Victor Davis Hanson tries to understand why Obama attacked Libya. In part, he was played by the Europeans, who were interested in protecting their oil contracts.
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/libya-the-genesis-of-a-bad-idea/?singlepage=true Thursday, March 31, 2011
Shark and Shepherd: A Primer on Publication of the Collective Bargaining Law
Here's a good post explaining what's happening in Wisconsin regarding the "publication" of the collective bargaining law. It sounds like the judge has overstepped her bounds, and misunderstood the process of publication to boot.
http://sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com/2011/03/primer-on-publication-of-collective.htmlI have made clear my view that the attempt to enjoin publication of the collective bargaining law and Judge Sumi's TRO enjoining publication was wholly without merit. Challenge the law if you wish but it seems clear that you must wait until after it's published. The Supreme Court's decision in Goodland v. Zimmerman, 243 Wis. 459, 10 N.W.2d 180 (1943) makes this clear.In an odd twist, the law was nevertheless published today and will become effective tomorrow. This isn't defiance of the judge's order by the Republicans or Scott Walker. They didn't do it. It's not defiance of the law at all. It seems to have been mandated by the law.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Who Are The Libyan Rebels? Doesn’t the President Care? - By Peter Kirsanow
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263323/who-are-libyan-rebels-doesnt-president-care-peter-kirsanow
Nonetheless, last night the president failed to devote any time to credibly addressing the identity, allegiances, and objectives of those on whose behalf he’s committed our military.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Go to Congress First
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262547/unwise-and-illegitimate-andrew-c-mccarthy?page=1
The Security Council is powerless to “authorize” the U.S. military to do a damned thing. The validity of American combat operations is a matter of American law, and that means Congress must authorize them.
Our Constitution vests Congress with the power to declare war. That authority cannot be delegated to an international tribunal that lacks political accountability to the American people. The decision to go to war is the most significant one a body politic can make. Thus the Framers designed our system to make certain that the responsible officials are answerable to the people whose lives are at stake and who are expected to foot the bills.
Does US Military Action Against Gaddafi Require Congressional Authorization?
http://volokh.com/2011/03/20/does-the-libya-intervention-require-congressional-authorization/
It’s worth noting that then-Senator Obama reached a similar conclusion back in 2007, when he said the following:
The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
'Unique capabilities' mean virtually all-American war in Libya
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/unique-capabilities-mean-virtually-all-american-war-libya
What Clinton meant by "unique capabilities" is that the United States has military power that other participating nations don't have, and it is that power, and virtually that power alone, that makes the Libyan war possible. Clinton's two key statements: 'We did not lead this" and "America has unique capabilities" are not consistent with each other. Because of America's unique capabilities, it is in fact leading the Libyan effort.
That became entirely clear in Gortney's briefing. "In these early days, the operation will be under the operational command of General Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command," Gortney told reporters at the Pentagon. "And the commander of Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn, which is the name of this operation, is Admiral Sam Locklear, who is embarked on board USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean."
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
The Leiter Side of Union Thuggery
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704893604576200522251828538.html
In the letter to Wisconsin businessmen, however, we see why so-called collective bargaining is particularly corrupting to the police. Although the letter explicitly threatens only an economic boycott, when it is written on behalf of the police--of those on whom all citizens depend to protect their safety--it invariably raises the prospect of another kind of boycott. Can a businessman who declines this heavy-handed "request" be confident that the police will do their job if he is the victim of a crime--particularly if the crime itself is in retaliation for his refusal to support "the dedicated public employees who serve our communities"?
Sykes sums up the letter this way: "That's a nice business you got there. Pity if anything were to happen to it if, say, you didn't toe the line and denounce Governor Walker like we're asking nice-like." He's right. "Organized" law enforcement bears a disturbing resemblance to organized crime.
Reynolds’ Law
http://philoofalexandria.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/reynolds-law/
Reynolds’ Law: “Subsidizing the markers of status doesn’t produce the character traits that result in that status; it undermines them.” It’s easy to see why. If people don’t need to defer gratification, work hard, etc., in order to achieve the status they desire, they’ll be less inclined to do those things. The greater the government subsidy, the greater the effect, and the more net harm produced.
The original post on Instapundit is here:
You might say it's a classic instance of the Law of Unintended Consequences, which applies to most government actions.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Health-Care Waivers and the Courts
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261982/health-care-waivers-and-courts-philip-hamburger
As argued in these pages, these waivers are an unconstitutional exercise of the dispensing power, which creates a power above law and thereby threatens equal rights under law. The point here, however, is more basic. The constitutional defense of the health-care waivers has thus far been a defense of waivers in general, without attention to the realities of the health-care statute. As a result, the defense of the waivers not only is wrong on the Constitution but also is irrelevant to the statutory realities.
William Tucker: Japan Does Not Face Another Chernobyl
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704893604576198421680697248.html
None of this amounts to "another Chernobyl." The Chernobyl reactor had two crucial design flaws. First, it used graphite (carbon) instead of water to "moderate" the neutrons, which makes possible the nuclear reaction. The graphite caught fire in April 1986 and burned for four days. Water does not catch fire.
Second, Chernobyl had no containment structure. When the graphite caught fire, it spouted a plume of radioactive smoke that spread across the globe. A containment structure would have both smothered the fire and contained the radioactivity.
If a meltdown does occur in Japan, it will be a disaster for the Tokyo Electric Power Company but not for the general public. Whatever steam releases occur will have a negligible impact. Researchers have spent 30 years trying to find health effects from the steam releases at Three Mile Island and have come up with nothing. With all the death, devastation and disease now threatening tens of thousands in Japan, it is trivializing and almost obscene to spend so much time worrying about damage to a nuclear reactor.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Endgame in Wisconsin
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261812/endgame-wisconsin-robert-costa?... > After an exhausting three-week stalemate, Wisconsin Republicans maneuvered late Wednesday to curb collective bargaining for public-sector workers, passing an amended budget-repair bill by an 18–1 vote in the state senate. The surprise legislative gambit stunned labor activists, who have flocked to Madison in recent weeks, and stymied the 14 Democratic state senators who fled to Illinois on February 17 in protest of Gov. Scott Walker’s budget proposal.
>> “The Senate Democrats have had three weeks to debate this bill and were offered repeated opportunities to come home, which they refused,” Walker said following the vote, which occurred on short notice in the early evening. He hailed the effort as a necessary step toward closing the state’s $3.6 billion budget deficit.
>> “The Senate Democrats have had three weeks to debate this bill and were offered repeated opportunities to come home, which they refused,” Walker said following the vote, which occurred on short notice in the early evening. He hailed the effort as a necessary step toward closing the state’s $3.6 billion budget deficit.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
George F. Will - On Libya, too many questions
Some interventionists are Republicans, whose skepticism about government's abilities to achieve intended effects ends at the water's edge. All interventionists should answer some questions:
Thursday, March 03, 2011
The Pirates of Somalia
Where's Thomas Jefferson when you need him?
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261118/pirates-somalia-clifford-d-mayincrease the risks of piracy and lower the rewards. That means taking the offensive: killing pirates at sea, in the harbors where they dock their vessels (and those they seize), and in what are now their safe havens and homes in the coastal areas of the northern Somali province of Puntland.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Jonah Goldberg on Wisconsin's union battle: Public sector unions must go
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg-wisconsin-20110222,0,4678423.column
Private sector unions fight with management over an equitable distribution of profits. Government unions negotiate with politicians over taxpayer money, putting the public interest at odds with union interests and, as we've seen in states such as California and Wisconsin, exploding the cost of government. The labor-politician negotiations can't be fair when the unions can put so much money into campaign spending. Victor Gotbaum, a leader in the New York City chapter of AFSCME, summed up the problem in 1975 when he boasted, "We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss."This is why FDR believed that "the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," and why even George Meany, the first head of the AFL-CIO, held that it was "impossible to bargain collectively with the government."
Sunday, February 20, 2011
“Badger 14″ Wanted Poster
http://thebadger14.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/badger-14-wanted-poster/
We need to bring these state senators from Wisconsin home safely. According to press reports, they were taken across state lines and are being held in Illinois. I think it's time to get the FBI involved. If we can save even one Senator, it's worth it.
Friday, February 18, 2011
The case against public sector unionism
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2011/02/the-case-against-public-sector-unionism.html
Even President Franklin Roosevelt, a friend of private-sector unionism, drew a line when it came to government workers: "Meticulous attention," the president insisted in 1937, "should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government....The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service." The reason? F.D.R. believed that "[a] strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied. Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable." Roosevelt was hardly alone in holding these views, even among the champions of organized labor. Indeed, the first president of the AFL-CIO, George Meany, believed it was "impossible to bargain collectively with the government."
WSJ: A showdown between public unions and taxpayers
Read the whole thing. Here are a few excerpts:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657704576150111817428004.html
Mr. Walker's very modest proposal would take away the ability of most government employees to collectively bargain for benefits. They could still bargain for higher wages, but future wage increases would be capped at the federal Consumer Price Index, unless otherwise specified by a voter referendum. The bill would also require union members to contribute 5.8% of salary toward their pensions and chip in 12.6% of the cost of their health insurance premiums.If those numbers don't sound outrageous, you probably work in the private economy. The comparable nationwide employee health-care contribution is 20% for private industry, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average employee contribution from take-home pay for retirement was 7.5% in 2009, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute.
The protests have an orchestrated quality, and sure enough, the Politico website reported yesterday that the Democratic Party's Organizing for America arm is helping to gin them up. The outfit is a remnant of President Obama's 2008 election campaign, so it's also no surprise that Mr. Obama said yesterday that while he knows nothing about the bill, he supports protesters occupying the Capitol building.
The reality is that the unions are trying to trump the will of the voters as overwhelmingly rendered in November when they elected Mr. Walker and a new legislature.
Public unions have a monopoly position that gives them undue bargaining power. Their campaign cash—collected via mandatory dues—also helps to elect the politicians who are then supposed to represent taxpayers in negotiations with those same unions. The unions sit, in effect, on both sides of the bargaining table. This is why such famous political friends of the working man as Franklin Roosevelt and Fiorello La Guardia opposed collective bargaining for government workers, even as they championed private unions.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Jim DeMint tells The Muppet Lobby "No"
http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=JimsBlog&ContentRecord_id=9f33a591-8891-4ad4-a856-e387dcade83a
Shows like Sesame Street are multi-million dollar enterprises capable of thriving in the private market. According to the 990 tax form all nonprofits are required to file, Sesame Workshop President and CEO Gary Knell received $956,513 -- nearly a million dollars -- in compensation in 2008. And, from 2003 to 2006, "Sesame Street" made more than $211 million from toy and consumer product sales. When taxpayer funding for public broadcasting ends, rest assured, Cookie Monster will still be fed. Saving the country from crushing debt and taxes is going to require hard choices. Telling the Muppet lobby “no” should be one of the easy ones.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
U.S. Government Shuts Down 84,000 Websites, ‘By Mistake’
http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-government-shuts-down-84000-websites-by-mistake-110216/
The US Government has yet again shuttered several domain names this week. The Department of Justice and Homeland Security’s ICE office proudly announced that they had seized domains related to counterfeit goods and child pornography. What they failed to mention, however, is that one of the targeted domains belongs to a free DNS provider, and that 84,000 websites were wrongfully accused of links to child pornography crimes.
If it saves one child, I guess it's worth it. Right? I mean who needs another 84,000 web sites on the internet. Better safe than sorry. (Just kidding :-)
I can't wait until the Feds take over health care and start pulling the plug when it really counts.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
The President’s budget: whistling past the graveyard
http://keithhennessey.com/2011/02/14/graveyard/
With his State of the Union address and this budget, President Obama is trying to define a new problem to be solved. He thinks Americans are at a long-term competitive disadvantage relative to the Chinese because our government isn’t spending enough on infrastructure, innovation, and education. Suppose you think he’s right (I don’t). Is this problem more urgent than restoring short-term economic growth? Is it more important than addressing unsustainable deficits and a federal government expansion that will leave fewer resources for the private sector? The President apparently thinks it is. I strongly disagree.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
