How many socialists does it take to change a light bulb?
One to petition the Ministry of Light for a bulb, fifty to establish the state production quota, two hundred militia to force the factory unions to allow production of the bulb, and one to surreptitiously order an American light bulb. -- Anon.
"It is only because science today is so dominantly funded by the government that restrictions on federal funding can wreak the devastation they have--severely hindering a promising area of potentially life-saving medical research."
"If science were left free, as it should be, funded solely by private sources, a scientist would not have to plead the merits of his work before a majority of politicians, however ignorant or prejudiced by religious or other dogmas they might be.
"The government should get out of the business of funding science. But so long as it is involved, it must scrupulously respect the separation of Church and State. Its funding decisions must be made on rationally demonstrable, not faith-based, grounds. Bush's veto clearly violates this principle."
"This research has the potential to rescue millions of individuals from painful and life-threatening diseases. Anyone who places the welfare of a few undifferentiated cells above that of actual human beings cannot claim to value human life.
"There are no rational grounds for ascribing rights to an unconscious cluster of cells smaller than a grain of sand. But the opposition to embryonic stem cell research is not based on reason--it's based purely on religious dogma. From the development of anesthesia to the introduction of birth control, religion has consistently opposed scientific and medical progress. Today, with their assaults on evolution, cloning, and stem cell research, the religious right is attempting to drag us back to the Dark Ages.
"Anyone who values human life must stand up for science and against President Bush's attempt to impose his religious agenda on America."
"Instead of excoriating Hezbollah and helping Israel to annihilate it, President Bush and other leaders urged that the victim, Israel, not cause 'excessive' damage to the aggressor--and begged that no harm come to Lebanon's terrorist-supporting government. Were Israel to follow such calls, it would have to leave in place the terrorist leadership and infrastructure that works to abduct, blow up and slaughter Israelis.
"The obscene premise governing so many of the West's leaders is the belief that we have no moral right to defend ourselves against the forces of Islamist barbarism.
"All of this can serve only to encourage Islamic totalitarian groups to intensify their war on Israel--and the West."
The criticism that Israel is using a "disproportionate response" to the kidnappings of its soldiers is an attempt to morally disarm Israel and make Israel out to be a bully. This notion is ludicrous when considered in the full context: Hezbollah and Hamas initiated the current crisis in an ongoing war against Israel's right to exist. Notice that no one cried "disproportionate response" when Hamas demanded 1,200 prisoners in exchange for one Israeli hostage. Hamas and Hezbollah aren't playing a game of proportions, why should Israel?Israel, an outpost of freedom in the Middle East, has every right to use whatever means necessary for her long-term interests to defeat those who are warring against her. All the "disproportionate response" critics are accomplishing is to empower Israel's enemies to wage more war, harm more Israeli citizens and escalate the violence. They are kicking Israel when she is down, when she needs our support the most.From The Jerusalem Post: Chirac: Israel has gone too far.French President Jacques Chirac castigated Israel for its military offensive in Lebanon on Friday, calling it "totally disproportionate," while he and other European leaders expressed fears of a widening Middle East conflict that could spiral out of control.Referring to Israel's attacks Friday on Lebanon's international airport and other transport links, the latest in a three-day offensive, Chirac asked aloud whether Lebanon's destruction was not the ultimate goal."One could ask if today there is not a sort of will to destroy Lebanon, its equipment, its roads, its communication," Chirac said during an interview in the garden of the presidential Elysee Palace to mark Bastille Day, the French national holiday.From Russia to Spain, leaders voiced concern at the escalation of the conflict, with Lebanon now drawn into the spiral of violence that has long been the mark of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.In Russia, President Vladimir Putin called on all sides to stand down."All the sides that are involved in the conflict must immediately cease military action," he said before a G-8 summit this weekend in St. Peterburg. ...In Spain, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero warned Israel that it was "making a mistake" to attack Lebanon and said that both the EU and the United Nations must secure "an immediate cessation of the hostilities.""One thing is defense, which is legitimate, and another is a counteroffensive of widespread attack," Zapatero told Punto Radio. "It won't bring anything other than an escalation of violence."The Vatican, the seat of the Roman Catholic church, echoed that remark - and the fear of a widening conflict."In fact, the right to defense on the part of a country does not exempt it from respecting norms of international law above all for that which concerns the safety of the civilian population," said a statement by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican's No. 2 official.Pope Benedict XVI was following the situation, the statement said, warning that it risks "degenerating into a conflict with international repercussions."From FoxNews: G8 Leaders Agree on Statement About Mideast Fighting.Leaders of the world's wealthiest nations agreed Sunday that three Israeli soldiers kidnapped by terror groups must be returned as a first order of business, and that all sides must put down their arms to resolve a conflict that is tearing up both Lebanon and Israel's northern region.Members of the Group of Eight, the world's industrialized nations and Russia, issued a consensus statement that they say sends a "strong message" on the Mideast crisis.Bush is still ridiculously urging "restraint" from Israel, but at least we're sending them jet fuel for their warplanes.Some critics of our inclusion of the Pope in this cartoon are trying to distance the Pope from the comments of Cardinal Sodano. But this news report quotes the Pope as follows:"In recent days the news from the Holy Land is a reason for new and grave concern for all, in particular because of the spread of warlike actions also in Lebanon, and because of the numerous victims among the civilian population."A very relevant observation at Tigerhawk that I think also applies Israeli strikes in Lebanon. (via Alan Fang)There has been some complaint about Israel's reactions in Gaza as "asymmetrical." Those complaints are, frankly, silly. Military actions in war are meant to be asymmetrical and lead to victory. They are not meant to be measured to achieve a stalemate.More from Pope Benedict XVI: Pope makes new appeal for peace in Middle East."In reality, the Lebanese have the right to see the integrity and sovereignty of their country respected, the Israelis the right to live in peace in their State, and the Palestinians have the right to have their own free and sovereign homeland," a message from Pope Benedict read, as released by the Vatican Information Services on Thursday.The Lebanese surrendered their sovereignty when they continued allowing a terrorist state to exist within their borders. Palestinians leadership has never demonstrated that they would create anything but a terrorist state, and they have no right to that.
From Cox and Forum:
We're hoping that Israel continues to vigorously defend herself and refuse negotiations with Hezbollah and Hamas for the kidnapped Israeli soldiers. In our cartoon "Non-negotiable" we celebrated such an aggressive response. But it should be remembered that the terrorists' tactics have worked for them in the past. A FoxNews article yesterday noted this fact in passing:
Israel has carried out several prisoner swaps with Hezbollah in the past to obtain freedom for captures Israelis. These include a January 2004 swap in which an Israeli civilian and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers were exchanged for 436 Arab prisoners and the bodies of 59 Lebanese fighters. In 1985, three Israeli soldiers captured in Lebanon in 1982 were traded for 1,150 Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners.
The Jewish Virtual Library has more on the issue: Israel-Hizbollah Prisoner Exchange (2004):
In exchange for the bodies of three Israeli soldiers, missing since October 2000, and one Israeli businessman, abducted in October 2000 under questionable circumstances, Israel released more than 430 Arab prisoners on January 29, 2004. Those released by Israel included 400 Palestinian prisoners who were released to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Another 29 prisoners from Arab nations, and a German-citizen who worked with Hizbollah, were flown to Germany and then most went to Lebanon. In addition, the bodies of approximately 60 Lebanese terrorists were handed over to the International Committee of the Red Cross at the Israel-Lebanon border near Rosh Hanikra.The prisoner exchange was the latest example of Israel's determination to bring its soldiers home, dead or alive. In 1985, Israel freed 1,150 prisoners in exchange for three Israeli soldiers kidnapped in Lebanon by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)-General Command. Many of the Arabs who were freed became leaders in the first Palestinian intifada. ...In the wake of the morning rush hour bus bombing in Jerusalem's upscale Rehavia neighborhood, some last minute voices were heard urging the government to stop the prisoner swap. MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) told Maariv, "Yesterday this murderous organization promised us a 'surprise,' so we must stop the release of 400 terrorists before we discover that they've put us in a death trap." According to Dr. Shmuel Bar, a senior research fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, the message this swap sends to the Palestinians is that "the only way in which anyone can succeed in freeing prisoners is Hezbollah's way of abducting Israeli soldiers and citizens … We're going to be sorry for this."
The Intelligence & Terrorism Information Center has more information on Hezbollah's ongoing war against Israel.
The Wall Street Journal editorial below points out that the economic growth of the past three years, encouraged partly by tax cuts, has resulted in an increase in government revenues, as rising incomes have increased government's take, despite the slight decrease in tax rates. The Journal then asks, "Since when do liberals object to a windfall for the government?"
The obvious rejoinder is: since when do conservatives applaud it? Unfortunately, the answer is: for a long time. The Journal is harking back to a long "Supply Side" tradition of evading the fundamental question of the proper role and moral limits on government and instead proposing lower taxes and free markets merely as a "practical" means for achieving the goals of big government. [emphasis added]
But as Grover Norquist points out (and the Journal concedes), this leaves the rapid expansion of government spending unchecked—creating the conditions for more federal budget crises in the future, no matter how fast America's producers work to make the economy grow.
The real news, and where the policy credit belongs, is with the 2003 tax cuts. They've succeeded even beyond Art Laffer's dreams, if that's possible. In the nine quarters preceding that cut on dividend and capital gains rates and in marginal income-tax rates, economic growth averaged an annual 1.1%. In the 12 quarters—three full years—since the tax cut passed, growth has averaged a remarkable 4%....This growth in turn has produced a record flood of tax revenues, just as the most ebullient supply-siders predicted. In the first nine months of fiscal 2006, tax revenues have climbed by $206 billion, or nearly 13%. As the Congressional Budget Office recently noted, "That increase represents the second-highest rate of growth for that nine-month period in the past 25 years"—exceeded only by the year before. For all of fiscal 2005, revenues rose by $274 billion, or 15%....
Remember the folks who said the tax cuts would "blow a hole in the deficit"? Well, revenues as a share of the economy are now expected to rise this year to 18.3%, slightly above the modern historical average of 18.2%. The remaining budget deficit of a little under $300 billion will be about 2.3% of GDP, which is smaller than in 17 of the previous 25 years….
Individual income tax payments are up 14.1% this year, and "nonwithheld" individual tax payments (reflecting capital gains, among other things) are up 20%. Because of the tax cuts, the still highly progressive US tax code is soaking the rich. Since when do liberals object to a windfall for the government? ["Soaking the Rich," Wall Street Journal, July 12]
"Hamas won a landslide to become the ruler of Palestinian territories, and Hezbollah is part of Lebanon's government and has a devoted mass following. Both gained power through U.S.-supported elections; both gained unearned legitimacy for their vicious war to exterminate Israelis and Americans. Winning power with the aid of their enemy confirmed for these Islamic totalitarian groups that the West will abet its own destroyers.
"America's self-defense entails crushing Islamic totalitarianism--not ushering its jihadists into political office and galvanizing them to redouble their war against us."
RM: I heard you say in a lecture that you went back to The Fountainhead when you were having trouble with the section on integrity in your book Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand [OPAR], and that that proved to be very helpful. Is that correct?
LP: Yes, but it's misleading to single out integrity. In OPAR, I tried to reproduce exactly Ayn Rand's essential thought on everything relating to philosophy. So I steeped myself in her work, including The Fountainhead, for every topic. The Fountainhead doesn't offer an explicit epistemology, but I certainly returned to it many times for the sections in OPAR on independence, sex, selfishness versus altruism, physical force and the like. I milked The Fountainhead of everything I thought essential. For instance, at the end of the section on productiveness, I quote from a scene with Austin Heller and Roark, which contains one of my favorite lines in the novel. Heller says: "After all, it's only a building. It's not the combination of holy sacrament, Indian torture and sexual ecstasy that you seem to make of it." Roark answers: "Isn't it?" That's a wonderful way to describe in condensed form the three components of genuine creative work—the three essential elements of the inner state of a creator. I just wish that in my work I'd had less Indian torture and more sexual ecstasy.
In a rapidly changing and unpredictable world, individuals and organizations need a clear set of fundamental principles to guide their actions. At BB&T we know the content of our business will, and should, experience constant change. Change is necessary for progress. However, the context, our fundamental principles, is unchanging because these principles are based on basic truths.
BB&T is a mission-driven organization with a clearly defined set of values. We encourage our employees to have a strong sense of purpose, a high level of self-esteem and the capacity to think clearly and logically.
We believe that competitive advantage is largely in the minds of our employees as represented by their capacity to turn rational ideas into action towards the accomplishment of our mission.
But, said Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, "While Gates and Buffett are brilliant businessmen, they and other philanthropists ignore the fundamental cause of poverty, including poor health care, around the world: lack of capitalism. Wherever and to whatever extent capitalism exists, the productive ability of individuals is unleashed, enabling them to make their lives progressively better. The West used to be as poor as Africa today; it is capitalism that made us rich."
"If the tribalist or religious dictatorships of Africa and the Middle East do not renounce their destructive political systems and adopt capitalism, even $100 billion in charitable handouts will make little difference in their lives."
"Anyone who is truly committed to helping the world's poor should first and foremost use their charitable dollars and their public platforms for the promotion of capitalism.
It is now firmly established, repeated ad nauseam in the media and elsewhere, that the debate over global warming has been settled by scientific consensus. The subject is closed. It seems unnecessary to labour the point, but here are a couple of typical statements: "The scientific consensus is clear: human-caused climate change is happening" (David Suzuki Foundation); "There is overwhelming scientific consensus" that greenhouse gases emitted by man cause global temperatures to rise (Mother Jones).
[...] Global warming science by consensus, with appeals to United Nations panels and other agencies as authorities, is the apotheosis of the century-long crusade to overthrow the foundations of modern science and replace them with collectivist social theories of science. "Where a specific body of knowledge is recognized and accepted by a body of scientists, there would seem to be a need to regard that acceptance as a matter of contingent fact," writes Barnes. This means that knowledge is "undetermined by experience." It takes us "away from an individualistic rationalist account of evaluation towards a collectivist conventionalist account."
In short, under the new authoritarian science based on consensus, science doesn't matter much any more. If one scientist's 1,000-year chart showing rising global temperatures is based on bad data, it doesn't matter because we still otherwise have a consensus. If a polar bear expert says polar bears appear to be thriving, thus disproving a popular climate theory, the expert and his numbers are dismissed as being outside the consensus. If studies show solar fluctuations rather than carbon emissions may be causing climate change, these are damned as relics of the old scientific method. If ice caps are not all melting, with some even getting larger, the evidence is ridiculed and condemned. We have a consensus, and this contradictory science is just noise from the skeptical fringe. ["Climate consensus and the end of science", Financial Post, Friday, June 16, 2006]
From the Investor's Business Daily editorial page: Friend Or Foe?.
The grisly deaths of two American servicemen show how hard it is to fight a war in which the enemy knows no rules and civilians can't be distinguished from combatants. Maybe it's time to make it easier.There's a method in the madness of those who kidnapped, tortured and murdered Pfcs. Kristian Menchaca, 23, and Thomas Tucker, 25, who were manning a Baghdad checkpoint with a comrade who was killed in the assault.
The jihadists want to give momentum to those in the U.S. such as Rep. John Murtha and Sen. John Kerry who want to bring the boys home either now or by a certain date. ...
This is a war where terrorists routinely kill innocent civilians and booby-trap their bodies so others will die as well. They use civilians as shields and masquerade as civilians, hoping overly cautious Americans will become their next prey. They follow no rules. They wear no uniforms. They could be behind any door. They could be the next person you see. They could be the last.
As war critics mourn three jihadist suicides at Gitmo, we have three dead soldiers who might have met their fate simply because, after Hamandiyah and Haditha, they took too long to determine if their kidnappers were friend or foe. If they'd killed their assailants, would they now also be accused of killing "innocent" civilians?
The cartoon is based on a suggestion from Philip Hannum.
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."
From CBS News: Iraq Terror Chief Killed In Airstrike.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most-wanted terrorist in Iraq with a $25 million bounty on his head, was killed when U.S. warplanes dropped 500-pound bombs on his isolated safehouse northeast of Baghdad, coalition officials said Thursday.U.S. military spokesman Maj. Gen. William Caldwell showed a picture Abu Musab al-Zarqawi with his eyes closed and spots of blood behind him after he was killed by an air strike. Caldwell also showed a video of the attack in which he said F-16 fighter jets dropped two 500 pound bombs on the site. ...
His fighters led a wave of kidnappings of foreigners, killing at least a dozen, including Arab diplomats and three Americans. Al-Zarqawi is believed to have wielded the knife in the beheadings of two of the Americans, Nicholas Berg and Eugene Armstrong, and earned himself the title of "the slaughtering sheik" among his supporters.
From FoxNews: Zarqawi Was Mastermind Behind Iraq's Bloodiest Attacks.
The string of kidnappings of Westerners by his followers terrorized foreign workers in Iraq, forcing them to limit movements and take up costly security precautions.Among the other hostage slayings claimed by Al Qaeda in Iraq were American Jack Hensley, British engineer Kenneth Bigley, Kim Sun-il of South Korea and Shosei Koda of Japan, whose decapitated body was found dumped and wrapped in an American flag.
Canadian authorities decided to move quickly against a suspected homegrown terror ring and head off any attack on Ontario targets after undercover Mounties delivered bomb-making materials in a sting operation, according to a news report Sunday. [...] Police arrested 12 adults, ages 19 to 43, and five suspects younger than 18 Friday and Saturday on terrorism charges, including plotting attacks with explosives on Canadian targets. The suspects were citizens or residents of Canada, and police said they had trained together.From The National Post: Nevermind foreign terrorists, why is Canada growing its own extremists?
They are young, militant and Canadian. And according to senior counterterrorism authorities, they have been plotting large-scale terrorist attacks on Canadian soil. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service acknowledged this week it has been investigating groups of "homegrown" extremists. In candid testimony to the Senate national security committee, the agency went on to say that these young followers of the "al-Qaeda ideology" have been plotting against targets within Canada."They are not looking to Afghanistan, the U.K. or anywhere else," Jack Hooper, the CSIS Deputy Director of Operations, testified on Monday. The exact targets of these young terrorists were not revealed, but it is their profile that is most shocking: young Canadian Muslims who have somehow become radicalized while growing up in Canada.They are "homegrown." In other words, they have emerged from within Canada, rather than infiltrating it from abroad. They are insiders, not outsiders like Millennium Bomber Ahmed Ressam, who was behind Canada's last major terrorism scare in 1999."Increasingly, we are learning of more and more extremists that are homegrown," says a declassified CSIS report obtained by the National Post. "The implications of this shift are important." Across the Atlantic, the term "European Jihad" is now used to describe the new generation of young Muslim extremists who not only live in Europe, but also consider it a legitimate terrorist target.
"A package of incentives presented Tuesday to Iran includes a provision for the United States to supply Tehran with some nuclear technology if it stops enriching uranium — a major concession by Washington, diplomats said." [US to give Iran nuclear technology]"The package includes a promise of Western technical help in developing peaceful civilian nuclear energy if Iran stops enriching uranium, a waiver of U.S. legal restrictions to allow export of some agricultural technology, access to U.S. aircraft parts or new Boeing Co. planes to upgrade Iran's aging fleet and U.S. and European backing for Iran to join the World Trade Organization, diplomats and others said." [Link]
Unless someother development occurs, Iran will do the same. To paraphrase a famous line: "Those who do not study the lessons of history are bound to repeat its mistakes."The proper response to Iran see End States Who Sponsor Terrorism and Iraq: The Wrong War.From Cox and Forkum:In the early 1980s, alarmed at North Korea's construction of a nuclear reactor capable of yielding weapons-grade material, America tried to induce the North to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. By 1985, after much stonewalling, Pyongyang finally agreed to ratify the treaty--but then demanded military concessions in return for promising to forgo nuclear weapons. Rather than dismissing these demands as extortion by a hostile nation, by 1992 the United States had agreed to cancel its military exercises in the area and to withdraw U.S. nuclear weapons stationed in South Korea; the South gave up its nuclear program and also offered a non-aggression pact and economic benefits. During this period, meanwhile, the North, bolstered by guarantees of security and the West's willingness to swallow its lies, completed two reactors capable of yielding weapons-grade fuel.
In 1993, after preventing required inspections of its nuclear facilities, Pyongyang announced its intention to withdraw from the treaty. Our response? More "diplomacy"--in the form of the "Agreed Framework," brokered in 1994. Under this scheme the North agreed to freeze its plutonium program in exchange for two light-water nuclear reactors (putatively for generating electricity) and, until the reactors were operational, 500,000 metric tons of oil annually (nearly half its annual needs). The United States, along with Japan and South Korea, paid for these lavish gifts. The agreement also provided for the lifting of trade and diplomatic restrictions, previously imposed as penalties for North Korea's aggression against its neighbors.
This shameful deal openly rewarded the North--already closer to acquiring nuclear weapons--for its aggression and lies, and furnished it with the means to become a worse threat. And indeed, by 2003--when the North actually did withdraw from the treaty--it was clear that Pyongyang had continued secretly to develop weapons-capable nuclear technology. [Elan Journo, Diplomacy" Aids North Korea's Nuclear Weapon's Program]
Iran is only months away from joining the club of nations that can make a nuclear weapon, Israel's prime minister said in a recent interview. "The technological threshold is very close," Ehud Olmert said on CNN's "Late Edition" in an interview taped Thursday and broadcast Sunday. "It can be measured by months rather than years." Asked whether he believes Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would halt his nation's nuclear-enrichment program under international pressure, Olmert said, "I prefer to take the necessary measures to stop it, rather than to find out later that my indifference was so dangerous." Some observers disagree with Israel's characterization, saying Iran is five to 10 years away from being able to make a nuclear weapon.