January 28-29, 2007
Jan 28 02:30 The Argument Against Jimmy Carter Jan 28 12:35 Great News From TwinsFest Jan 28 13:35 Big Trouble Heading In Harry Reid's Direction? Jan 28 15:55 District 15 Townhall Meeting Jan 29 11:42 Kerry Tells Foreign Audience "U.S. Is a Pariah" Jan 29 14:08 Resolution Negotiations Fail
Prior Years: 2006
The Argument Against Jimmy Carter
Kenneth Stein has written an article about his leaving the Carter Center. Suffice it to say that it's devastating to Carter.
While Carter says that he wrote the book to educate and provoke debate, the narrative aims its attack toward Israel, Israeli politicians, and Israel's supporters. It contains egregious errors of both commission and omission. To suit his desired ends, he manipulates information, redefines facts, and exaggerates conclusions.The question I'd love asking Jimmy Carter is this: How can you pretend that the goal of your book is to "educate and provoke debate" when it's so factually inaccurate and biased?
I ask you to think back to your favorite teachers. Didn't these teachers have their facts straight and their logic seamless and compelling? Where is the compelling logic in Carter's book? How many facts have been pointed out in the media alone? It's enough to bury what little is left of Carter's credibility.
Carter's preferred method in writing the book was to lay a brief and somewhat selective historical foundation for each chapter and emphasize the contemporary. I sought to anchor each chapter more deeply in history and political culture. He had little patience for precedent or laborious recapitulation of history. Too often it interfered with his desire to find action-oriented solutions, which befit his training as an engineer. For Carter, history and ideology bestowed unwanted moorings and unnecessary rigidities ; they shackled the pragmatism and flexibility of the would-be negotiator.When Stein says that Carter thought that "history and ideology bestowed unwanted moorings and unnecessary rigidities", what he's really saying is that historical truths proved cumbersome to Carter because he was already then living in a fantasy world devoid of real truth. Carter is nothing if not divorced from reality and indifferent to historical truth.
The Roots of Carter's AngerThis is where verifiable facts get in President Carter's way. That's why he simply ignores the facts.
Carter believes the conflict's resolution to be simple: After the Israeli government agrees in principle to withdraw fully from the West Bank, a dedicated negotiator like himself can usher in an independent, peaceful Palestinian state. That this has not happened is, in Carter's view, primarily due to the legacy of late Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin, not the fault of poor Palestinian decision-making or the Palestinian embrace of terrorism.
Carter believes that if the U.S. government reduces or stops its support for Israel, then the Jewish state will be weakened and become more malleable in negotiations. His underlying logic is based upon an imperial rationality that assumes Washington to have the answer to myriad issues besetting Middle Eastern societies. This plays into the notion in Arab societies that the cause of their problems lies with Western powers and other outsiders.That's about as wrong-headed of thinking as it gets. First of all, that's awful policy. It's awful policy because it's based on the U.S. favoring a terrorist nation over a full-fledged democracy who's biggest desire is to simply live in peace while raising their families. Arab nations have been used a myriad of excuses for the ineptitude of their governmental institutions. These institutions are inept because the terrorists aren't interested in a government that provides for their people. These terrorist governments are only interested in wiping Israel off the face of the earth.
Posted Sunday, January 28, 2007 2:31 AM
Comment 1 by USpace at 28-Jan-07 04:07 AM
Carter is such an appeaser and a laughing stock that he's a huge embarrassment to the US. The world will be better off when he's dead.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe knows
Jimmy Carter is garbage
.
Great News From TwinsFest
This year's TwinsFest, where the Metrodome is turned into the ultimate Hot Stove League meeting ground, has produced some quotes that have put a smile on this Twins fan's face.
"I know I have two more years here," Santana said. "I'm willing to work something out to stay with this team and in this city, wearing this uniform because I love this team."After Barry Zito signed a 7 year, $126 million contract with the Giants, Strib columnist Patrick Reusse suggested that Twins fans enjoy Johan until his contract expired & he left for a big payday, presumably in Yankee pinstripes. Now it appears as though Johan wants to retire as a Twin. Having the most dominant southpaw since Koufax tell you that he wants to play his entire career with your team is about as good a reason to smile as there is. It gets better though:
"I'm in no hurry," Santana said. "At the same time, I think the sooner the better, and the cheaper it will be."'Smiling Carl' Pohlad has to be smiling when told of that quote. Santana won't come cheap but having a guy signed to pitch into his mid-thirties is great. Better yet is that Johan is capable of dominating for a couple months at a time. Simply put, he's the best pitcher in baseball right now. Last season Johan won the 'Pitcher's Triple Crown', leading AL pitchers in wins, strikeouts & ERA. Predictably, he won his second Cy Young award in three years. Predictably, it wasn't even close; Johan was the unanimous choice for the award.
If that news isn't enough to make Twins fans smile, then I'll give you this good news:
"This is a great organization," Nathan said. "This a great city. My family loves it here. We are comfortable here. So we'd love to talk about it and see where we are at and see if we are on the same page with Terry."Joe Nathan is one of the best closers in baseball. No closer is automatic but Nathan is awfully close. When the Twins got him, he threw a dominant fastball, often clocked in the 95-98 mph range. Since then, Nathan's worked hard & developed a first class curve & a nasty, unhittable slider.
The thought of having Johan at the top of the rotation & Nathan at the back end of the bullpen has put a huge smile on Ron Gardenhire's face. The reason why these things are possible is directly related to the Twins' amazing comeback last year. Because of that, Twins tickets are selling like hotcakes on a cold wintry morning. Here's what Twins' beat writer LaVelle E. Neal III said in his article:
Single-game ticket sales are more than brisk. Season-ticket sales might top 10,000. The 2007 season attendance might reach 2.4 million.The Twins have never sold 10,000 season tickets. Not even after their World Championship seasons of 1987 & 1991. If they draw 2.4 million people to their games this season, it will be their highest attendance total since 1988, when they became the first AL team to draw 3 million fans through their gates.
Oh, and there's the new ballpark scheduled to open in 2010.
It all allows the Twins to think big this year. Ace Johan Santana big. Closer Joe Nathan big.
That's pretty good news to get with a mere 19 days until pitchers & catchers report to Ft. Myers.
The only way this news could be better is if it could warm up the temps around here.
Posted Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:35 PM
No comments.
Big Trouble Heading In Harry Reid's Direction?
This LA Times article is potentially disastrous news for Senate Democrats.
It's hard to buy undeveloped land in booming northern Arizona for $166 an acre. But now-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid effectively did just that when a longtime friend decided to sell property owned by the employee pension fund that he controlled.Haven't we heard of Harry's real estate bargains before? Did Reid think that nobody would notice? Frankly, Dingy Harry has gotten more great deals than any American politician in my lifetime.
In 2002, Reid (D-NV) paid $10,000 to a pension fund controlled by Clair Haycock, a Las Vegas lubricants distributor and his friend for 50 years. The payment gave the senator full control of a 160-acre parcel in Bullhead City that Reid and the pension fund had jointly owned. Reid's price for the equivalent of 60 acres of undeveloped desert was less than one-tenth of the value the assessor placed on it at the time.
What's worse news for Democrats is that they're betwixt and between on this. If they don't make an example of Reid's shady land deals, then they'll be seen as totally corrupt. Remember that Reid short-changed an employee pension fund, giving them only 10 cents on their retirement dollar. Based on this article, the assessor valued the property at more than $100,000 per acre. I'm not a real estate expert but that seems dirt cheap in a hot real estate market.
If they do make an example of him and expel him from the Senate, that gives Jim Gibbons, the Republican governor or Nevada, the power to name Reid's successor. If the Democrats don't make an example of Reid, people will know that they aren't worthy of the public's trust. They'll know that Democrats will sell out anyone for a buck.
Believe it or not, it gets worse:
Six months after the deal closed, Reid introduced legislation to address the plight of lubricants dealers who had their supplies disrupted by the decisions of big oil companies. It was an issue the Haycock family had brought to Reid's attention in 1994, according to a source familiar with the events.Can you say quid pro quo? It's difficult, if not impossible, to conclude that this was slush money paid to Reid for his intervention on a constituent's behalf.
If Reid were to sell the property for any of the various estimates of its value, his gain on the $10,000 investment could range from $50,000 to $290,000.That's probably the most conservative thing that I've heard from the LA Times in ages. Based on their own reporting, Reid paid $166 per acre was "less than one tenth" of what the assessor valued the land at. Frankly, I'm skeptical of that assessment. Frankly, I can't imagine this land not being worth $50,000 per 1/3 acre lot, not $166 per acre. That would put Reid's eventual profits alot higher than $290,000.
Based on this information, this deal makes Hillary's futures deal all those years ago look modest. And that takes some doing. That takes alot of doing.
In a statement, Reid's spokesman Jon Summers said that the transaction was not a gift and that the price was due to the property's history and the fact that only a partial interest was sold. Reid's action on the lubricants issue was unrelated to the sale and reflected the senator's interest in fairness for small businesses , Summers said.RIIIGGGHHHHTTT. Harry Reid, the small businessman's hero. That should be his campaign slogan the next time he runs. That is, if he isn't run out of the Senate before that. If he's such a friend of small business, why would he have ripped of this small business's pension fund that badly?
Because an employee pension fund had owned the land Reid purchased, labor law experts contacted by The Times said, a below-market sale would raise additional questions. Pension fund trustees like Clair Haycock have a duty in most cases to sell assets for their market value, the experts said.Let's suppose for the sake of discussion that Reid didn't push legislation for this 'small business owner'. Let's stipulate for this discussion that he simply paid 1/10th of the market value of the land, keeping in mind that Reid essentially bought this from the employees' pension fund. At a time when pension funds are badly underfunded, this is serious business.
"I think this would have been considered a potentially serious issue" at the time, said Ian D. Lanoff, who led the Labor Department's pension division during the Carter administration...
If there is justice in this world, Harry Reid will be run out of town on a rail & Republicans will have a 50-50 split in the Senate. The bad news is that I doubt that there is justice in a Democrat Senate.
Can you say 'Democrat Culture of Corruption'?
Posted Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:36 PM
No comments.
District 15 Townhall Meeting
Yesterday, my MMG blogging partner Leo & I attended a town hall meeting with Sen. Tarryl Clark, Rep. Larry Haws and Rep. Steve Gottwalt. The meeting's topics were the environment & interacting with your legislators.
Follow this link to read Leo's observations, too.
One thing that stood out for me was a presentation by a gentleman who talked about the watershed districts west of St. Cloud. The districts were called Sauk watershed & Sauk 2. This gentleman said that the Sauk 2 watershed district had been disbanded by the legislature but that the taxpayers of that watershed district were still being levied a tax that went to the operation of the watershed district. The amount of taxes collected for Sauk 2 ran into the $300,000 range. (For those not familiar with Central Minnesota, the Sauk watershed got its name from the Sauk River.)
If that isn't bad enough, someone suggested that the watershed districts should have been combined. We were told that that's what was proposed & that that idea was rejected.
Another gentleman stood up & identified himself as having worked in the environmental movement. This gentleman lamented how "the environment has gone downhill the last 20 years." Frankly, I found that statement ridiculous.
Twenty years ago, I fished in amateur bass tournaments on central Minnesota lakes. Two of the most popular bass tournament locations were the Horseshoe Chain by the town of Richmond and Clearwater Lake just east of Annandale. Both were great fishing lakes but the water clarity was almost zero. Many thought that the culprit in the Horseshoe Chain's problems were the raw materials getting dumped into it from a nearby industrial plant. Today, the water clarity on Clearwater and the Richmond Chain have dramatically improved. In fact, water clarity in Clearwater is almost 6'. That's pretty dramatic improvement considering that the clarity was less than 6" when I fished it the first time.
After the meeting, Sen. Clark stopped to talk with Leo & I. I asked Sen. Clark if adopting a zero-based budget was a possibility. Sen. Clark said that that's something they were looking into and that it might happen for the '08 legislative session but that there wasn't enough time to adopt it for the '07 session. Not willing to let it go at that, I asked if they would at least schedule oversight hearing that would identify the wasteful spending that's already there. I was assured that they would be holding vigorous oversight hearings. (I phrased the question specifically to establish the fact that waste existed & that it was just a matter of determining how big the amount was.)
Pressing forward, I then asked Sen. Clark why six tax increase bills were introduced the first week. She said that "there were really only 2 tax bills, one to lower property taxes, the other to raise them." She assured us that the other bills weren't going anywhere and that they "were introduced by individual" legislators and "weren't part of the leadership's agenda."
Let's consider the fact that one of those proposals is a constitutional amendment to raise the Minnesota sales tax 3/8ths of a cent. That type of legislation isn't something that just happens. That's something that is carefully planned.
I was skeptical from the start that these proposals were chance happenings. I'm now totally convinced that these proposals were orchestrated by the Senate majority leadership based on conversations with various state GOP legislators. One legislator told me that the first week's bills were "designed to tell" GOP legislators who was in charge. This was confirmed by Rep. Gottwalt, who told of veteran DFL legislator Cy Thao telling Steve "You guys won't get one thing passed this year--you know that, don't you?"
After corresponding via email with House Assistant Minority Leader Laura Brod,I've been put on the e-mail list of GOP press releases. I told her that GOP legislators should use these press releases to announce the GOP legislative initiatives and amendments that get voted down on straight party line votes. I said that they should also include all the times that the DFL hides behind procedural tactics to prevent debate on GOP proposals. I was assured that that would become their first communications priority.
The truth is that all the happy talk about bipartisanship & "the era of partnership" is an illusion. It doesn't exist in any meaningful way. That's how life works when you're in the minority. Elections have consequences. This should be a clarion call to GOP activists that we need to have our legislators' backs. This should be our notice to recruit great candidates for 2008's elections and to work our buns off to get those candidates elected. GOP apathy isn't acceptable, especially when the GOP legislature is working hard on bedrock conservative principles.
Rep. Brod said that they aren't perfect & that it's possible that GOP activists might not like all the votes. I told her that I didn't expect ideological purity. I said that working hard on the issues nearest & dearest to GOP activists' hearts was good enough for me. Here's what Rep. Brod told me in an email about that subject:
We have got to keep the fire going and make sure the activists know that the House Republicans are fighting for them and their conservative philosophies.If they're pursuing our interests, then having their backs is the least we can do in return.
Originally posted Sunday, January 28, 2007, revised 19-Oct 3:15 AM
No comments.
Kerry Tells Foreign Audience "U.S. Is a Pariah"
That's what CBS News is reporting.
Kerry was asked about whether the U.S. government had failed to adequately engage Iran's government before the election of hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005.We're only isolated in Kerry's mind. His accusations are more myth than fact. This is what happens when unserious people talk about serious issues. He's also trying to sell myths to the Davos crowd, myths that they know aren't truth. When he hints that it was President Bush that walked away from Kyoto, he's gotta know that he was one of 95 senators who voted against it before President Clinton signed the treaty. Everyone in that audience knew that.
Kerry said the Bush administration has failed in addressing a number of foreign policy issues.
"When we walk away from global warming, Kyoto, when we are irresponsibly slow in moving toward AIDS in Africa, when we don't advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards, we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy," Kerry said.
"So we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle East - in the world, really. I've never seen our country as isolated, as much as a sort of international pariah for a number of reasons as it is today."
When Lurch says "when we are irresponsibly slow in moving toward AIDS in Africa", he must be talking about the Clinton administration because President Bush has earned high marks from international AIDS organizations for his administration's policies.
The most outrageous statement he made, though, was saying that America is isolated in the world. In Kerry's thinking, it's all because we aren't using diplomacy enough. That's absurd. The truth is that Kerry is a pacifist appeaser. He has been his entire life in the Senate. He was a pacifist when Ronaldus Magnus installed Pershing missiles in Europe. In fact, Kerry predicted an escalation in the Cold War. Instead of an escalation, the Cold War ended when the people, not Mikhail Gorbachev, tore down that wall.
Kerry said the government needs to use diplomacy to improve national security. "We need to do a better job of protecting our interests, because after all, that's what diplomacy is about," he said. "But you have to do it in a context of the reality, not your lens but the reality of those other cultures and histories."What he's talking about is anyone's guess. The best time to use diplomacy is when the other nation is worried about our response to their reckless policies. I call it the Reagan Principle. You negotiate with the wind at your back. You don't negotiate just for the sake of negotiating. When you negotiate just for the sake of negotiating, you can't win.
Posted Monday, January 29, 2007 11:44 AM
No comments.
Resolution Negotiations Fail
Robert Novak is reporting that John Warner has rejected Biden's overtures:
The Democratic plan was for Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden to sit down over the weekend with his longtime Republican colleague, Sen. John Warner, and hammer out a consensus bipartisan resolution opposing President Bush's troop surge in Iraq. But Warner, who has been making backroom deals for 22 years in the Senate, informed Biden late last Thursday: No deal.Warner's decision marks a turning point in the defeatist resolution debate. It's also proof that bloggers and other activists have impacted the debate. Let's admit that the NRSC pledge has given these senators pause. Let's admit that our calls to GOP senators have essentially given them a spine transplant.
Warner wrote that the "will of the Senate" should be determined in "open" session, not closeted negotiations. That killed the Democratic leadership's dream of passing a Biden-crafted anti-surge resolution by 70 votes or more. Such a proposal now cannot get the 60 votes needed for cloture to end a filibuster (and could fall short of the 50 senators needed for a simple majority). Conceivably, no resolution at all may be passed by the Senate.
One of Biden's advisers told me then that the negotiations should prove no problem because they were willing to accept "about 90 percent" of Warner's resolution. Democrats complained that its present wording left the door open for further troop increases, and some questioned its first paragraph affirming the president's constitutional role as commander in chief. Such language was supposed to have been massaged during the weekend.This is a defeat for Biden, who fancies himself a serious policymaker. The truth is that Biden has positioned himself on the wrong side of this issue. I'm not pretending that the Iraq War is popular. It clearly isn't. What I'm talking about is the fact that most Americans want us to win. They want to see our military win.
But Biden was surprised late Wednesday afternoon to receive a blunt letter from Warner and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, the most conservative Democrat in the Senate. They asserted that they and other co-sponsors of the resolution "believe that issues set forth in [the resolution] should occur as a consequence of the will of the Senate, working in 'open' session, during floor debate and consideration." In other words, no private negotiations.
The truth is that America is pro-victory. It's just that our politicians have heard from us so they know what to believe.
Posted Monday, January 29, 2007 2:09 PM
No comments.
