18/11: Chinese Repression
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
How much do the cheap "Made in China" items really cost? Gateway Pundit on recent repression in China here.
Joab, a frequent commentator on this blog and writer of his own Joab's House of Blog, has a provocative post in favor of legalizing marijuana and prostitution. Lest you start labeling him a liberal degenerate (no, that is not redundant), realize that he is a self-described Christian Libertarian and a law-enforcement officer.
He makes the case that marijuana is much less harmful to society than is alcohol; and the penalties seem excessive given the social harm that results from use. Regarding prostitution, he argues that it is going to happen, the way that it happens now has several bad features, and that the social cost would be less if all states followed the Nevada model.
In response: I have gone back and forth on marijuana legalization over the last couple of decade. I oppose the recreational use of marijuana, but it does seem to me that we should legalize it for the following reasons: (1) what Joab said; (2) if at least a significant minority of the members of a free-society are determined not to obey a law, that law cannot be enforced adequately and remain a free society; (3) a significant number of people in a free society chossing to break a law that is not adequately enforced results in a loss of respect for The Law as The Law (see Prohibition); (4) if a significant number of people create a demand that cannot be met legally, they will subsidize a lucrative criminal economy that creates a powerful criminal element.
As a Christian I have distinguished in a previous post between moral issues that should, and should not be, addressed through law (governmental public policy). Some issues are better left to cultural witness by Christians, rather than law. To quote my previous post:
First, while culture and politics are related obviously, they are not exactly the same thing. A Waco Farmer has observed that we do not implement the entire Ten Commandments as public policy. I would add, nor should we. For example, the command not to covet is better conceived as an issue of culture rather than of government. Culture is best shaped by passive and active witness. By Passive Witness I mean the Christian community living according to this commandment for all the world to see. By Active Witness I mean the public articulation of this command in a persuasive way. Even those commandments that have an obvious governmental aspect, such as not bearing false witness, have a limited relation to government in issues such as fraud or perjury. The broader issue of truthfulness is more of a cultural issue (I would never seek prosecution for lying about the size of the fish that got away) and should be promoted by Witness within culture.
I think marijuana is best left as a cultural issue, rather than a governmental. I am now thinking over the prostitution issue.
He makes the case that marijuana is much less harmful to society than is alcohol; and the penalties seem excessive given the social harm that results from use. Regarding prostitution, he argues that it is going to happen, the way that it happens now has several bad features, and that the social cost would be less if all states followed the Nevada model.
In response: I have gone back and forth on marijuana legalization over the last couple of decade. I oppose the recreational use of marijuana, but it does seem to me that we should legalize it for the following reasons: (1) what Joab said; (2) if at least a significant minority of the members of a free-society are determined not to obey a law, that law cannot be enforced adequately and remain a free society; (3) a significant number of people in a free society chossing to break a law that is not adequately enforced results in a loss of respect for The Law as The Law (see Prohibition); (4) if a significant number of people create a demand that cannot be met legally, they will subsidize a lucrative criminal economy that creates a powerful criminal element.
As a Christian I have distinguished in a previous post between moral issues that should, and should not be, addressed through law (governmental public policy). Some issues are better left to cultural witness by Christians, rather than law. To quote my previous post:
First, while culture and politics are related obviously, they are not exactly the same thing. A Waco Farmer has observed that we do not implement the entire Ten Commandments as public policy. I would add, nor should we. For example, the command not to covet is better conceived as an issue of culture rather than of government. Culture is best shaped by passive and active witness. By Passive Witness I mean the Christian community living according to this commandment for all the world to see. By Active Witness I mean the public articulation of this command in a persuasive way. Even those commandments that have an obvious governmental aspect, such as not bearing false witness, have a limited relation to government in issues such as fraud or perjury. The broader issue of truthfulness is more of a cultural issue (I would never seek prosecution for lying about the size of the fish that got away) and should be promoted by Witness within culture.
I think marijuana is best left as a cultural issue, rather than a governmental. I am now thinking over the prostitution issue.
17/11: Had Enough?
Evidently, not. GOP re-elects leadership (Washington Post story here).
As I kept saying, our leadership elections were much more important to us and the nation than the Democratic canvass. Sure enough, while we watched the Pelosi follies and rubbed our hands together with glee (check out the spate of articles this morning predicting doom for the Dems), we quietly opted against reform in our own party.
What were we thinking?
As I kept saying, our leadership elections were much more important to us and the nation than the Democratic canvass. Sure enough, while we watched the Pelosi follies and rubbed our hands together with glee (check out the spate of articles this morning predicting doom for the Dems), we quietly opted against reform in our own party.
What were we thinking?
Traditionally America followed a policy of Political Isolationism. We were active in the global economy with American ships sailing the oceans to trade, but refrained from political involvement abroad. Recently one of our frequent commentators, Tocqueville, gave us an important historic statement of this policy in the context of current political discussion.
Wilsonianism has run amuck in the GOP, which is a far cry from Bush's 2000 campaign for an end to peace-keeping and nation-building. The most thorough and persuasive critique of the Wilsonian strain in American history is Walter McDougall's "Promised Land, Crusader State." McDougall's guiding spirit is John Quincy Adams, who, by way of refuting the heretical doctrine of a crusader America, formulated once and for all the orthodox dogma of American Exceptionalism in his July Fourth address of 1821:
"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assumed the colors and usurped the standards of freedom.... She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."
A Waco Farmer then added some context:
JQA speaks as James Monroe's secretary of state (according to Samuel Flagg Bemis, and others, the very best to ever hold that position). The context is the unraveling Spanish Empire in Latin America. The other component is Henry Clay, who, outside the administration, is calling upon the government of the USA to lend military assistance to the fledgling republics. Henry Clay, in fact, takes a Wilsonian position nearly 100 years prior to Wilson. And JQA is promoting a rock-ribbed realism that he inherited from his political hero, George Washington.
Question for discussion: In 2006/2007, should the United States follow the policy of George Washington as expressed by John Quincy Adams?
Wilsonianism has run amuck in the GOP, which is a far cry from Bush's 2000 campaign for an end to peace-keeping and nation-building. The most thorough and persuasive critique of the Wilsonian strain in American history is Walter McDougall's "Promised Land, Crusader State." McDougall's guiding spirit is John Quincy Adams, who, by way of refuting the heretical doctrine of a crusader America, formulated once and for all the orthodox dogma of American Exceptionalism in his July Fourth address of 1821:
"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assumed the colors and usurped the standards of freedom.... She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."
A Waco Farmer then added some context:
JQA speaks as James Monroe's secretary of state (according to Samuel Flagg Bemis, and others, the very best to ever hold that position). The context is the unraveling Spanish Empire in Latin America. The other component is Henry Clay, who, outside the administration, is calling upon the government of the USA to lend military assistance to the fledgling republics. Henry Clay, in fact, takes a Wilsonian position nearly 100 years prior to Wilson. And JQA is promoting a rock-ribbed realism that he inherited from his political hero, George Washington.
Question for discussion: In 2006/2007, should the United States follow the policy of George Washington as expressed by John Quincy Adams?
16/11: Former Mainline Now Sideline
The slow schism in the Episcopal denomination continues following denominational endorsement of same-sex sex. From Virginia this news.
Leaders of two of Virginia's most historic Episcopal parishes have voted to split from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia, a move that could spark a legal battle over millions of dollars' worth of property.
And from Ohio this story. Two more Presbyterian congregation vote to leave the PC(USA), which has been in turmoil for over two decades because of several issues, including same-sex practice.
Two area congregations have voted to leave the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The pastors of Stow Presbyterian and Hudson Presbyterian churches said the decision to break away from the denomination came after much prayer and deliberation.
Mainline denominations (by million members) Statistics from Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, via USA Today.
United Methodist Church
• 1995: 8.5
• 2004: 8.2
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
• 1995: 5.2
• 2004: 4.9
Presbyterian Church (USA)
• 1995: 3.7
• 2004: 3.2
Episcopal Church
• 1995: 2.5
• 2004: 2.3
Disciples of Christ
• 1995: .93
• 2004: .74
American Baptist Churches
• 1995: 1.5
• 2004: 1.4
United Church of Christ
• 1995: 1.5
• 2004: 1.3
Leaders of two of Virginia's most historic Episcopal parishes have voted to split from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia, a move that could spark a legal battle over millions of dollars' worth of property.
And from Ohio this story. Two more Presbyterian congregation vote to leave the PC(USA), which has been in turmoil for over two decades because of several issues, including same-sex practice.
Two area congregations have voted to leave the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The pastors of Stow Presbyterian and Hudson Presbyterian churches said the decision to break away from the denomination came after much prayer and deliberation.
Mainline denominations (by million members) Statistics from Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, via USA Today.
United Methodist Church
• 1995: 8.5
• 2004: 8.2
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
• 1995: 5.2
• 2004: 4.9
Presbyterian Church (USA)
• 1995: 3.7
• 2004: 3.2
Episcopal Church
• 1995: 2.5
• 2004: 2.3
Disciples of Christ
• 1995: .93
• 2004: .74
American Baptist Churches
• 1995: 1.5
• 2004: 1.4
United Church of Christ
• 1995: 1.5
• 2004: 1.3
What does the Pelosi defeat today mean?
1. Nancy Pelosi is not going to be an intimidating all-powerful Speaker.
2. Nancy Pelosi is not a very good vote counter.
Both of those things augur well for President Bush and a center-right 110th.
More basically, today's events are not important in themselves. Right now, K-Fed is still better known to most Americans than Nancy Pelosi. Specific scandals and this kind of misstep will not play a large role in the next election. Remember: our leadership elections are much more important for us politically than anything Nancy Pelosi will do this week.
Just for kicks: Why did she do it?
Speaker Pelosi attempted to reward a loyal friend, knock out an old rival and, most importantly, appeal to her anti-war base. Murtha was an anti-war rock star on the scale of Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan. The anti-war zealots were unanimous in their support for Murtha, and I am betting that they appreciate Pelosi's overture.
1. Nancy Pelosi is not going to be an intimidating all-powerful Speaker.
2. Nancy Pelosi is not a very good vote counter.
Both of those things augur well for President Bush and a center-right 110th.
More basically, today's events are not important in themselves. Right now, K-Fed is still better known to most Americans than Nancy Pelosi. Specific scandals and this kind of misstep will not play a large role in the next election. Remember: our leadership elections are much more important for us politically than anything Nancy Pelosi will do this week.
Just for kicks: Why did she do it?
Speaker Pelosi attempted to reward a loyal friend, knock out an old rival and, most importantly, appeal to her anti-war base. Murtha was an anti-war rock star on the scale of Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan. The anti-war zealots were unanimous in their support for Murtha, and I am betting that they appreciate Pelosi's overture.
16/11: Newt Again
Category: Politics
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Today, Newt is in the Wall Street Journal arguing for a Ronald Reagan-esque coalition of conservatives that transcends party lines:
"[T]he Democratic victory makes it possible to re-establish the conservative Democrat and House Republican coalition which made the Reagan legislative victories of 1981-82 possible. Tip O'Neill was the liberal Democratic speaker when Reagan became president, but he did not [actually control] a liberal majority in the House. [D]espite a seemingly liberal Democrat lock in a 242-192 majority, they lost control of the floor on the most important bill [tax cuts] of Reagan's first term.
He has this exactly right. President Bush needs to employ Reagan's "boll weevil" strategy of 1981. Read the op-ed in full here.
"[T]he Democratic victory makes it possible to re-establish the conservative Democrat and House Republican coalition which made the Reagan legislative victories of 1981-82 possible. Tip O'Neill was the liberal Democratic speaker when Reagan became president, but he did not [actually control] a liberal majority in the House. [D]espite a seemingly liberal Democrat lock in a 242-192 majority, they lost control of the floor on the most important bill [tax cuts] of Reagan's first term.
He has this exactly right. President Bush needs to employ Reagan's "boll weevil" strategy of 1981. Read the op-ed in full here.
From the Washington Post, this article on three groups and same-sex sex.
(1) The Roman Catholic bishops continue to affirm that homosexuality is a disordered condition since it goes against the natural purpose of sex. And they affirm that Roman Catholic leaders are not free to ignore this teaching. (2) The North Carolina Baptist Convention (the Southern Baptist Convention congregations are organized in state conventions) moves to ensure that no congregations affirming same-sex sex as good can remain within the Convention. (3) The Presbyterian Church (USA), the mainline Presbyterians, are conducting a trial of a minister who performed a same sex wedding.
The action by the bishops is significant given the history of American Roman Catholicism: there has been a tendency in our country on the part of some to ignore official teaching. The NC Baptist action is no surprise. The Post is behind in reporting on the events on the Presbyterian case: charges have been dismissed because a filing deadline was missed. Article here from Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
(1) The Roman Catholic bishops continue to affirm that homosexuality is a disordered condition since it goes against the natural purpose of sex. And they affirm that Roman Catholic leaders are not free to ignore this teaching. (2) The North Carolina Baptist Convention (the Southern Baptist Convention congregations are organized in state conventions) moves to ensure that no congregations affirming same-sex sex as good can remain within the Convention. (3) The Presbyterian Church (USA), the mainline Presbyterians, are conducting a trial of a minister who performed a same sex wedding.
The action by the bishops is significant given the history of American Roman Catholicism: there has been a tendency in our country on the part of some to ignore official teaching. The NC Baptist action is no surprise. The Post is behind in reporting on the events on the Presbyterian case: charges have been dismissed because a filing deadline was missed. Article here from Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
16/11: Smells Like 1938
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
From the Telegraph, hat tip Jihadwatch. Full article.
Opening paragraphs:
Iran tried to obtain uranium from Somalia in return for supplying weapons to the anarchic country's Islamist movement, the United Nations said yesterday.
A report compiled for the Security Council found that Iran is one of seven countries breaking a UN arms embargo by providing weapons to the Islamic radicals who control most of southern Somalia, including the capital, Mogadishu.
This influx of weapons increases the chances of a new regional war in the Horn of Africa. It also underlines the close ties which Somalia's Islamists, who style themselves the Supreme Council of Islamic Courts, have forged with radical regimes across the Muslim world, notably Syria and Iran.
The report found that 720 Somali fighters were sent to Lebanon in the summer to aid Hizbollah during the war with Israel. In return, Hizbollah dispatched five advisers to Somalia to provide advanced military training.
I wonder what Iran wants with uranium? (sarcasm alert)
Opening paragraphs:
Iran tried to obtain uranium from Somalia in return for supplying weapons to the anarchic country's Islamist movement, the United Nations said yesterday.
A report compiled for the Security Council found that Iran is one of seven countries breaking a UN arms embargo by providing weapons to the Islamic radicals who control most of southern Somalia, including the capital, Mogadishu.
This influx of weapons increases the chances of a new regional war in the Horn of Africa. It also underlines the close ties which Somalia's Islamists, who style themselves the Supreme Council of Islamic Courts, have forged with radical regimes across the Muslim world, notably Syria and Iran.
The report found that 720 Somali fighters were sent to Lebanon in the summer to aid Hizbollah during the war with Israel. In return, Hizbollah dispatched five advisers to Somalia to provide advanced military training.
I wonder what Iran wants with uranium? (sarcasm alert)
For several weeks I have resisted commenting on the Jane Harman-Nancy Pelosi-Alcee Hastings triangle of intrigue story, which involves the chairmanship of the extremely important House intelligence committee. Mainly, I have been doing my best to follow my own advice and give Speaker Pelosi some latitude in the opening moments of her leadership. However, the reportage and analysis from Ruth Marcus, a Washington Post columnist, merits attention.
Two weeks ago, Marcus discussed Pelosi's potential choice between Alcee Hastings and Jane Harman within the context of enmity between Pelosi and Harman, partisanship, racial politics and other considerations (read "An Unintelligent Choice" here ).
Today, Marcus fired on Pelosi once again. This time taking aim at her decision to support John Murtha over Stenny Hoyer for majority leader. Judging Murtha "Unfit for Majority Leader" in light of his "grainy" ethical past, Marcus proclaimed:
"I wrote a few weeks back that Pelosi's first test as speaker would be whether she picks Florida's Alcee Hastings -- who was removed from his federal judgeship for agreeing to take a bribe -- to head the intelligence committee. As it turns out, I was wrong. Pelosi's first test was how to handle Murtha. Whatever happens tomorrow, she flunked. Whether she'll get another failing grade on Hastings remains to be seen."
Today's (Wednesday) column in full.
Also in the Post today, media critic, Howard Kurtz offers thorough analysis concerning the evolution of this story from non-issue to above-the-fold event. He asks an important question: "So why didn't the media jump on this earlier?" And Kurtz also confronts the role of the Post as Hoyer booster and chief Murtha accuser (read here).
Two weeks ago, Marcus discussed Pelosi's potential choice between Alcee Hastings and Jane Harman within the context of enmity between Pelosi and Harman, partisanship, racial politics and other considerations (read "An Unintelligent Choice" here ).
Today, Marcus fired on Pelosi once again. This time taking aim at her decision to support John Murtha over Stenny Hoyer for majority leader. Judging Murtha "Unfit for Majority Leader" in light of his "grainy" ethical past, Marcus proclaimed:
"I wrote a few weeks back that Pelosi's first test as speaker would be whether she picks Florida's Alcee Hastings -- who was removed from his federal judgeship for agreeing to take a bribe -- to head the intelligence committee. As it turns out, I was wrong. Pelosi's first test was how to handle Murtha. Whatever happens tomorrow, she flunked. Whether she'll get another failing grade on Hastings remains to be seen."
Today's (Wednesday) column in full.
Also in the Post today, media critic, Howard Kurtz offers thorough analysis concerning the evolution of this story from non-issue to above-the-fold event. He asks an important question: "So why didn't the media jump on this earlier?" And Kurtz also confronts the role of the Post as Hoyer booster and chief Murtha accuser (read here).
