The Opinionated Bastard

Bush made all the big decisions correctly in the Global War on Terror. While he’s flubbed some of the details, his opponent seems to indicate that he would have made all the big decisions incorrectly in the GWOT. Given that, I must choose Bush.

I don’t know if this is true or not, but it should be…

Supposedly “Kerry” sounds like Kiri in Kurdish, which means “his penis”.

From Anticipatory Retaliation which had an interesting round up of Iraqi opinions on the candidates. (Only one was for Kerry.)

Read about it here

Bush, with 279 electoral votes.

Done with the help of these two websites:

TradeSports, which has state by state betting.

Electoral Vote Calculator

And of course Marketocracy which leads me to trust traders over pundits.

And I’ve only been somewhat sympathetic to the Swift Vets. I read their book, and found that they were more angry at Kerry for his anti-war activities then anything else they talked about.

But I think the Swift Vets, if anything, showed that we really mistreated our Vietnam vets, that there was this huge underlying anger by them against the media image of Vietnam veterans. The Swift Vets tapped into that to transfer some of that anger to Kerry. How appropriately, I cannot say.

But I think that all of us, left or right, should watch this video. If you’re a Kerry supporter, ignore the anti-Kerry part of the message at the beginning and end, but watch the images of our soldiers in Vietnam doing good instead of evil. Its too bad we had to have an election to see those images.

From Captain’s Quarters:

Once the Kerry campaign learns to do math in the morning

I don’t know why this morning would be any different. The Kerry campaign could never do budget math, what makes you think they could do electoral math?

I just heard a very upset Kerry voter on NPR, and spent an half hour iChatting with a friend who was surprised that Kerry lost. Here are my open answers to them.

From InstaPundit:

I too am worried about what Matthew Yglesias calls Bush Unleashed, at least so far as spending and social legislation goes. Democratic hopes that Bush would somehow be compelled to govern like a Democrat, for no clear reason that I can see, were always destined to be dashed, but the pickups in the house and Senate mean he’ll have a freer hand than I was expecting when I endorsed him.

Jeesh Glenn, you’re being a pessimist. I thought you were a small-l libertarian?

What if Bush used his “mandate” to:

1. Cut Spending
2. Fix the Income Tax system.
3. Reform Social Security.
4. Scare Iran into reforming on their own without us doing anything.

That’s what I’m hoping for…to hell with moving to the right socially, what if Bush moved way over to the right fiscally? Wouldn’t that be cool?

So first, a blogger writes a funny post called CANADIAN ARMY FORTIFIES BORDER TO REPEL REFUGEE ONSLAUGHT FROM THE SOUTH.

Then CNN posts No Canada safe haven for Democrats.

That’s just funny!

I subscribed to Kos for a bit, but eventually I dropped him because he was too crazy.

Today Wizbang pointed a Redstate (sorry, he messed up the link) posting out showing that all of the candidates Kos endorsed lost.

Somehow, that doesn’t surprise me. I’m trying not to gloat, but my problem with the Democrats is the whole moonbat thing. I was talking to one of my friends today, and he had bought into the whole moonbat line.

Barack Obama won in a landslide.

He’s Black, but no one really sought to comment on that but me, and I think that’s pretty cool.

Colin & Condi in 2008!

Surprising conclusion? Let’s follow that up.

I subscribe to a wide range of political magazines, some of which are far left. I like to get sample from a wide range of opinions. That’s why I blog, and read lots of Blogs.

When President Bush made the decision to go into Iraq, I started reading in the far left magazines (Adbusters was the most entertaining) a lot of bogus charges about President Bush:

• He was invading for the oil.
• He was invading to make Halliburton more money
• He was invading because Saddam shot at his daddy
• He was invading because the big corporations told him to

Meanwhile, in Foreign Affairs, for a year prior to that, I was reading serious articles that boiled down to: “What the hell are we going to do about Iraq with the UN being so corrupt?”. So the real foreign policy mavens didn’t believe that we were going into Iraq because we wanted to, but because we might have to if the UN didn’t pull its head out of its ass. So the conspiracy theories were clearly moonbat nonsense, because Foreign Affairs would have no problem criticizing the President if they thought there was no reason to go into Iraq.

Bush is a sellout to the corporations fit in with a certain far left mindset, so they started repeating it to each other constantly. Because they took it on faith that Bush was Evil, anyone opposed to Bush must be good. So Iraq became the land of butterflies and happiness, Saddam just misunderstood.

However, repeating things doesn’t make it true. If it did, we’d all go around constantly saying I’m rich. In a busy world though, if you hear things enough times from a number of different people, you start to wonder. I did, and I investigated. Basically, while the media can scream all they want about “no-bid” contracts, the reality is that the government has to buy stuff all the time from sole-source providers. So by law, those contracts are limited to somewhere between 2-7% profit over cost. The only way to get 7% is to deliver things ahead of some deadline, and the government reserves the right to “disallow” certain costs, so its actually quite challenging to make money on those sorts of government contracts. In fact, out of $9B in revenues for the Engineering and Construction group in 2003, they ended up losing $36M.

So the Halliburton dog won’t hunt as they say. None of the other stuff I looked into was any more valid then that.

Now none of that would have mattered until Michael Moore came out with his movie which repeated this and some other charges. When he did that, while the more rational left called the movie what it was, a complete distortion, too many people on the moderate left embraced the movie because it was against President Bush, rather then critically evaluating it.

So the moderate left, which could have reasonably criticized the President on a number of fronts, bought into the whole mindset of the far left.

Now Kerry had a chance here to set the direction and tone of the debate. If he had, we might be have a different President in the White House right now.

At some point, Kerry had a chance to tone done the rhetoric from the left. He could have booted Carter and Moore from the convention. He could have found some real things to criticize the President about.

He didn’t do it. In fact, he started embracing those points, probably in an effort to solidify his “base”. That’s the moment he started losing. Something that particularly stands out to me is when he repeated Moore’s “Bush did nothing for 7 minutes” line. It was a stupid, pointless, criticism, made even more pointless when it turned out that Kerry did nothing for 44 minutes.

By embracing the pointless charges of the far left, Kerry made the election about nonsense, and ultimately about Bush. Its an old marketing rule: never mention the competition, because it only helps them. Kerry’s stump speeches were always about Bush, never about Kerry.

And that’s why he lost. Reading a Kerry speech was like listening to hours of reasons why you shouldn’t vote for Bush, but 5 minutes of why you should vote for Kerry. In a weird way, Kerry was campaigning for Bush, because Kerry never really provided himself as an alternative.

One telling example for me was reading both of their position documents. Kerry had a 265 page download that was mostly copies of his stump speeches but no actual “plan”. Bush had a 41 page download that was filled with details.

So ultimately, it was Kerry’s decision to embrace the Michael Moore segment of his supporters and their message that lost him this election. Kerry needed to produce his own message, and he never did.

Its not that I think that we shouldn’t criticize the President during wartime.

Far from it.

Rather I think that when we do criticize a wartime President, the media has to drop the typical sort of “he said”, “she said” conflict journalism and start really digging into issues. Report the good, the bad and the ugly, and let Americans make up our own minds.

Instead, this election I had to listen to hours of mindless drivel from both parties as they each slavishly repeated talking points crafted by nameless staffers. Somehow, this passed for journalism in the media.

The media complains about the candidates not covering the issues, but when they do, they don’t cover the candidates.

It would have been trivial for each of the major media websites to provide a section where they collected each candidates statements on a number of issues, along with in-depth analysis by different factions.

Did they do so? No. Because they don’t care. Conflict journalism pays the bills.

But in wartime, it also kills.

Bottom line, criticize the President all you want, but know what you’re talking about. That’s the only standard I think we need set. In peacetime, we can afford the constant partisan blather. In wartime, the partisans need to take the time to turn their blather into constructive criticism.

Otherwise, shut the hell up. I have a remote control, and I know how to use it.

Which everyone should subscribe to, its a great magazine:

Here’s the Article.

Here’s the conclusion:

Finally, a word of unsolicited advice to scientists who want to play in the public policy arena. Facts by themselves do not immediately entail the adoption of particular policies. Many of the scientific “facts” cited by activists arise from contested epidemiological data and controversial computer models. For example, if humanity is significantly warming the planet, it is entirely possible that the best policy is to encourage rapid technological progress and economic growth so that any problems caused by such warming can be dealt with more effectively and fairly in the future. And how does one make the trade-off between possibly harming a few species of birds through the use of DDT, and using the insecticide to prevent the deaths of millions of people each year from malaria? These are political decisions. Suggestive scientific data certainly help guide our decisions, but they do not mandate any particular policies—not even those championed by the most brilliant researchers.

Well said.

From a “market-based environmental group”. You can read it here.

While that’s not a great grade, it “suggests that the Bush administration has improved slightly on the Clinton administration in bringing market approaches into environmental policy.” Bush was better then Clinton? Hmm…

Here’s an interesting quote to whet your appetite:

Activists have created the impression that the Bush administration has virtually ended air pollution regulation in the United States. In reality, the administration has taken a series of actions that will eliminate the vast majority of remaining air emissions.

First a review of that Kansas book so no one wastes their money.

Here are some facts debunking the “moral values” poll:

If the Los Angeles Times’ pollsters, which allowed multiple choice answers, are to be believed (a big caveat), 40% of voters voted on “Moral/Ethical Values”, with Bush leading, while only 15% voted on “Social issues such as abortion and gay marriage”—where the vote was evenly split!

Here’s a rant by the same guy on the subject. He’s a gay bush voter if I remember correctly. I had an interesting conversation with him about a constitutional amendment, how it might be a good idea in a different form if it just explicitly let states go their own way.

And finally, here’s a survey by the BBC with a lot of good responses. Sounds to me like a lot of people made informed decisions.

Here’s a 3D version of the red county/blue county map.

Kind of debunks the whole “we’ll all join Canada” thing…big parts of even Oregon were red…

The President’s press conference from yesterday.

Interesting to compare the transcript with the news stories. All politicians give thoughtful, reasoned answers in general, which the media dumbs down to irrelevancy.

Who is a conservative mole inside our own State Department:

Most State types, deep inside, believe that the primary purpose of American diplomacy is not to advance our country’s geo-strategic interests, but to provide for them a prestigious career in which their unusual talents (e.g. foreign languages) and interests (foreign lands) are properly valued and appreciated (Note: there’s precious little demand in the real world for experts on the history of Venezuelan political parties). This is a mindset that makes too many diplomats contemptuous of most ordinary Americans, who, in their view, are narrow-minded and boorish. You see the looks of bemused disbelief around the conference table - especially an AID one - whenever anyone suggests that a policy decision should be governed by the interest of the American taxpayer.

So, we were all minding our business one fine day, when one of these very boors - from Texas, no less - turned our little world upside down. It’s not that Bush is a Republican, or conservative, or overly aggressive. It’s that he’s NOT a member of the club of Those of Us Who Understand These Things. As such, he had no right to redefine our foreign policy and security doctrine overnight. Certainly not without first commissioning many feasibility studies and blue-ribbon panels informed, of course, by Us. As a result “all our allies” hate us, and our international relations have been set back years

Read the Whole Thing

Voter Registration began in Iraq on Monday. That’s pretty cool.

Hat tip: Mudville Gazette

Look at it here

It shows relative percentages of blue, purple and red by county.

The annual Punkin’ Chunkin’ contest was over the weekend.

Now see, if I was a terrorist, stuff like that would scare me. I mean, this is what American’s do for fun, we compete to see how far we can shoot a pumpkin with a cannon.

Imagine what we could do if we were serious?

Hat Tip: Eduwonk, who says ” It’s a great way for students to learn about physics, engineering, sportsmanship, and c’mon, it’s a whole lot of fun… Eduwonk thinks this that in addition to their obvious sagaciousness; this school won the youth trebuchet division!”

The “Youth Trebuchet division”. The mind boggles. A Trebuchet is a type of catapult for those unfamiliar with medieval siege engines. So basically, we’re teaching our youth how to storm castles. For fun.

In other news, it seems we invaded Fallujah today. Maybe we can load any foreign-born insurgents into a trebuchet and send them back to their homeland…

Of Ayn Rand’s two most famous books, the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged I prefer the Fountainhead. Ayn Rand wrote about the Artist vs. the Political Correctness in 1945. It really says everything I wish the Left understood about why I detest their rhetoric. It’s quite possible to be both liberal and fascist, I don’t fear the right’s obsession with abortion with nearly the same dread as I fear the left’s obsession with political correctness.

Yet its Atlas Shrugged that I find most useful in my life. Like Fountainhead, Atlas clearly displays Rand’s contempt for those who talk versus those who do. This time the hero is not an Artist, he is a engineer and industrial magnate. In Atlas, rather then fighting the good fight against the forces of evil (and losing), the people who actually do all the work just leave the forces of evil (the talkers and parasites) to their own devices.

Of course, civilization collapses…

Which brings us to the election. The Democrats would really like to believe:

• Losing wasn’t their fault
• Republicans are Evil
• The Voters are Stupid

None of those are true no matter how much the Democrat’s might like to believe it. The real issue is much more simple, but to really understand why the Democrat’s lost, Atlas Shrugged is required reading.

Here’s are chart for you to look at that really illustrates what happend:

Here you go

For reasons that are complex to explain, but basically, because NCLB forces our schools to actually see if they are working as schools.

Eduwonk from my Blog Roll is a fan as well, but today he? got a letter from an urban administrator praising NCLB. Its nice to hear stories from the trenches…

Read the Whole Thing

I notice that many of the academic bloggers who voted for Bush identified themselves as “Libertarians”. That seems to be code for “Republican”, because you can’t admit you might be conservative in academia I guess. Being a “Libertarian” is ok though?

You can’t be a conservative, but you can be far enough out on the right that you don’t believe in government at all?

Glad I’m not an academic…

The Noise being the local monthly paper I write a column for. This month’s will be about debunking the draft myth, and I’ll post it in a few days after I figure the real world copies are out.

Though I’m not sure why. Its not like any of my readers were going to fly to Flagstaff in order to get their free copy of the Noise. Somehow though, it seems like minimal politeness to my editor to not broadcast stuff on the Internet first.

This month is a first as its the first column I wrote specifically for the paper, rather then retooling one of my longer blog postings. Usually I take one of my 1500 word missives and trim it down to 900 words.

From Winds of Change

It’s a long post, especially if you read all the other posts by other bloggers that it refers to, but its worth the read.

The Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project has issued this report assessing claims that the discrepancy between exit polls and actual vote in certain jurisdictions provides evidence of voting machine fraud. The report finds no evidence that electronic voting machines or any other type of equipment were used to “steal” votes.

Hat tip: Equal Vote

State Run Television

Ok, that was the short version. Here’s the long version.

Most of old Europe has some form of Socialism, and in my experience, a culture of mediocrity. Sort of a “the nail that sticks up gets hammered down” mindset. They have a few cowboys, but not enough because their culture really enforces a sort of groupthink mentality.

That’s one of the reasons that many of the more ambitious Europeans still emigrate to the US.

As a system engineer, I’m always looking for feedback loops and how things interact.

And it hit me today. Most European countries also have television run by the state. Now in US television, we have a set of cowboys competing for ratings. In Europe, the TV is run by a combination of the bureaucracy and the intelligentsia.

So in the US, we get lots of sex and violence, and we end up with lots of cowboys. In Europe, you get all the excitement of a show designed by a committee, along with government propaganda to “conform”, plus some naked boobies occasionally. Despite the lack of naked boobs, some of the highest rated shows on the government television tend to be old US reruns.

It’s all the fault of state run television, its driving the cowboys out of their culture. Death to the BBC!

So Martha Stewart, who was convicted of insider trading for selling a stock she’d tried to sell 3 times before, and had discussed selling with her broker, goes to the big house, but Senators get a free pass?

If only it were true:

The curse of Chrenkoff strikes - I write about the guy and about an hounr later he dies.

Now if only he would write something about Bin Laden…

Because all but one of them are glad Arafat is dead.

Now, I am too, I was just too polite to say it.

Since every one else is saying though, fine:

Ding Dong the Witch is dead, the witch is dead…

Seriously. Turning down Clinton was the last bonehead move in a history of bonehead moves. I’ve always called him AraTheif because he kept getting richer and fatter the more the Palestinians starved.

From a moderate woman, Open Letter to the Democratic Party, How you could have had my vote. Like many of us, see seems upset by the “screaming over substance” tone of this last election.

Hat tip: Winds Of Change

According to the NY Observer, its really the Ayn Rand novel, the Fountainhead, mixed with Republican foreign policy:

While The Incredibles’ battle against conformity and mediocrity screams anti-oppression to some, it’s obviously Randian to others.

Is it simply that, after four years of being beaten up with good-versus-evil rhetoric and post-9/11 fear, somehow all superheroes seem vaguely Republican to us? It’s back to Nietzsche for one more shot.

The Incredibles’ storyline, not unlike most current superhero storylines, will warm the hearts of the Republican elite, and also the scared, ordinary moviegoing folks emboldened by America’s long-time military prowess. Mr. Incredible could be Dick Cheney himself, or Donald Rumsfeld, big-bellied and in mothballs during the Clinton years, watching the world go to hell while nobody needed them, tortured and beat up by the little people and the bureaucrats all around them.

Hat Tip: Tim Blair

Reading through the HTMl source for the Diplomad after reading in the blogspot help about how to turn on feeds, I discovered a link to an atom.xml file. So I guess BlogSpot provides RSS/Atom feeds, they just don’t provide links in the templates to same.

Wish I’d known that a long time ago, there are a lot of blogs I like, but don’t read regularly because they don’t provide feeds.

Cool!

(For those who don’t know, an RSS feed is basically a file with the latest postings in a website, that you can use with a specialized reader to quickly read 20 blogs in the time it would take you to read 1. )

But they’ve become kind of fun. Who knew there was an Ayn Rand dating service? It’s like this weird snide commentary on my blog by Google.

While I think you’d have to be crazy to shell out full price for a copy of the Team America soundtrack, shelling out $.99 for America F**k Yeah or I’m So Ronery is probably worth it.

Though its pretty weird that people who bought those songs also bought Has Been by William Shatner.

Links to iTunes:

Team America Soundtrack

America F**k Yeah

I’m So Ronery

Has Been

Though perhaps the weirdest thing of all is that I ended up following the link to Has Been, and I enjoyed some of the songs…Shatner can’t sing, he sort of does these dramatic readings over the songs, but they’re still fun.