From The Loonatic Left

A Reverse Nigerian Scam?

Here is an interesting twist that arrived in one of my web-mail boxes:

Dear Nigerian:

Hello I have been referred to speak with you by our mutual acquaintenances and they assure me that you are a truly honorable and honest person of quality.  I have recently come into possession of a small fortune provided by investors and need to move it out of my country.  The sum of $7 million US was provided to me by investors who believe that my business will provide them a profitable investment.  I need to hide this money before they wake up and realize that it is gone.

If you will send me contact and banking information so that this transfer can be arranged I will send you the money.  For you efforts you can keep 10% of the balance plus all the interest earned while the money is in your possession.

Please respond to this writing as soon as possible so that we can resolve this to our mutual satisfaction and benefit.

<Name Withheld> Pajama Media/OSM

The name was not withheld in the anonymous e-mail I received but I'm withholding it here. Of course this is purely ficticious (and nearly libelous).  I believe that someone has been having some fun at these folks expense.

There seems to be a great deal of energy being spent insulting and denegrating the Pajama Media plan by bloggers who chose not to participate.  I asked for and was sent a legal document to join the group but after reading it decided not to participate.  My reasoning was fairly simple, this is not my job, it is a hobby.  Signing that document would turn my hobby into something else.  I have the freedom to ignore this hobby when I feel like it.  Of course my other hobbies don't come with huge VC funding opportunities and maybe in the end I will believe that I was a victim of my own short-sightedness.  Part of the reasoning behind not joining was the feeling that I could not pin down what the product was.  How is this endeavor designed to make money?  Is it just seeking web-based advertising revenue or is it a web based version of the Associated Press?  Maybe it is actually just another 'group blog'?

The group has raised venture capital (reports vary...either $7 or $3.5 million) and the site appears to be active.  I still don't know what the business of the venture is or how it is going to make money.  If the critical response is any indication, it is either going to be wildly successful or a completely bomb. 

Even if it bombs, why does anyone feel compelled to denigrade the attempt?  Some successful bloggers appear to be taking themselves way to seriously.

Washington Post Misleads Readers Again

This is an excerpt from one of the Washington Post news reports...I should probably put that in quotes...'news reports':

"Debate in Washington over when to bring troops home turned bitter last week after decorated Vietnam War vet Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and estimated a pullout could be complete within six months. Republicans rejected Murtha's position. (emphasis added)"

Republicans actually put it up for a vote...see here.  It was rejected.  That much is true.  Do you think the Washington Post is going to tell you the truth?  Oh simple reader...not on your life!

This was not a serious proposal...it was really just a Democratic Party publicity stunt.  It seems lately that this is the only thing the Democrats appear to do...engage in publicity stunts.  They are aided by the media who refuse to tell the truth about these silly childish stunts.  If the Democrats actually had a serious proposal for Iraq it deserves coverage and discussion...sadly they have none.  Not a single one.  Nada...nothing...at...all.

A party of spineless simpletons.  Where is the party leadership?

Why am I certain, you may ask, that this was just a publicity stunt?  Guess what the vote in the House of Representatives was?  Go ahead guess...

403 - 3  That is correct...403 members of the House of Representatives voted against the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.  Only three members voted in favor of this resolution.  The Democrats were actually mad that the Republican leadership said "OK...if you want to immediately withdraw U.S. troops...VOTE ON IT."  Thus caught in their own publicity stunt, Democratic lawmakers were angry that they had to either go on record as supporting such a horrendous violation of the public trust or they had to vote down their own publicity stunt.

Now how should that be characterized in a news report?  Was this a serious proposal?  Of course not!  The Washington Post could have written:

"The Democrats tried another variation of their regular anti-war publicity stunts and they got called out and had to publicly acknowledge that immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq is not such a swell idea.  It seems that more than just Republicans rejected Murtha's position, the measure failed 403 to 3.

But what of the Democratic Representative who proposed immediate troop withdrawal in his well televised publicity seeking news conference?  Surely he voted for this proposal...right?  Umm...No...Representative Murtha voted against this proposal.  No one really thinks immediate troop withdrawal is such a great idea...they just want to politically whine about it to their media toadies in news conferences.

Bush Approval Ratings

You would think that George W. Bush was going to run for office in 2006.  Of course he's term limited but his negative ratings are huge and there is much discussion about his potential impact on the Congressional mid-term elections.  The question that can not yet be answered is whether Bush's declining popularity will have any impact on Congressional races at all.  Since it can't be answered...let's try and prognosticate!

Some people have argued that at this point the Democrats are engaging in an identical mistake that Republicans engaged in with Clinton.  They are running against a candidate who is not running and doing it on a platform which is mere dislike for that unpopular candidate.  History shows that this is not the clear cut recipe for success that these partisans might think.  There are many reasons for this lack of success but the most common one cited is incumbency.

Congressional campaigns are based upon local issues and initiatives.  They typically pit Congressional incumbents with controlling name recognition against virtual unknowns who must first solve the name recognition issue before they can even dent the issue debate.  This power of incumbancy coupled with the 'local' issue aspect of most Congressional races reduces the impact of national issues on mid-term elections.

There is an exception to that basic rule.  That exception occurred in the 1994 mid-term elections when an anti-incumbent mania swept through the country and we all threw the bums out.  Newt Gingrich led this movement with his now infamous Contract for America.

There is no such movement happening today and it does not seem that the splintered Democratic party is capable of putting together a contract for much of anything.  The lack of Democratic leadership is astonishing in the face of what everyone should recognize is an opportunity for a 1994-like anti-incumbancy movement.  Sadly the only agreement between the Democratic factions is a near reflexive hatred for Bush.  It was not enough during the prior election and it won't be enough to turn Congressional races.

While Republicans are far from united on everything, they definately appear to have a unified foreign policy and a unified domestic agenda.  Against this general uniformity Democratic congressional leadership has a problem.  With a pro-life head in the Senate and a militant pro-abortion head in the House, the party is trying to walk in both directions on a key social issue.  With pro-war leadership in the Senate and rabid anti-war leadership in the House, the party can't even articulate a consistent position on what promises to be the pivotal issue in the up-coming election.  The party is further hampered by staking out a position of fiscal restraint along with huge spending increases for various domestic issues.  When pressed, an income tax increase appears to be the probable stated direction.  Ask Walter Mondale how well that tends to work as a campaign strategy.

Even in the face of an unpopular President, an unpopular foreign policy and an attacking media, the Democratic party is unlikely to make any headway without a real leader to help steer the party policy toward practical and useful ends.  That person has not emerged from the scrum of Congressional wannabes and the dissonant cacophany of empty rhetoric is ripe for political lampooning.  Most of the Congressional leadership appear as either performing clowns or empty suits.  It is hard for conspiracy theorists not to see Rove's blue print on this result but this is really just an extension of the destruction of the Democratic party which began in 1968 and has continued steadily ever since.  The anti-war movement in 1968 destroyed the Democratic party by splintering labor and the blue collar voters from the peace movement.

Those two factions literally went to war against each other and have been fighting for control of the party ever since.  Since Karl Rove was just a child at the time, we must credit him with the most inspired performance of any political strategist in grade school.  How does he do it?

My prediction...Republicans control both the House and Senate with a few seats changing but party control remaining.  Keep your eye on Ohio, Louisiana and Virginia Senate races.  The local issues could decide those congressional races.  A potential for two Repulican losses and one Democratic loss.

I told you so...

To those who are shocked about France...and now Europe.  Please read this...and then this...please also note the dates.

Facts are facts, and the when the facts show such a serious employment, discrimination and segregation problem, the outcome is not just predictable it is patently obvious.  This will not end until France and 'old Europe' change.  And I mean REALLY change.

The decrepit financial pit of liberalized socialism is staggering to the same sorry conclusion that destroyed communism as a workable economic/social policy.  It is all over but the violence.  After two weeks of near constant rioting even the most stubbornly foolish of the 'old Europe' defenders must be cringing in shame.

The U.S. Democratic party, and yes even liberals in Canada, should look closely at Europe.  This is what you are building toward.  Only stubborness can excuse the defense of economic policies which produced this catastrophy, but stubborness we've got!  The Liberal economic professor and New York Times columnist, Dr. Paul Krugman wrote a column which encapsulates the liberal separation from reality (hat tip to WSJ Best of the Web):

"Now, there's no reason a country can't have both an excellent health care system and a troubled economy (or vice versa). But are European economies really doing that badly?

The answer is no..."

What?  Krugman wrote this in July...the guy is supposed to be a trained economist!  Can he predict any worse than this?  He goes on to claim that it is all just a difference in priorities...  Oh sure, the priority in the United States is that you have the freedom and hope to advance and live a better life regardless of where you start from or who you are, whereas in France and old Europe you are basically screwed if you aren't born into it.

"Let's ask how the situation of a typical middle-class family in France compares with that of its American counterpart. The French family, without question, has lower disposable income. This translates into lower personal consumption: a smaller car, a smaller house, less eating out."

The French family also now has a burning car and looted streets as the 'have-nots' who are sick and tired of being frozen out of French society and sold a bill of goods are starting to exact revenge on a corrupt socialist system.

"But there are compensations for this lower level of consumption. Because French schools are good across the country, the French family doesn't have to worry as much about getting its children into a good school district. Nor does the French family, with guaranteed access to excellent health care, have to worry about losing health insurance or being driven into bankruptcy by medical bills."

I am sure that all of these unemployed and hopeless people who are looting and fighting the repressive French socialist disaster are relieved that they have a decrepit health care system and good schools.  Whew.  If they get injured firebombing their good local school...what luck!  No medical bills!

I know this is socially unpopular to say but...I believe Canada would be 'enjoying' identical uprisings but for the natural resources (oil production - rapidly depleting) which has supported the current economic boomlet.  Canada has a 6.6% unemployment down from a recent high of over 10%.  Unemployment in Canada is historically similar to European countries and shares another characteristic...near twice the unemployment rate for ethnic minorities or 'visible minorities' as Canada calls them.  Even today in the oil fueled economic boomlet, unemployment is much higher (12.5%) for 'visible minorities'.  Remember, Canada has an almost identical social welfare program to that of Europe and almost identical immigrant problems.

Next up...minority rioters in Quebec?  Hey it's the 'France' of North America!