Bankruptcy can't come too soon.

The NYTimes is now getting snippy with the WaPo. The editorial board's lack of objectivity is on full display and pathological. This is the result of the view that the press is supposed to be adversarial with those they cover, being promoted in our schools of journalism. It practically forces reporters to become obnoxious and unfair, and excuses breaches of civility and outright dishonesty.

The press has lost the trust and respect of a very large proportion of their supposed audience, as the string of media scandals over the past few years demonstrates. The Times is still trying to make a logical impossibility into something corrupt. The president declassified information that was being loudly and irresponsibly promoted by the angry press and Democrats, and they want us all to view it as a violation of national security. Except that their whole case, based on the "Bush Lied!" battle cry, is falling apart, and the Times is reduced to being shocked, shocked a phrase that turned out to be merely ambiguous.

The Icarus Factor

(I seem to have "wings" on my mind.)

I have mixed feelings about Bill Hobbs' losing his job. I went to BYU which is owned and operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If a BYU employee gained notariety by blogging a cartoon with the title "Mohammed Blows!" he'd probably be disciplined, but not fired. But if he became high profile and got bad press for the school, they'd probably can him.

I guess that's the price we have to be willing to pay for free speech. Tom Paine wasn't treated with kid gloves either.

But I've never read anything by Hobbs that made me think less of him, however, and for a rival who works for old media to attack him seems pretty CS. Without more from the university where he worked and from Hobbs himself, however. I find myself without enough information.

How's this for a koan?

When the the left wing flaps too much the eagle turns to the right.

More on those Non-Bioweapons Trailers

The American Spectator points to some information from three years ago that make the recent attacks on Bush's claim that the trailers were used for bioweapons look more dishonest than they already did. One has to wonder why, if they were for legitimate purposes, they had to be mobile. The media are so dead set on proving that Bush lied about something, they don't even stop to think how rabid they appear. The fact that there are a lot of moonbats eating it up doesn't make it any the less unethical.

More "Dignity of Islamic States"

Tom Friedman calls the current attacks on Israel by Hamas from Gaza "just plain stupid." Read the whole thing, free of the NYTimes Select surcharge.

More here.

I like it!

Republicans playing hardball, that is. They'd better, or they'll be hammered in November. The gaming by Dems of the immigration bills in Congress is a fair issue and they should be scorched for it. This practice of blocking amendments so that the majority can't vote to improve a bill is anthetical to what people expect of their government.

Did the Clinton Administration Give Plans for a Nuke to Iran?

Yes, says NYTimes reporter James Risen. You won't see this in the liberal media, but imagine if the Bush administration had pulled such a stunt.

Magog Speaks

Ahmadinejad is spouting more threats:

"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation," Ahmadinejad said at the opening of a conference in support of the Palestinians. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."

Ahmadinejad provoked a world outcry in October when he said Israel should be "wiped off the map."

On Friday, he repeated his previous line on the Holocaust, saying: "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

The land of Palestine, he said, referring to the British mandated territory that includes all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, "will be freed soon."

He did not say how this would be achieved, but insisted to the audience of at least 900 people: "Believe that Palestine will be freed soon."

Of course, who will want it if it's radioactive?

Ahmadinejad and his fellow Israel baiters don't give a straw for the Palestinians. They just use the Jews as a bete noir for their demagoguery, to distract people from their own failure to deliver freedom and prosperity.

He went on to say "The existence of this [Israeli] regime is a permanent threat" to the Middle East, "Its existence has harmed the dignity of Islamic nations." The DIGNITY of Islamic Nations? The dictionary definition of dignity is "being worthy of esteem or respect, inherent nobility and worth," or "poise and self-respect." How can you esteem or respect people who murder women, send children into battle, and finance and plan suicide bombers?

When Professors Don't Teach

It's more than sad, it's dishonest and shows a lack of reasoning skills. First, professors of something other than political science shouldn't be discussing politics in class. Second, if they can't defend their positions with logic and verifiable fact, and resort to bullying tactics, they don't deserve to be teaching anybody and should be fired. Unfortunately, tenure rules have left us with a bunch of freeloaders and demagogues like Ward Churchill who think that Academic Freedom gives them a license to plagiarize and agitate for causes. I don't send my kids to college to be indoctrinated, but to be taught objectively.

Another example. This time of a "professor" urging the interference with others' first amendment rights.

I watched.

The South Park episode, I mean. It wasn't really very funny, but it did make the point that this spate of sensitivity to Muslim irritability is pretty silly, and hypocritical for a "comedy" network to permit disgusting use of God or Jesus in a childish joke while knuckling under to Muslims. Where's the "theocracy" by Evangelicals we hear so much about? It doesn't look to me like religious people have all that much say in our popular culture. So why are our media treating Muslims like they're our new masters? I don't see any reason to go out of your way to offend Muslims but I feel that way about offending anybody's religion, except perhaps Scientology and Ralph Phelps.

I have to agree with Jeff Goldstein: Comedhimmi Central.

Give me a break!

Is there a columnist alive who HASN'T called for Rumsfeld to be replaced? How about taking all these jerks and let them write up a war plan. Keep them busy doing something other that running around with their hair on fire.

And while we're at it, tell all the retired generals out there to go back to their double-dipping and leave the government to the people we've elected. The media do not run this nation yet. And every Pentagon desk jockey and disgruntled general who didn't get his pet weapons program approved, should remember that he's RETIRED.

And that goes double for Brent Scowcroft, whose advice helped Saddam retain his dictatorship and condemned the Iraqi people to another decade of suffering.

Another fine example

of responsible use of free speech. MTV and Comedy Central are owned by the same company, no? Yes, it's Viacom.

"We believe revenue growth will be muted in 2006."

Not what the stockholders want to hear.

These are the people we're cowering from?

Moussaoui testifies and essentially seeks to be executed. The guy is an idiot.

If this is God's will, then he has ceased to be God.

My sense of fear for my nation continues, mostly because so many of us would rather fight Evangelicals than the Islamists who want all Americans to follow those who died on 9/11. We do all we can to weaken our President and then complain that he's too weak. We've got politicians running around like chickens without heads and they're supposed to be the leaders! Bush isn't Churchill, but he has the same instincts and will. He just doesn't have the rhetorical skill. And we have news media whose approach to national security is to duck and cover and hope the threat goes away.

Personally, I prefer confronting Iran now, rather than later. The only way I can see through this is to stand tough, let Russia and China know that they don't want to mess with us in this case and if Iran won't drop its nuke plans and allow full inspection, bomb its facilities. Yes, it's an act of war, but so is developing nukes to wipe Israel off the map. (I'm sure the Palestinians will rejoice at the return of their lands, even if they do glow in the dark.) We are the big dog in the world and we need to start acting like it and quit tiptoeing around Muslims.

Why should we trust the Times?

The NYTimes reports "Analysts Say A Nuclear Iran is Years Away." I want a guarantee. If their analysts are wrong, I want them to pay big time.

And Harry Reid is not a leader

The quotes from his speech on the floor of the Senate is a masterpiece of nonsense. He's excused by Al Kamen, while every nuance of everything George Bush has ever said is analyzed and any niggling discrepancy is pounced upon by the press as an indictment of him and his administration, as George of Seixon blog demonstrates.

Thanks to the media!

Howard Fineman probably didn't mean this as a criticism of his profession, but it is:

Today, the whole world is hostage—not only to Iran’s fanaticism but, ironically, to America’s diminished power, and the president’s diminished standing, in the aftermath of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Personally, I don't think our power or our president is diminished so much as our people, by the constant second-guessing, negativity, pronouncements of failure from people who never did anything riskier than sharpening a pencil. Our military might is unprecedented, but our culture is sinking into a morass, while the class of scribblers who claim to tell us the news are doing all they can to make it worse. And what for? They don't like the president the people chose. He's not urbane and well-spoken. He's true to his wife. And he embarrasses them with his old fashioned sense of patriotism, and his talk about (ugh!) freedom, democracy and delivering of an oppressed people from a thirty year nightmare. How gauche!

Now, people like Fineman are realizing that we're facing the possibility of a terrorist state with nukes, and all he can do is whine about America's "diminished power." Maybe Jimmy Carter didn't deserve that Nobel after all. I wish we could just hand the problem to France and the rest of the EU, who were more interested in profiting from Saddam's depredations than standing up for peace and honor. A united West might have a chance of facing Iran down, but they are calculating that the rest of the world hates us so much that they'll side with the oil producers. How about the big names at Time, Newsweek and the major dailies being assigned to the Teheran beat?

Fineman writes: "A nuclear-weaponized Iran is every sane person’s worst nightmare," but then proceeds to blame Bush for the fact that the nation isn't behind him. Guess what, Howard. There's a reason for the saying that politics ends at the water's edge. You can't tear down the president for year after year and expect the public to jump up and salute when you realize that you need him. You've assisted in the forgetfulness of what 9/11 meant to this nation, and painting our soldiers and marines as feckless screwups. Now you're facing the beast and you're wondering why he has become so bold. I suggest you read Major Mike's response, and give our warriors a little credit.

You talkin' ta ME?

Blogger has identified my blog as a potential spamblog. How depressing.

I spend a lot of time on it and reading other blogs, and this is the recognition I get?

I have had a problem with somehow getting my posts put up several times on the blog page, but I correct them as soon as I notice. That's the only reason I can see for this insult. I don't think I write unintelligible gibberish.

Actually, it's a good thing that they are trying to get rid of splogs. I just wish they could have been more tactful.

What would make you want to come to Utah?

The State of Utah just paid $400 grand for a new slogan: "Life Elevated" and some new graphics to advertise the state. My opinion of consultants has not been improved. A while back they promoted the slogan, "Utah, a pretty, great state!" Notice the comma between "pretty" and "great"? Most people didn't and even if they did, it was hardly going to make anybody want to come here. The comments from the hometown folk are kinder than I am. I think I agree with Garr Ovard.

The two main tourist attractions for Utah are the "Greatest Snow on Earth" and the National Parks. Maybe something about slopes and cliffs would work, but "life elevated" doesn't say anything, without something else.

There's a local brewery that names all its beers with names mocking the Mormon church adorned with sexy graphics. Its "Polygamy Porter" worked well, but it annoyed most of us Mormons. It also had one called "Provo Girl" based on St. Pauli Girl, but the only one that seems to have stuck was polygamy. They're promoting "Evolution Amber ale," with a dig at intelligent design. I guess that earns points with the non-Mormons who hate the local culture, but it seems kind of weak to me.

Our Quarter is coming up, and I'm worried they'll mess it up with too many symbols. A Sandstone arch, a skier and the Mormon Temple, for example. The non-LDS folks DO NOT want anything like the Beehive, Brigham Young, Covered Wagons or anything else to remind them that the state was settled by Mormons. If they have to have several images, I'd say use one from Arches National Park, one from Canyonlands, one from Bryce Canyon and one from Zions Park. Utah has more national parks than any other state. I just hope they don't use this "Life Elevated" theme or the ugly logo they sold us.

The fact is that when most people hear Utah, they think of Brigham Young, women in sunbonnets and covered wagons, and maybe the LDS Salt Lake Temple. It's pretty obvious that they don't think of a happening nightlife, and I don't think it's useful to focus so much on the past. Mormons don't want to be confused with the Amish, not that there's anything wrong with that. The problem is trying to describe the whole state without slighting one area. It's Red Rocks and Sandstone cliffs and canyons in the south and Mountains and snow in the north. Then there are the salt flats, and the Great Salt Lake, neither of which offer much to see or do. Maybe they should just choose "Big Love!"

Harry Reid, Villain

Ruben Navarrette:

Republicans were tireless in search of comprehensive, and bipartisan, reform. Sen. John McCain of Arizona joined with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to draft the guest-worker legislation, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter made that legislation central to what his committee sent to the full Senate. Sens. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and Sam Brownback of Kansas were vocal in their support. Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska offered a helpful compromise. And Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist showed leadership by reaching out to the other side.

Too bad you can't say the same for Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who was the villain in this drama.

Hector Flores, president of the League of United Latin-American Citizens, told me that he tried to impress upon Reid's office that it was important to get immigration reform done.

"Apparently, it fell on deaf ears," Flores said.

Reid claims it was GOP hard-liners who killed reform by running roughshod over Frist.

Baloney.

Ouch!

In the House, the Dems prevented the Republicans from amending their bill to make it less draconian, on the theory that they could use the bill as a club to pummel Repubs with in the fall. As though there were no reporters pointing that out.

In other words, the Democrats don't really care about solving the immigration problem. They see this as an opportunity to demagogue the Hispanics, as they've been able to do with African-Americans. Their basic aim is power not good government. Otherwise, they wouldn't be trying to sabotage bills designed to secure our borders.

Uglier to Some than to others.

How the world views America. Plus some interesting analysis. Note where India is, and that 17% of Americans are unfavorable to their own country. Probably Academics. It would have been interesting to see Iraq's results, but those would be hard to measure.

Some of the 17% are making asses of themselves. How can a free nation defend itself from enemies within?

The Liberal Forecast

Jonathan Alter on Iran: We're screwed. There's nothing we can do, but let them develop their nukes. The transcript will be on Radioblogger a little later today.

Your mission, Mr. Phelps . . .

is to go home and read he sermon on the mount until you understand what it means. "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:"

Go back?

I saw one of the signs being carried today saying "Honkies, go back to Europe". Do they really think the U.S. would be so attractive had it not been settled first by English colonists and then by other immigrants?

It reminds me of the Palestinians demanding the return of their land. Unfortunately, there's no way for Israel to turn over just the land as it was in 1948, empty desert with little or no economy. The basic truth is that the land in Israel is worth more because of who possesses it now than it was before they came. Utah, where I live, was home to roving bands of Fremont culture Indians who barely survived. Before the Mormons settled in Salt Lake Valley, Jim Bridger claimed he'd give $500 for the first bushel of wheat to be grown there. Lucky for him, nobody held him to it. The Mormon pioneers built irrigation systems and made the desert bloom.

So suppose we gave the Southwest back to Mexico. How long would it remain prosperous? My guess is not long. Most of them would want to know where the Gringos had gone, so they could go there and get jobs.

Glenn Reynolds seems to agree:

If they wanted to live in Mexico they'd have stayed in Mexico.

In fact, they're leaving Mexico because its corrupt and thuggish political culture stifles economic growth and opportunity. The people there are smart and hardworking, after all, and they tend to do just fine when they get here. They're leaving because being smart and hardworking is enough to get you ahead in the United States, but not in Mexico. And I suspect that if the Reconquista advocates somehow did get their way, and the Southwest United States became a new Northern Mexico, we'd soon have illegal immigrants crossing over into Kansas and Oklahoma for opportunity, because the Mexican political culture would have ruined things in Arizona and Texas just like it's already ruined them further south.

More Mitt

Mitt Romney has proposals for fixing education, following up all the press he's been getting for Massachusetts' new health care reform.

Was this in the model?

Bob Carter:

For many years now, human-caused climate change has been viewed as a large and urgent problem. In truth, however, the biggest part of the problem is neither environmental nor scientific, but a self-created political fiasco. Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero).

The number one objection I have to the hysteria over global warming is that it is all based on computer models which are nothing more than someone's theory about how the atmosphere and the ocean work. The only way to know if it's correct is to wait and see if the its predictions turn out. It presumes that the programmer understands every variable that can affect climate and how it does so. I think it would be highly irresponsible to cripple the world's economies based on this kind of data.

Will the Massachusetts Health Plan Work?

Sally Pipes says no. I don't know who's right, but I do like the idea that someone is trying a new approach. The real test will be whether the state can stick by its guns and tell people who don't get insurance no. Hospitals or doctors who continue to treat people without insurance will have to absorb the bills.

It's Explicit Now: Democrats want illegal aliens to vote

Their efforts to make it easier to register to vote have always seemed designed to allow non-citizens to vote, but they'd deny that. Michelle Malkin publishs a photo of a sign posted at the Dallas demonstration that clearly invites Mexicans here illegally to vote here. I hope this creates a backlash. I don't like the idea that people who have no knowledge of what or whom they're voting for, should be allowed to cancel out votes of those who do. And nobody who is here illegally should be allowed to vote. Why is that so hard to understand. Are these people so desperate for power that they'd destroy the system they want to govern?

Apparently they are. From Wizbang!:

The Dems have cornered the black voting collective with over 90% voting Democratic. If Democrats manage to corner the Hispanic vote like they have cornered the black vote, Republicans won't win the White House for a very long time. This is the Democrats' dream, so they are trying very hard to collectivize the Hispanic community by turning the immigration issue into another civil rights issue.

Michael Medved had a guest wacko today preaching that there is no difference between legal and illegal immigrants.

Update: The sign referred to above was photographed by LGF reader mjolnir910 It's not really a sign but a leaflet, apparently being passed out by Democrats.

The future

Michael Barone:

We're on a collision course. On the one hand, we have a private-sector economy that is vibrant, creative, continually transforming itself and producing millions and millions of new jobs -- overcoming the stagflation of the late 1970s, the sharp recession of the early 1980s, the savings and loan bailout of the early 1990s and the trauma of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. On the other hand, we have a public sector that is threatening to gobble up more and more of that economy as time goes on.

We know what things look like somewhere down the road: France.

Uf that doesn't scare you, you're oblivious.

Latest in Libbygate

This Washington Post editorial has the presidential non-leak about right.

Ms. McKinney Regrets

Ellen Alperstein comments on the current art of apologizing without admitting wrong. It now means "I'm sorry you were offended, not for what I said or did."

Of course, repentance means more than expressing sorrow. You have to change your behavior too. If that's unacceptable, I'm sorry but not repentant.

Something to Celebrate

It's Iraq Liberation Day. I think it's a little early to celebrate democracy, but they can be happy that Saddam is standing trial and that his sons are dead.

Jonathan Alter has a surprisingly positive piece on Mitt Romney. I think Romney is an impressive candidate and could beat Hillary hands down.

MARK STEYN'S LATEST. Read it.

Between him and Michelle Malkin the whole immigrant-handling apparatus of the government has been shown to be worse than impotent.