervention to solve the problem. You know that there will some kind of clamp-down on drinking including a prohibition against alcohol promotions such as the drink all you can for £10. Tony Blair should show the same kind of bravery after 9/11 against international terrorism and stand up against domestic healthy lifestyle fascists.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:09 AM

 
We in the West must always be on the ready

The Australian reports that post-9/11 security may have made us less safe:
"But because security at high-profile targets has been stepped up ­ coupled with al-Qa'ida's weakened operational ability ­ there has been a rising tide of soft target attacks.
Bombing a nightclub in Bali, or marching suicide bombers into an upscale restaurant in Casablanca or attacking a housing complex in Saudi Arabia requires much less planning and co-ordination than hijacking jets and flying them into buildings filled with people and symbolism."
It is said that generals are always fighting the last war. With those responsible for domestic security worrying mostly about airplanes, how many of our other public spaces become less safe? Al-Qaeda changes tactics but the West does not seem to notice.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:05 AM

 
A warning to the ostriches

This Telegraph editorial realizes, unlike the Democratic Party in the United States and almost everyone in Canada, understands that the world is at war:
"They [the terrorists] wish to destroy the whole basis of Western society - secular democracy, individual liberty, equality before the law, toleration, and pluralism - and replace it with a theocracy based on a perverted and dogmatic interpretation of the Koran.
That is why the suggestion that we should try to negotiate with such terrorists is so fatuous: there is nothing whatever to negotiate about. It has been suggested that, had Spain not backed America's invasion of Iraq, then the bombs in Madrid would not have happened. It has also been claimed that our Government could save Britain from further depredations by withdrawing troops from Iraq and condemning America's presence in that country.
But al-Qa'eda did not kill nearly 3,000 people in New York in order to persuade President Bush to change American foreign policy, and the idea that we could prevent the next al-Qa'eda outrage by any change in policy at all is just silly."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:01 AM

 
When socialists win, Islamofascism wins

Dan Mader on the vote in Spain:
"With 56% of the votes counted, Spain's conservative government appears headed for defeat.
If this holds, it will be a massive victory for the Islamofascists.
It will also mean that we are all a little more likely to die in a terrorist attack. If they do succeed in influencing the vote in Spain, then we have to believe that the terrorists will try to duplicate their success elsewhere.
Its a sad, sad day for the free world.
UPDATE (17:17 Eastern): The terrorists won. We're all a little less safe today."
May I suggest to voters everywhere: think globally, act locally by voting for the political party most dedicated to prosecuting the War on Terror/Expanding the Empire of Liberty. Our lives depend upon it.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:05 PM

 
Daifallah on Love

Adam Daifallah has some tough words for Rod Love. (For non-Canadians, Rod Love is a conservative political operative not a star in a the adult entertainment industry.) He takes Love to task because Love, who is Alberta manager for Blahlinda Stronach's campaign, says that people should support Blahlinda Stronach because she's an outsider, she's not part of The Club. Daifallah says that once Stronach and Love win power, they become members of The Club.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:26 AM

 
None dare call it Islamic terrorism

The media has generally gone out of its way to not assign blame to Al-Qaeda for the terrorist attacks this week in Spain. I know that when it is terrorism on this scale, it doesn't matter who did it. Whether it was the ETA or A-Q, it doesn't matter because terrorism is terrorism. The UK got more serious about the IRA after 9/11. I also know that there were initially some good reasons to wonder whether ETA was involved -- they are, after all, terrorists who want to disrupt the lives of the Spanish. But A-Q did, after all, take responsibility for it and there were some initial clues that would lead reasonable people to believe that, at the very least, there was an Islamic connection. Now we have word about the arrests of several Arabs and Indians that would suggest an Islamic connection.
Reuters: "Spain's intelligence service is '99 percent certain' that radical Muslims and not the Basque separatist group ETA are responsible for the train bombings that killed 200 people..." However, this article tries to paint partisan reasons for the radio station that reported this story; the socialist-owned private radio station (how do you like that!) blames Muslims while the centre-right government blames the ETA.
The Associated Press: "Spain arrested three Moroccans and two Indians on Saturday in connection with the Madrid train bombings, the strongest indication yet of a possible Islamic link to the attack on one of Washington's staunchest allies in Iraq." Note that this story reports arrests. That would imply that the government, or at least the branch of it called the police that does criminal investigation work, thinks that there is an Islamic connection. The announcement was made by Interior Minister Angel Acebes. This story, too, however, reports that partisan considerations are part of the blame game.
The New York Times: "Spain's interior minister said early Sunday that a videotape has been discovered claiming that Al Qaeda carried out train terrorist attacks on Thursday that killed hundreds, but that its authenticity could not be confirmed. Several hours earlier, Spain arrested three Moroccans and two Indians in connection with the bombings.
... 'We claim responsibility for what happened in Madrid just two and a half years after the attacks in New York and Washington,' said the man, according to a government translation of the tape, which was recorded in Arabic. 'This is an answer to your cooperation with the Bush criminals and their allies'."
The Washington Post: "...the suspects had been linked to a cellular telephone and a cell-phone card found Friday night in a gym bag that also contained undetonated explosives and wiring. The bag had been mistakenly placed among train luggage lost after the attacks. Police said they believed Thursday's attackers used the same technique -- wiring explosives inside gym bags and backpacks to cell phones -- to bomb the trains." That is, there is a fair amount of evidence that A-Q was behind the terrorist attacks in Spain.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:13 AM

 
Two great Kerry columns

If you read only one political commentary all week, well shame on you, but let it be David Brooks' dismantling of Senator John Kerry in the New York Times. Some choice 'graphs on Kerry perfecting the "foragainst method":
"The 1990's were a confusing decade. The certainties of the cold war were gone and new threats appeared. It fell to one man, John Kerry, the Human Nebula, to bring fog out of the darkness, opacity out of the confusion, bewilderment out of the void.
Kerry established himself early as the senator most likely to pierce through the superficial clarity and embrace the miasma."
And:
"In laying out the Kerry Doctrine — that in voting on a use-of-force resolution that is not a use-of-force resolution, the opposite of the correct answer is also the correct answer — Kerry was venturing off into the realm of Post-Cartesian Multivariate Co-Directionality that would mark so many of his major foreign policy statements."
And this one:
"The Balkan crisis emerged, and again the Congress seemed to face a tough decision, whether to authorize the use of American force. But then the Boston Fog Machine rolled in: 'It is important to remember that this resolution does not authorize the use of American ground troops in Bosnia, nor does it specifically authorize the use of air or naval power. It simply associates the U.S. Senate with the current policies of this administration and of the Security Council.' The vote, Kerry concluded, was over whether to associate with a process that would determine certain necessary conditions involving uncertain modalities, which must be explored, in order to reach certain desirable ends."
And finally: "Kerry has made clear that if he is elected president, the nation will never face a caveat shortage."
James Lileks has a great column on Kerry in the Cleveland Plain Dealer and those unnamed foreign leaders who supposedly told Kerry that he had to beat Bush in '04. Some choice 'graphs from that column:
About why those foreign leaders who supposedly told Kerry that he had to beat Bush in '04 don't matter:
"Sen. Kerry might be surprised to discover that foreign opinion doesn't concern your average NASCAR dad, who would prefer America to be strong and disliked than weak and beloved."
About what foreign leader it might be:
"The Kerry camp has no record of its candidate meeting with Blair or other foreign leaders, for that matter. Maybe he's referring to a seance. Maybe Neville Chamberlain is pulling for him from beyond the grave."
About why foreign opinion doesn't matter. Period:
"As the strongest nation in the world, we are apparently required to do what the weakest ones want, lest we waste their most precious commodity: sympathy. It's a common theme for those who value process over results and admire impotent international institutions whose primary output is thick, creamy paper stamped with interesting signatures and official seals."
On why Europe wants Kerry to president (hint: Europe looks stronger when America is weak):
"Europe can't fight its way out of a paper bag, because it spends half its money propping up its paper bag industry, and the other half on bureaucracies regulating the strength and thickness of paper bags. Europe can only be the equal of American power with the willing cooperation of a president who stays up late at night wondering whether chain-smoking leftists in cafes on another continent might greet his next state visit with giant mocking puppets."
On whether Kerry's nuanced approach is a virtue:
"The New York Times, explaining Kerry's innumerable flip-flops, says this: 'Some aides and close associates say Mr. Kerry's fluidity is the mark of an intellectual who grasps the subtleties of issues, inhabits their nuances and revels in the deliberative process.'
When 220 stories of skyscraper tumble into a mass grave, that's what you want in a leader. A nuanced response. Better yet: an inhabited one."
And I didn't even quote the two best lines.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:53 AM

 
Madrid and why it matters

Andrew Stuttaford in The Corner on why Madrid matters to more than just Spaniards:
"There’s little to add really about the horror in Spain earlier this week. All the adjectives have been exhausted – and they are all inadequate. The question that is being asked now is who is responsible – ETA (the Basque terrorist group) or some offshoot of Al Qaeda. The view seems to be that if ETA were the killers, then terrible though the tragedy was, it is essentially a Spanish problem. That’s too simplistic. Terrorist murder on this scale was, prior to 9/11, unimaginable, at least in the West. What al-Qaeda has done is to ‘raise the bar’ for all would-be terrorists. To get the sort of attention that they crave now takes more than the killing, say, of a judge or a policeman. It now requires the murder of dozens or more. If ETA indeed does prove to be guilty of this crime, they will have proved that they have learned bin Laden’s lesson all too well. The implications are appalling."
David Mader on how he felt after hearing about the terrorist attack in Madrid -- or why it matters Part II:
"I've actually found that in certain ways I've personally reacted to this Eleventh much as I reacted to the first. That mix of fear, anger and resolve, that indescribable but unique feeling is back. I didn't feel it after Bali, or after the UN attack in Baghdad, or after Mombassa, or after Turkey - though I was angered and upset after each of those outrages.
Is it Eurocentrism? In part. I think I see terrorism in the developing world as simply more likely, if no more acceptable. That's partially cultural prejudice, but I think it's also fairly rational. When terrorists strike in a developing country with relatively weak security infrastructure, it illustrates the necessity of development. When terrorism strikes in the heart of the developed world, it illustrates the precariousness of our security situation. If Australians aren't safe in Bali, they may at least be safe in Australia. When Spaniards are not safe in Madrid, we none of us are safe. Period."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:46 PM

 
Over-sensitive about suicide

I know it is a serious issue but the note at the end of a story in The Sun (UK) about how Britney Spears is depicted committing suicide in an up-coming video is a clear indication of editors at that paper being a touch too sensitive. The paper concluded the article with this: "If you have been affected by this issue and need advice, contact Survivors Of Bereavement By Suicide on 0870 241 3337, between 9am and 9pm." Imagine the possibilities of helpful tips at the end of every article. Or column. Martin Newland helpfully suggest at the end of Mark Steyn's Daily Telegraph columns that "Liberals upset with the truth in this column can contact Acme Anger Management at ...."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:23 AM

 
Harper to get first-round win

Former Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper is poised to become the Conservative Party of Canada's first leader. That is no surprise. But the Globe and Mail reports that he could win on the first ballot which goes against everything almost everyone has said since the beginning of this three-way race. The wildcard is Quebec whose 9,000 members (out of 250,000) will hold one-quarter of the points necessary to capture the nomination. The CW is that Blahlinda Stronach will win the lion's share in that province. She might but I don't think it will be as big a victory there as is often predicted. An unpublished poll early in the campaign had Harper and Tony Clement leading in Quebec. While I think Stronach has the numbers to overtake them, the fact is the early poll of existing members is significant because those who were already party members before the race began are likely more motivated to get out and vote in the leadership race; bought memberships, which is what Stronach's supporters are mostly presumed to be, are much less likely to vote. Just some things to think about as you wonder how Harper pulled off a first-round victory on March 20.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:12 AM

 
Blahlinda blog watch

I haven't been by the Blahlinda Stronach website for a couple of days (lucky me) and was not entirely surprised to find that her blog is no longer up (or at least easy to find). Her last entry was something like February 11; it is obviously difficult to campaign, single mother and blog at the same time.
Now if the candidate would just go away ...
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:55 PM

 
On Madrid

K-Lo in The Corner: "Really an amazing sight today, Europeans out protesting terrorism. May no other country have to realize terror that deeply..." The story reported that "Spanish royals and Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar headed the march in Madrid alongside Italian leader Silvio Berlusconi and EU President Romano Prodi demonstrating unity a day after what was also Europe's bloodiest bomb attack in 15 years." But how long 'til the EU stands in the way of prosecuting the War on Terror and Expanding the Empire of Liberty?
The Daily Telegraph reports that 8 million Spaniards took to the street to demonstrate against terrorism. The article has quite a startling and powerful image.
The Telegraph also has a wonderful editorial entitled "Spanish proudly defiant in the face of terror." Proudly defiant is the proper reaction to terrorism. David Gelertner has written that New York should erect a taller World Trade Center in proud defiance of the terrorists and their ilk who felled the first towers. Sort of a middle finger to the rest of the world.
The Wall Street Journal finds an easy lesson in Spain: the War on Terror is not over nor is it just America's war. "So much for the illusion that the global war on terror isn't really a war. That complacent notion, which has been infiltrating its way into the American public mind, blew up along with 10 bombs on trains carrying Spanish commuters yesterday on their way to work in Madrid."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:53 PM

 
If at first you don't succeed, whine a lot and then urge a new vote

Sheila Copps is proving why Paul Martin is right to want her out of the House of Commons. The Globe and Mail reports "Insisting that she wouldn't be muzzled by a 'code of silence,' she has called for a party investigation and a new vote."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:37 AM

 
Idiot Hall of Fame

It's been a while since we've inducted anyone into the Idiot Hall of Fame but it didn't take long to realize that California State Sen. John Vasconcellos (D) deserves induction. Vasconcellos has "proposed amendment to California's constitution would give 16-year-olds a half-vote and 14-year-olds a quarter-vote in state elections." And worse yet, he got three of his colleagues to propose the idea with him. Thankfully, as a constitutional amendment, his idea must get two-thirds approval by the legislature in order to appear on the November ballot. And then the people, not including 14- and 16- year-olds, will get to decide this issue. It is, as Assemblyman Ray Haynes (R) said, "the nuttiest idea I've ever heard." One can take solace in the fact that 16-year-olds and 14-year-olds wouldn't cast their half and quarter votes for a charlattan such as Vasconcellos. But he is still a bona fide Hall of Fame Idiot.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:33 AM

 
A sure sign the campaign is in trouble

Blahlinda Stronach's campaign team is asking for a delay in the leadership vote scheduled in ten days. They blame some membership number monkey-business but it is more likely her poor showing in the polls that leads to a desperate attempt to foist illegitimacy upon the leadership race. Er, I mean delay the leadership vote.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:24 AM

 
Great idea for Ontario Tories

John Tory, a Red Tory, will likely enter the provincial leadership race for the Progressive Conservatives. Frank Klees and Jim Flaherty, two conservatives, will be standard-bearers for the right. Good race. But I like David Mader's suggestion: "Of course, all this talk (and talk and talk and talk) about Canadian politics is giving my Yankee-loving self a headache, so I'd just like to say, for the record, that in the upcoming Ontario Tory leadership race I'll be supporting Ronald Reagan as a write-in candidate. As John Robson once said, the Gipper can always use the help."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:59 PM

 
Kerry's first marriage

What happened to it? Senator John F in Kerry (Ultra D, People's Republic of MA), ostensibly a Catholic, had it annulled. Andrew Sullivan has it covered, although he has a not-so-hidden agenda for doing so -- to discredit the pro-traditional marriage side of the SSM debate.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:45 AM

 
JO'S on Martha

John O'Sullivan has a possible point on which Martha Stewart can appeal:
"The final blow was the judge's decision that the jury could not be told that Stewart had not committed insider trading in the first place. Some members of the jury might well have assumed wrongly that if there was a cover-up, there must have been a crime to be covered up — and voted to find her guilty on that count.
That is perhaps the one point on which Stewart's appeal might succeed. Though the appeals court is rightly reluctant to challenge a judge's discretion in such matters, this particular exercise of it seems at least questionable to the lay mind. And it was the climax of a series of dubious legal decisions that descended heavily on Stewart's beautifully coiffed head."
Let's hope so.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:43 AM

 
A serious look at The Cabal

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Daniel Casse reviews James Mann's Rise of the Vulcans which is about the "hawks" surrounding President George W. Bush. Casse says that "the racial and ethnic mix of Mr. Bush's foreign-policy coterie is merely incidental. Far more important is its professional and intellectual pedigree." Unless, of course, you're Ad Busters or Patrick Buchanan, in which case it is all about ethnicity.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:41 AM

 
Paulitics

Today at Paulitics: Who Cares Tuesday and a long post on the Colorado Senate race (hint: the biggest blow to the GOP in the Senate in 2004).
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:35 AM

 
You don't have to be pro-life to find this a touch disturbing

How will you celebrate National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers? It seems odd that anyone, including Planned Parenthood, would encourage the public to send messages of support to those who make their livelihoods taking the lives of the tiniest among us. Joel Mowbray columnizes the absurdity of celebrating abortionists: "Most ordinary Americans who identify themselves as 'pro-choice' would be disgusted that abortion providers are being hailed as heroes. Even to people who support keeping the procedure legal, abortion is not something to be glorified." As absurd as this is, one can imagine this becoming a national holiday if Senator John Kerry (UltraD, People's Republic of MA) becomes president.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:41 PM

 
Coulter can be soooo good and soooo bad in the same column

Ann Coulter has a column on The Passion of the Christ that includes this laugh-out-loud funny line:
"In fact, Jesus' distinctive message was: People are sinful and need to be redeemed, and this is your lucky day because I'm here to redeem you even though you don't deserve it, and I have to get the crap kicked out of me to do it. That is the reason He is called 'Christ the Redeemer' rather than 'Christ the Moron Driving Around in a Volvo With a "Be Nice to People" Bumper Sticker on It'."
This proves that she gets Christianity. But then she does this: "According to liberals, the message of Jesus, which somehow Gibson missed, is something along the lines of 'be nice to people' (which to them means 'raise taxes on the productive')." So far, so good. Then ...:
"You don't need a religion like Christianity, which is a rather large and complex endeavor, in order to flag that message. All you need is a moron driving around in a Volvo with a bumper sticker that says 'be nice to people.' Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity (as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed'). But to call it the 'message' of Jesus requires. . . well, the brain of Maureen Dowd."
She can be so good it is frustrating that she is this bad. Kinda like Patrick Buchanan in the very early '90s before he went all the way to the dark side.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:25 PM

 
Worst government programs

Human Events has the list. Among them: Medicare Prescription Drug Entitlement; funding for the United Nations, Planned Parenthood and National Endowment for the Arts; farm subsidies.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:14 PM

 
New Liberal logo

Jay Jardine suggests an amendment to the latest changes to the Liberal Party logo. Personally, I prefer a duffle bag with cash spilling out of it.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:18 PM

 
Bye-bye NAC. Doubtful but wished for

The National Post has a good editorial on the financial troubes of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (for non-Canadian readers, the Canadian equivalent of the National Organization of Women) that is worth reading:
"NAC is now demanding $100,000 from Ottawa, no strings attached, to jump-start a renaissance. It mustn't get the cash. The feminist group had become one of the most pernicious and politically extreme special interests in the country before it fell on hard times, and it would be a delight to see it expire. This is a group, recall, whose last full annual lobbying day on Parliament Hill in 1998 resembled a freak show. Members visited MPs and harangued them in their offices. When other MPs agreed to attend a NAC briefing, they were booed, hissed and shouted at by the feminists in attendance. Is this how most Canadians want their tax dollars spent?
Lobby groups shouldn't be funded by the governments they seek to influence. Like all special interests and charities, NAC should survive or fail on the basis of the donations it can extract voluntarily from individuals and corporations. Compelling Canadians, through their taxes, to fund lobbies with which they disagree is unconscionable. Free-will donations and membership fees are the only true measure of a group's support.
NAC's claim to be the largest women's organization in the country was always phony anyway. It had almost no direct members of its own, but instead insisted it spoke for three million women because its 700 affiliate organizations -- such as church groups, the YWCA, women's business associations, labour unions, student groups and lesbian advocacies -- had among them that many members.
As much as it would be gratifying to see NAC close its doors, we don't hold out much hope. The group's recent alarms about going under mark at least the third report of its imminent demise in the past six years. On both previous occasions, it was saved by a last-minute government contract. The same is likely to occur this time. Still, we're keeping our fingers crossed."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:11 PM

 
Kofi is nothing

Trudeaupia on the official visit of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan:
"I have to say I found this bizarre. Kofi is being treated as if he were the President of the World or had some official diplomatic standing. That’s nonsense; he’s a bureaucrat, not a head of state. His is a consensus appointment whose job is an administrative one. His utterances are not the policy of some body with legitimacy, and in any case he serves no role in setting any policies the UN has, such as they are. Anything with teeth comes from the votes of the members of the security council, not pronouncements from Kofi. The rest of the nonsense comes from resolutions voted on in the General Assembly, which can safely be ignored as empty hot air."
This is mostly true, but the stupid things that the GA and various UN bodies do (such as pressure countries to allow spanking or report on the progress of programs that promote condoms among youth) are taken very seriously by the types of countries that treat Kofi Annan like a head of state. Such as Canada.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:08 PM

 
Odds are God exists

Really, scientists say so.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:09 AM

 
A bunch of neocons prevented Sheila Copps from winning the Liberal nomination

During Saturday's vote in Hamilton East-Stoney Creek that eventually saw Sheila Copps lose the Liberal Party nomination, Liberal Party attack dog Warren Kinsella complained: "Sheila could still win. The votes aren't in, as I write this. If she does, it will be against the odds - against a cabal who did all they could to drive her out." Does Kinsella mean that people with names like Perle and Frum and Wolfowitz engineered Copps' loss?
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:44 PM

 
Nobody covers the Anglican Church like the Midwest Consevative Journal

Lots of musings about recent and on-going developments by Christopher S. Johnson at his MCJ blog, but this line is hilarious anytime: "... there are only six sins left in the liberal Anglican religion (racism, sexism, homophobia, violence (defined as anything the United States and Israel do to defend themselves) and not praying in the direction of the United Nations building) ..."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:21 PM

 
I'm almost as pure a libertarian as Charles Murray

I scored scored 71 on Bryan Caplan's libertarian purity test. I took the test after a bunch of Cornerites reported their scores: Steve Hayward, 60; Andrew Stuttaford, 37 (37!); Robert P. George, 29 (he says that Aristotle would have scored lower but Aquinas about the same); Charles Murray, 72 (but an 85 in his heart); Jonathan H. Adler, 89; Rick Brookhiser, 40; Jonah Goldberg, 41; Ramesh Ponnuru, 73.
So just around Ponnuru and Murray. Not too shabby -- 71 out of 160 makes me a medium-core libertarian which is what I would consider myself, namely a libertarian-minded conservative.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:57 PM

 
Swine in the city

Email to The Derb in The Corner:
"Derb---Calling Sex in the City 'hog-swill' is inappropriate; hogs have much more attractive mating habits than the one-dimensional characters on that piece of over-hyped tripe."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:55 PM

 
Kakutani's false dichotomy

Jay Nordlinger in his Impromptus column today:
"Michiko Kakutani, chief book critic of the New York Times, had the following line in a recent review: '[Author James Mann] points out that [Condoleezza] Rice evolved from being a pragmatist (in the tradition of Henry A. Kissinger and her mentor Brent Scowcroft) to being "the prime mover behind the drafting of a new National Security Strategy that laid the framework for a preventive war".'
Um, sorry, but such war is pragmatic, or so say its advocates. We do not wage such war just for kicks, or out of some natural belligerence — most of us hate war, shocking as that may sound. No, we wage it so as to spare ourselves much graver, more destructive problems later. This is, in fact, pragmatic."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:37 PM

 
Sullivan on Kerry's liberalism

Andrew Sullivan is too miss to read reliably and too hit to miss reading for a day (although I often do). Today (scroll down):
"HOW LIBERAL IS KERRY? Not as liberal as Clinton or Carter or Kennedy. Or so says a poli sci professor."
Very nice.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:20 AM

 
The little guy always gets screwed when people fight for him

Barbara Amiel has a good column in the Daily Telegraph on short-sighted and increasingly oppressive minority shareholders. But the opening paragraphs on the persecution of Martha Stewart are a very nice illustration of why we should beware of the role of envy in public policy making or the administration of justice:
"The jury convicted the American lifestyle diva Martha Stewart of something last Friday but one suspects they don't quite know what. 'It's a victory for the little guys, who lose money in the market because of this kind of transaction,' explained one of the jurors mysteriously.
Stewart's investigation and trial have cost the American taxpayer tens of millions of dollars. Hundreds of millions have been lost by pension funds and investors on the near-50-per-cent decline in value of her company's stock; Martha Stewart Living may have to wind up its affairs if her conviction stands, with the loss of jobs for about 15,000 employees, plus sub-contractors. Not so easy to see how that computes as a victory for the little people, but those who were interviewed on the streets of New York proclaimed it 'the right thing to do'."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:12 PM

 
Should Canada adopt the primary system?

Adam Daifallah muses about it in a post (about Sheila Copps losing her nomination battle in Hamilton East-Stoney Creek) and says one of its upsides is that it will reduce the nasty little ethnic sign-up fests that many riding nominations become:
"It goes without saying that it's great to bring as many people into the political process as possible. But I do think it's a little unfortunate that this is how nominations are increasingly being fought -- candidates go out and activate specific ethnic groups, and drag them out to these meetings. These people often don't even know what they're getting into. Some people there yesterday could barely speak English.
Observing yesterday made me wonder about the 'closed' system we use here to nominate candidates, which is the reason campaigns do what Sheila did. Perhaps we should look at opening these things up like the US primary system, which would open the system up to everyone and likely reduce the instances of these ethnic recruitment campaigns."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:59 PM

 
Euro bureaucrats have too much time on their hands

Andrew Stuttaford points to this press release from Brussels on banana imports. Yes, seriously, banana imports. The EU bureaucrats will determine how many bananas Europeans (Europeans being defined as those under Brussels' regulatory regime) will eat:
"In view of accession of ten new Members States on 1 May 2004, appropriate arrangements have to be made to ensure sufficient supply of bananas to consumers in the new Member States. To this end, the current import volumes for bananas have to be increased for an EU of 25. The exact additional volume of bananas will be based on historical imports to the new Member States and is subject to negotiations with our WTO trading partners and hence still to be determined. For the new additional quantities, the current licensing mechanisms will apply (for details see background). In due time before the beginning of May, the Commission will determine the additional quantities of bananas to ensure a sufficient supply to the market of the enlarged Union, and will take the necessary measures which will enter into force as of 1 May 2004."
There are some further complex descriptions of the process. There is something less cumbersome that can make the same determination and usually with greater accuracy. It's called the market.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:53 PM

 
Anyone need to hire a loud-mouthed, out-of-touch former Heritage Minister

20-year veteran of Parliament Sheila Copps lost her fight for the Liberal nomination for the riding of Hamilton East-Stoney Creek. But wait a minute ... we may not have seen the last of Sheila. The Toronto Star reports that "perhaps she would run in another riding as a Liberal, maybe even in Quebec, according to one rumour circulating around the overheated corridors yesterday." Pass the tequila.
Andrew Coyne talks about the politics:
"You can talk about how ruthless the Martin machine is, and people will, but really, they had no choice. There was no way on Earth that Martin was going to include Copps in his cabinet -- I'm told during Chretien's reign he wouldn't even sit in the same committee room with her -- and there was no way in Hell she was going to go quietly. There could be only one resolution to this: a showdown, winner take all, Martin (via Valeri) v. Copps. And, as we've seen time and time again, Martin's control of this Liberal party is absolute."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:08 AM

 
Warren Buffet wants to pay more taxes

Really. And good for him. He says he doesn't pay enough. Despite the fact that Berkshire Hathaway Inc (Buffet's company) paid $3.3 billion in taxes last year, he wrote to shareholders in his annual letter "We hope our taxes continue to rise in the future -- it will mean we are prospering -- but we also hope that the rest of corporate America antes up along with us." Yes, that's right -- he wants other corporations to pay more, too. That's not good. If Buffet and his company want to ante up for a federal program -- heck, let 'em choose which one to subsidize -- he is most welcome to do that. But not everyone or every company can afford higher taxes. After all, what is another percent or two when you pull in billions.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:56 PM

 
Substantial Stronach

The Globe and Mail runs this headline today on a story about Conservative Party leadership hopeful Blahlinda Stronach: "Stronach strives to dismiss argument she lacks substance." As proof of her substance, the paper relates a story from a campaign stop in Atlantic Canada durign which she tells her political handlers that she isn't going to use a speech they prepared on rebuilding the military -- a serious topic that the campaign hopes will (in the Globe's words) "dispel criticisms that she is little more than a political phenomenon with no substance" -- and will instead just wing it with an informal talk. The Globe and Mail reports:
"What follows is a folksy address interspersed with jokes about a newspaper contest aimed at finding her a date. One of the old-timers in the crowd takes the bait, telling the former Magna International executive he'd gladly go out with her.
'We'll talk after,' Ms. Stronach says and winks, to great laughter from the gathered audience."
Ah, yes. Substance.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:30 AM

 
Lott on The Passion

Jeremy Lott on why the violence and gore of The Passion of the Christ is different from ostensibly similar movie violence and gore:
"For all the talk of ultra-violence and gore, the film isn't any harsher than your typical Martin Scorsese pic. But knowing where the story is going, the tragedy of what this man suffered despite his goodness and innocence -- I never felt anyone in Goodfellas was being unreasonably whacked, for example -- made watching it all the harder to bear."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:53 AM

 
Keeping the state out of the kitchen

The Economist reports that the United Kingdom might not need to get the state involved solving the so-called obesity epidemic. It appears that the United Kingdom has a great itch to get the state involved:
"On March 3rd John Reid, the health secretary, announced a three-month public consultation about the nation's health: in the current mood, that is likely to focus on obesity. Last week, a report on public health commissioned by the government cited obesity among its main worries; last month Tony Blair's strategy unit floated the idea of a 'fat tax' on foods that fuel obesity; and last year, the Food Standards Agency, the industry regulator, advocated a ban on advertising junk food to children." Reid says the Blair "government wants to be neither a 'nanny state' nor a 'Pontius Pilate state which washes its hands of its citizens' health'." My guess is that the Blair government becomes a hand-wringing nanny state: "we don't want to do this but we must for the health of the children."
But as The Economist notes, "it is not clear that the government can do much about it. There's no evidence that making fatty foods more expensive would put people off them; and in Sweden, where advertising to minors is already banned, children are as porky as they are in any comparable country." More importantly, with increased information about the health effects of obesity, there is evidence that people's eating and physical activity habits are being modified. The question remains: will the effects of this changed behaviour happen fast enough to mollify the state? Okay, another question remains: will the facts, such as those reported by The Economist, get in the way of new plans for state intervention?
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:50 AM

 
NDP is just so nutty

The Winnipeg Sun reports that at the Manitoba provincial New Democratic Party conference, party members will consider resolutions endorsing establishing a provincially run TV station, removing the provincial sales tax from bicycles (less cars, better for the environment) and condoms, and setting up closer relations with Cuba ("act unilaterally to trade, invest in and import goods and services from Cuba"). And for those of who think that this is just some out-of-the-mainstream party remember that the NDP form the provincial government in Manitoba. However, as the Sun helpfully reminds readers, 1) just because the resolution is put forward, that doesn't mean it passes and 2) even if it passes and becomes official policy for the NDP, that doesn't mean it is automatically government policy.
(Hat tip to Neale News)
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:30 AM

 
The Left's obsession with abortion

In the 2000 Canadian federal election campaign, journalists would ask Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day during every interview about his views on abortion. Afterward, they complained that he, Day, was obsessed with abortion. Now Reuters reports about the Los Angeles Times where an opera review was altered to adhere to the paper's enforced politically correct terminology:
"A Los Angeles Times music critic who wrote that a Richard Strauss opera was 'pro-life' -- meaning a celebration of life -- was stunned to pick up the paper and find his review changed by a literal-minded copy editor to read 'anti-abortion.'
Music critic Mark Swed said the copy editor was adhering to a strict Times policy banning the phrase 'pro-life' as offensive to people who support abortion, and didn't seem to realize that the epic Strauss opera 'Die Frau Ohne Schatten' had nothing to do with that politically charged issue."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:10 AM

 
Teachout on turn-offs

Great post, in its entirety, from Terry Teachout's great arts blog About Last Night:
"These three words, when used in the same paragraph, automatically turn my ears off:
(1) Offended
(2) Demand
(3) Apologize"
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:55 PM

 
Recent paulitics

Over at my political news blog (Paulitics) recent posts include the Colorado Senate race, a recent national poll and veep watch.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:26 PM

 
A healthy view of multiculturalism

Ferdinand Mount writes in The Spectator that multiculturalism is dead in the United Kingdom -- or at least in its new citizenship ceremonies. I suspect that reports of multiculturalism's demise are greatly exaggerated but it is nice to see that immigration rituals will now include a public declaration of fidelity to England and a pledge of "loyalty to the UK" and to "respect its rights and freedoms." New citizens will vow to "uphold its democratic values. I will observe its laws faithfully and fulfil my duties and obligations as a British citizen." Very nice.
Mount says that new immigrants that are serious about the new oath of allegiance are most welcome to England: "Nothing could be plainer or more unabashed in its ambition to cement national unity by declaring the existence of a single common culture, within which other minority cultures may happily nest and flourish but which is itself not to be sidelined or suppressed." This strikes me as the proper balance between the requirements of citizenship in a new country and a respect for one's own cultural heritage. Let's not call this sober understanding of diversity "multiculturalism," a term that is properly considered ugly because of its connotations with (often) official efforts to celebrate every immigrant's heritage at the expense of national heritage. Perhaps Pierre Trudeau's term to describe Canada's cultural make-up -- polyethnic -- will work?
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:58 PM

 
Quote of the day

George F. Will in his Washington Post column today: "It is axiomatic -- meaning, true outside of Washington -- that everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:14 PM

 
Two Americas

Hugh Hewitt writes in the Daily Standard that yes, John, there are two Americas. But, sorry Edwards, it is not the division between rich and everyone else that exists:
"The dividing line between Americans runs between those who are serious about the world and the nation and those who are silly on these subjects.
Silly people listen to Michael Moore. Silly people issue marriage licenses to couples ineligible to receive them because they feel that it is important to do so. Silly folks think Dick Cheney is still running Halliburton and that Halliburton is running the war. Silly people make ads for websites that feature George W. Bush morphing into Hitler. Silly people think we've got Osama bin Laden stashed away in a cave waiting for a September debut. Silly people look to Maureen Dowd for insight into the world."
Unfortunately, silly is breaking out of its tinfoil hat limits that for years kept silly outside the realm of dangerous. Now, formerly serious are becoming silly:
"Because many Americans have slipped into the silly category, the rest of us are beginning to forget that those folks are indeed silly. Some people once thought of as serious have adopted silly positions. Such as, for instance, Madeleine Albright speculating that the United States has Osama under wraps. We respect the office she once held and resist branding Albright as silly. And thus some small bit of credibility becomes attached to her bizarre thought-process."
When enough people do not recognize silly when they see it, what should be a straightforward re-election of a serious president becomes (in many people's minds) a question mark.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:13 PM

 
Moral/cultural issues affect economics

I've always thought that the dichotomy of fiscal and social conservatives was often exaggerated, with the actual divide often being an issue of emphasis of fiscal or social issues instead of holding either fiscal or social conservative views. That said, obviously there are fiscal conservatives who do not espouse morally/socially/culturally conservative views. Those conservatives should consider the following facts theWashington Post's George F. Will includes in a column on how America's aging population will affect its political future:
"On Jan. 31, 1940, a check, number 00-000-001, for $22.54 was issued to Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vt., making her the first recipient of recurring monthly Social Security payments. Then, in an act of dubious citizenship, she lived to 100, dying in January 1975, having received $22,000 in benefits. That did not matter because in 1940 there were 42 workers for every retiree. Today there are 3.2 to 1. In 2030 there will be 2.2 to 1. Nowadays parents have fewer children than they used to, the children are geographically more dispersed, and their sense of obligation is attenuated by distance and divorce."
Fewer children -- whether because of abortion or other lifestyle priorities -- and divorce have economic consequences that will include our ability to pay for social programs, mostly pensions and health care, in the very near future.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:08 PM

 
Why we should be glad young people don't vote

Fox News reports:
"A poll released earlier this year by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that 21 percent of people aged 18 to 29 cited 'The Daily Show' and 'Saturday Night Live' as a place where they regularly learned presidential campaign news.
By contrast, 23 percent of the young people mentioned ABC, CBS or NBC's nightly news broadcasts as a source."
I'm not saying that Jon Stewart or SNL are less reliable than ABC, CBS or NBC. (I'm definitely not saying that.) But certainly political knowledge gleaned from comedy -- irony, parody, smarmy asides and the like -- is not the way to form the informed voter.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:17 AM

 
Nooooooo!

Stephen Gillers, a professor of law at New York University, pens an op-ed for the New York Times making the case for former President Bill Clinton as the Democratic vice presidential nominee. The upside, as Gillers mentions, is a debate between vice presidential candidates Clinton and Dick Cheney.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:14 AM

 
Immigration: The 1960s effect

Immigration policy reformer Mark Krikorian says in The Corner of the immigration advocates that he often encounters:
"I never cease to be amazed at how the high-immigration side blissfully dismisses the assimilation implications of the fundamental changes that our society has undergone since the cultural revolution of the '60s. Multiculturalism is deeply rooted in every institution of our society -- every school, every church, every daycare denter, every corporate human resources department -- and we face a long, twilight struggle to root it out. How can we justify admitting 1.5 million immigrants, legal and illegal, each year?"
Well put. Not a decisive argument in the immigration debate but certainly one worth pondering. For the record, I'm agnostic about immigration policy although I tend to lean toward a restrictionist policy for cultural reasons.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:11 AM

 
Sobering Thoughts schedule

Posting will be infrequent for the next several weeks as I have a number of projects on the go that require my attention. Ditto for Paulitics. But drop by as I intend to post a few items several times a week. I expect only 3-5 Paulitics posts each week for the next month.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:14 PM

 
Support Sick Kids Hospital and check out blogger Adam Daifallah's curling

Details at Daifallah's blog. Also, some curling dude Wayne Middaugh will be at the charity event March 16.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:43 AM

 
Hitch or the kids

Andrew Sullivan says (scroll down) "When you visit college campuses as I do all the time ..." What's Sullivan doing hanging out at college campuses so much? One day he has a five-hour lunch with Christopher Hitchens, on another ... Oh never mind; college kids are certainly preferable conversation partners.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:40 AM

 
Books that should never have been

Terry Teachout links to (and participates in) a Baltimore Sun book pages symposium on the topic "What book do you wish had never been written?" Fun reading. Three stand out:
Teachout said: "I doubt that mass murder can be blamed, however peripherally, on very many books ('Mein Kampf' was less a cause than a symptom), but if ever a book were written that inspired the piling up of corpses, it was Karl Marx's 'Das Kapital.' Tens of millions of innocents were killed - and continue to be killed - in Marx's name, and whether or not the killers took it in vain, the indelible fact remains that the world would be a far less bloody place if that mad altruist had never been born and his well-intentioned book never written."
Lisa Simeone, a veteran broadcaster and host of National Public Radio's World of Opera: "'I'm OK - You're OK', by Thomas Harris. Once this book appeared in 1967, the psychobabble floodgates were open. Most Americans now not only think they're experts on everyone else and engage in fatuous 'analysis' of their peers, they also think they're 'OK,' even when they're not."
Steve Weinberg, an investigative reporter: "Any of Joyce Carol Oates' novels. Many literary types dismiss Oates' novels: How can anybody so prolific be considered great? But I have read almost all, starting with Them. Then I experience nightmares for weeks on end."
I could not come up with just one. There are so many from which to choose. I am tempted to follow Weinberg's example and condemn the whole Margaret Atwood oeuvre to the trash bin ... but ... ok, I will.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:35 AM

 
Comments

Please send comments to paul_tuns@yahoo.com.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:35 AM

 
Paulitics

Complete results of Tuesday's primaries, state by state, at Paulitics.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:34 AM

 
Kass responds to critics

Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics answers his (and the President's) critics in column in the Washington Post saying that politics did not come into play in naming new members of the council and came to the defence of the new nominees. Of the new nominees, Kass says:
"Both are known among their colleagues for their openness to discourse and their devotion to public deliberation and democratic decision-making ... Our new members are all people of distinction, ethical seriousness and intellectual independence, with the sorts of competences we need for the new and different work ahead."
On the idea that politics played a role in the appointments:
"Unfortunately, these membership changes were met with unfounded and false charges of political 'stacking' of the council. Such charges are as bogus today as they were when the council was formed. We shall continue to honor the diversities of our views, confident that the reports we write will contribute to public understanding and earn the respect of fair-minded readers."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:33 AM

 
The high cost of FDA regulations

David Gratzer has an extraordinary talent for putting big issues in the most intelligible terms. In a column for NRO yesterday, he said President George W. Bush needs to appoint a good head of the Food and Drug Administration. Gratzer notes:
"The FDA is an organization whose work falls largely off the public's radar. As a result, some may assume that its role is less than crucial. But the FDA oversees the regulation of roughly 25 cents of every dollar spent by consumers. This major role includes the approval of all new pharmaceutical and biotech drugs and genetically modified foods. The FDA, in other words, has an impact on what's in your fridge and in your medicine cabinet."
Gratzer reports several cases in which red tape slows down getting life-saving drugs to market -- that is, to patients who need them. Two astonishing facts about the state of excessive regulation:
1) "Since 1964, the total time required for drug development, from synthesis of the molecule to marketing approval, has more than doubled, now topping 15 years."
2) "Drug companies, according to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, spend almost $900 million to bring a drug to market. Thirty years ago, the cost was a mere $138 million (adjusted for inflation). The bureaucratic hurdles, in other words, have been set too high."
In the name of protecting patients, it is very likely a good many people have died or had to bare terrible hardships because of these regulations. Gratzer says someone who realizes that this state of affairs cannot continue must be appointed, and sooner rather than later.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:06 AM

 
The war against radical Islam is a Western and Muslim war against radicalism

While I think that the three concluding paragraphs of Jean-Christophe Mounicq's TechCentralStation column are bang-on, I found that the preceding 12 paragraphs not terribly interesting. So here are the final three paragraphs:
"'The Crisis of Islam' is real. Regardless of whether France is at war against Islam the fact is that Islam is at war with itself. Only Muslims can help their religion evolve towards modernity. Only Muslims can interpret all the violent statements against Jews and Christians contained in Koran as parts of a past history. Only Muslims can define jihad not as war against non-Muslims but rather as a personal and interior fight against evil. Only they can abolish the belief that women are inferior to men and that non-Muslims are inferior to Muslims. Only they can accept secularism, freedom and democracy.
Westerners can mostly do two things: first, help the moderate Muslims to win; second, make it clear to the radical Muslims that they will lose. The West is not doing well on the first point. The war against radical Islam is a cultural war, a war of ideas. The Saudis understand this: they spend billions of dollars every year to spread radical Islam throughout the world. Propaganda is not something Western states are good at. The way civil servants from the U.S. State Department have sold Bush's policy in Iraq demonstrates this.
At least Westerners are acting on the second point. George W. Bush is conducting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to help foster a positive evolution of Islam in the Muslim world. Jacques Chirac is making laws to foster a positive evolution of Islam in the Western world. Both can be criticized. Neither is assured of victory. But if they lose, we all lose."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:57 AM

 
Everything New Labour is Old Labour again

Daily Telegraph columnist Janet Daley says you can't teach an old political party new tricks as she finds that Tony Blair's Labour Party is reverting to form:
"There was a time, not long ago, when everybody who stood for office had to say it. New Labour got elected by promising to give us something called 'social justice' which would be in addition to - but would not interfere with - its new regard for private responsibility and initiative. That was the doomed contradiction of the Third Way: squaring the Thatcherite economic circle with Left-wing social control.
Well, now we know which side of this irreconcilable equation won out. What they meant by social justice was, it turns out, good old socialist wealth redistribution and a sinister degree of state intrusion on every aspect of our social and economic existence. That meant not only bigger, more interfering government, but also a pernicious inversion of the moral language that Labour had plagiarised from the Tories."
The whole column is well worth reading.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:48 AM