MTA Strike in New York City

First, I should impart some full disclosure. I am very anti-union. It is not that I am against the concept of collective bargaining. I do believe that workers should band together to protect their collective interests. However, I do not believe that those collective negotiations should include pay scales, retirement and medical benefits.

I am a big believer in merit. People should be rewarded in work, as in life, for working hard and being successful. However, unions have become something that spits on merit. Unions bargain for pay according to length of service, education, etc. These scales have nothing to do with how successful someone is in performing their tasks.

Secondly, unions have bargained to the ultimate detriment of their members in a globalizing economy. The unions, in addition to poor management in highly unionized indsutries, have served to create jobs which significantly overpay its employees. While it may be hard to say this with a straight face if I were some CEO making millions, it is true. Auto workers in Detroit have the opinion that a $60,000 per year job assembling autos, with more than $40,000 per year in retirement and medical benefits is middle class. I'm sorry folks, $60k per year in salary is not middle class. That is likely in the top 20% of incomes in the country.

So as it applies to the recent transportation strike in New York City, Americans, and even New Yorkers, are losing their sympathies for workers, who are overpaid for the value that they provide. I was sincerely hoping that Mayor Bloomberg would make more drastic threats to the union, such as firing the whole bunch.

Strikes such as those, or the recent teachers strike here in Oregon, in which a rural district outside of Portland saw teachers striking (and consequently students not in class) for 4 weeks, are simply causing the unions to distance themselves from the people and causing general animosity. Frankly, while this may certainly be painful in the short run, it will likely destroy the unions as we know them today. Perhaps that will be a good thing.

Germans release a terrorist for good behavior?

This week, Germany released a Lebanese terrorist, convicted of killing a US Navy diver in 1985.

Mohammed Ali Hamadi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. While eligible for parole in January (after 19 years in prison), he was released last week. The German government continues to deny that he has been released, however. At the time of his capture, Hamadi was attempting to enter Germany. The US vigorously attempted to have him extradicted, but to no avail.

The timing of this release is particularly interesting, as a German citizen, archaeologist Susanne Osthoff, was just released in Iraq. If this was a quid pro quo, Germany is continuing to negotiate with terrorists, as fellow EU'ers Italy have been doing since the beginning of the war.

It is hard to argue how this makes anyone safer.

Odds N' Ends

Sorry about the delay. I haven't been very motivated to make any postings recently. I have also been busy, but that is no real excuse.

I am on vacation for the next 9 days (through the day after Christmas), about which I am very excited. Hopefully I'll be able to relax and do some reading.

I am also excited because, in case someone who knows me that comes across this blog doesn't already know, my wife is pregnant with out first child. The due date is supposed to be in June. As it is still early (we are in pregnancy week 14), we are cautiously optimistic. But it is amazing to see and hear the heart beating.

I just found out the Washington Post's managing editor, Steve Coll, moved to the New Yorker magazine. Alright, maybe I won't let my subscription lapse. He is a great writer and working for the New Yorker will allow him to produce the 10,000 word articles he can't do very easily in the Post. I am sorry to see him leave my favorite paper, however.

Also finished another book. I had to stop my James Madison book midstream because I am lacking interest in the moment. I read Robert Baer's 2nd book called, "Sleeping With the Devil." It is about the dependant relationship the US has with Saudi Arabia because it must consume oil, and all the bad things that occur because of that relationship. It is excellent, and I highly recommend it.

Anyway, I should be writing a little more frequently now that I am on vacation, so I'll be back soon!

The Government is Taking Away More of Your Freedoms

Next week (the week of 12/5/2005) Congress will hold a hearing to determine the fairness of the BCS Championship. If that name sounds familiar, it should. The BCS Championship is the Bowl Championship Series to determine the national champion of college football.

As they did with steroids, Congress continues to rape the Constitution by interfering with parts of the country about which it has no legal right. And it is our fault as Americans for letting this happen. Whether or not you like the BCS is irrelevant. This is just the latest example of the eroding status of our freedoms in this country.

When you were a kid, and someone used to tell you, "You can't do that!," and you would respond, "It's a free country. I can do whatever I want!" That freedom is now in jeopardy. I am sure it is not much longer until Congress determines the fairness of dodgeball at school.

Imperial Grunts by Robert Kaplan

I recently finished another book, this one called, "Imperial Grunts," by Robert Kaplan. Like the other Kaplan book I read, "Eastward to Tartary," it is a quick and easy read. I finished this book in about 1 week.

I suggested this to one of my colleagues who has, let us say, different ideological underpinnings than yours truly. Despite an adherent to traditional liberal dogma, she also very much enjoyed the book. In fact, she claimed that it changed her entire perspective on the military. Further, she railed against a negative review the book received in the NY Times; a paper, by the way, which she reads religiously.

I suggest this book for anyone who wants to know more about the great imperial efforts our military is making, and anyone who wants to reaquaint themselves with why ours is the greatest country in the world.

Portland in November

We have had 8 consecutive days of sunny weather. Although the temperature is quite brisk (our lows will be down to 33 degrees tonight), it is a nice departure from our normal temperatures. These sunny days are only supposed to last for another two days.

The wind (which is blowing like crazy!) will be bringing in rain over the weekend for Thanksgiving.

Middle Class Jobs?

Today, General Motors announced that they would be laying off 30,000 employees and shutting down 12 plants across the nation. Union leadership claimed this was another example of the destruction of middle class manufacturing jobs.

These employees make an average of $25 per hour and have nearly there entire benefits paid for by the corporation. At GM supplier, Delphi, management has needed to make similar decisions to cut jobs. Similarly paid jobs actually cost Delphi a total of $65 per hour (when including benefits). If we are actually concerned about losing American jobs, consumers will have to either make a conscious decision to spend more money on goods (and thereby consume less), or manufacturing workers must take significant pay cuts (to about $20 per hour including benefits, which works out to a salary of approximately $13 per hour). Neither of these are likely popular, and therefore, more jobs will be cut.

It is inevitable.

Suicide Terrorism

As you probably know, I am reading a book about suicide terrorism/bombings called, "The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism."

The thesis of this book is that despite what we want to admit, suicide bombings work. They tend to force a country (predominantly democracies) to withdraw their troops from the questioned territory. This happened to the United States, France and Israel from Lebanon, it mostly worked on India from Sri Lanka, and the Sinhalese from Tamil, also in Sri Lanka, and it is working in Palestine. And of course, this seems to be working in Iraq (the jury is still out).

Regardless of what we want to believe, suicide terrorism works because we allow it to work. Despite this, it is important to understand that organizations commit themselves to suicide terrorism because a power (i.e. America) occupy their country. The one proven way to prevent this from ocurring is to withdraw troops. Promoting democracy will not stop suicide terrorism. Is this the appropriate exit strategy from Iraq/Afghanistan/the gulf states?

This is a question for our politicians.

I believe there is one other way to defeat this without allowing the jihadis to win. This way requires us to convince the Muslim world that suicide, despite its reasons, is a violation of Muslim law. This of course is true. All who commit suicide go to hell. However, beginning in Lebanon in the early 1980's, certain political clerics began to convince the largely uneducated populace that martyrdom is ok. In other words, despite the Koran, and even the prophet Muhammed saying that suicide is the ultimate sin, certain clerics have exempted so called, martyrdom. Obviously this is a red herring. Their own religious scriptures prohibit suicide. But, despite this, jihadis are still comitting suicide. Why is this? And further, do they realize they are sending their victims straight to heaven (i.e. the Jews) and themselves to hell? There are no virgins in the seventh layer of hell, guys. If we don't want to withdraw our troops, this is the way out.

Democracy and the School System

This past Tuesday, Washington state voted by a significant majority to prohibit private parties from allowing smoking at their establishments at which the general public is permitted to frequent.

In other words, if you own a restaurant or bar or smoke shop in Washington state, you will be fined for allowing people to smoke at your establishment. This is a clear example of Americans' complete lack of knowledge as to our system of government.

Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of government we have after the Constitution was ratified in Philadelphia. He replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." Please note, he did not say we have a democracy. There is a very simple explanation for this: the founders thought a democracy would lead to the majority tyrannizing the minority. And they were right to fear that, for that is precisely what happened in Washington state. The government has declared that you will be punished if you allow smoking at your commercial establishment.

Clearly, democracy has gone too far. Of course, our government is a Constitutional republic, meaning that the country is ruled by the people, but they cannot trounce the Constitution and take rights away from some because it is the popular thing to do.

For example, in Germany, it is against the law to impersonate Adolph Hitler. In France, it is against the law to write racist literature. While I agree that people shouldn't publish racist literature, this is America folks: we cannot take that right away from people. Because that right wasn't given by people, people cannot take it away. Our Constitution protects the minority.

Somehow, our country forgot this very important lesson. Even our Supreme Court justices are using precedent in countries with very different governments and laws to "interpret" our Constitution. Imagine that!

I can't wait until the first dissident is assasinated in this country because you can do it in China! Maybe people will determine our founding documents were in fact important, and not a means to an end.

Judge Samuel Alito and Vanguard

After reviewing some of the facts of the case, the concern about Judge Alito's "non-recusal" in a case of a woman suing Vanguard is ridiculous.

It is true that with Vanguard being a mutual company, it is owned by its shareholders. This is no different than an auto insurance policy from a mutual company, such as State Farm. So does that mean that if State Farm was a defendant or a plantiff in a case, and a judge has auto insurance through State Farm that said judge must recuse himself/herself? That is patently absurd and all of the skirmishing about this issue is a red herring. It is simply left wing radicals (and lazy reporters) making a big deal out of nothing.

The only reason this is any kind of big deal is that these said radicals and reporters can't find any red meat on the guy and they are figuring out that, in reality, he is a pretty good guy and a great judge.

I hope that if there is some dirt we should know about, that it comes out, but it is important for everyone to remember that he is applying for a judicial position and not a political one.

Judge Samuel Alito

After doing some reading about Judge Alito, it is my opinion that he will be confirmed with just slightly less of a majority than did Chief Justice Roberts. His credentials are impeccable, he has shown in his opinions to base his decisions on the rule of law, rather than his own opinions, and he is probably a hell of alot smarter than most of the members of the Senate Judicial Committee.

This pick, rather than being "sloppy seconds," as John Roberts of CBS news recently asked, should have been the pick in the first place. And fortunately, we won't have to hear Rev James Dobson testify, nor are the reasons for his pick because "he is a good Christian."

I believe that this hearing will be contentious, but informative. Hopefully, he will be able to faithfully execute the Constitution, and not the unConstitutional judicial ammendments thereto.

New Policy

I am sorry to have to do this, but I am officially restricting the comments section of this blog to stop getting a bunch of solicitations for mortgages, larger genitalia, etc.

If you have an interest in making a comment, please register with Blogger so that you can do so.

This should not restrict your ability to view my blog, by please e-mail me if you have any difficulties.

Speaking of the CIA Leak

This weekend, on one of the Sunday talk shows, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, announced that she hoped the special prosecutor would pursue the case (release of classified information) on its merits and not on some spurious side charge like perjury or obstruction. Further, she attempted to redefine perjury by implying that perjury can include forgetting to disclose information and needing to go back and re-clarify information.

Now I am no lawyer (and I am sure she is), but it seems to me that perjury is lying under oath. Last I checked, lying is willful deception.

If someone in the administration, up to and including the President, can be found guilty of perjury or obstruction, the federal government has every right and need to pursue the toughest remedy possible to prevent the violation from occuring again.

Further, it is somewhat disingenuous that Senator Hutchinson would preclude a charge of perjury or obstruction when those are the precise charges that caused President Clinton's impeachment.

It just goes to show you that you can't trust a politician. Because like you or I, for the most part, politicians strive to keep their jobs.

Political Scandal Bigger Than CIA Leak

There is a bigger political scandal floating around out there which dwarfs the Valerie Plam CIA leak case involving the President's closest advisers. This scandal threatens to change how politics is done in Washington.

And for that reason, I fear the story won't get much traction.

Jack Abramoff is a lobbyist on what is called "K Street," or the address of most lobbying firms in Washington, D.C. He has also been friendly with largely conservative causes and has friends high up in the conservative movement. However, he has gotten into some trouble lately. Apparently, he has been soliciting funds from certain Indian Tribes to represent their gambling interests to Congress. So far, this is typical of how this relationship works. A special interest, such as Indian Tribes, pays tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars to lobbyists to pressure Congressmen to vote for their interests. If this sounds like bribing officials, that is because in any other walk of life, it would be. However, this is how politics is done in Washington, D.C. and is perfectly legitimate.

Where Abramoff got into trouble is that he attempted to increase the purview of his interests by laundering the funds to other lobbyists with political influence. This was done to skirt campaign finance rules and increase the scope of support to pressure politicians.

With this money, the lobbyists don't actually write a check to the politicians. Rather, they take the politicians on fancy trips (sometimes out of the country), to pressure the politicians to see their point of view. This is the bribe. These trips can be golf outings or ski trips, cruises or other general vacations, but they are all done for the same reason.

It is tremendously unfortunate this does not receive more press, because these are the people who are influencing votes by politicians. If you thought your $2,000 contribution or your letter does it, you are mistaken. The fact is, Representatives and Senators go on hundreds of these trips each year. This is where power is in politics and all campaign finance legislation is worthless unless it addresses this graft.

Fortunately, all of these trips are required to be reported, so you can see who is buying your Senator or Representative's vote.

The Nomination of Harriet Miers

As you probably know, the President recently nominated Harriet Miers, White House Legal Cousel, to become the next associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). As you probably know, I am skeptical of almost all politicians, whom I believe rarely have standard voters interests in mind when making decisions.

Does anyone else find it troubling that one of her main qualities is that she is a good Christian? Of course, there is nothing wrong with being Christian (coming from someone who was born and raised Roman Catholic), but I have never heard a national candidate for any office being qualified because they are a good Christian. But that is exactly what supporters of her justiceship are saying.

I believe that the nomination process of federal judges and justices just goes to show that being a judge is now a political position, and will be until we rightly return political power to the people and remove power from politicians and judges.

International Coverage in the Media

For those of you, like myself, who have stopped reading the New York Times to protest their pay service, I suggest that you check out both the Christian Science Monitor and the Washington Post. Both have amazingly in-depth world coverage. Additionally, Yahoo has begun running a series on war zones around the globe called "Hot Zone" with Kevin Sites, which is also excellent and takes you to countries you wouldn't see otherwise.

The Cold Arrived Early This Year

Today's high temperature is expected to be 63 degrees. For Oregon, that is pretty chilly. In fact, last year's warm temperatures lasted into late October. The last time this city saw an 80 degree day was September 8, one of the earliest days on record.

I say this not to make some profound point, but for the sake of posterity. If anyone comes across this blog and wants to know what the temperature was like this year, well now you know!

On a separate note, I am sick for the second time this year. This time is worse than the last for certain. Being that I am never sick, hopefully I am getting this out of my system for a couple of years.

Why Hurricaine Katrina Shows Us Less Government is Better

Many communists and socialists around the world have been quite glib in their converage of Hurricaine Katrina. These statements have been profoundly arrogant and almost joyous. They have ranged from, "America should have signed the Kyoto Protocol," as if that would have done anything to prevent any weather or natural event for at least 10 years, to "this is an example of how big government is far superior to less government."

As you might imagine, I completely disagree with these Cassandra's. I believe this is an important opportunity to see why big government has failed us. Who were successful in addressing this natural disaster? Who failed? The American people, under no prompting from the government, raised more than a half billion dollars within a week for this crisis. Charities, churches and concerned individuals were on the ground, despite many having travelled by car across the country. Problems ocurred when they had to collaborate with FEMA and other government agencies.

While each government agency was complaining about not getting support, or how the response was somebody else's fault, the Red Cross was creating evacuation shelters. When the governor was paralyzed from doing anything to help her citizens, the Salvation Army was handing out food. When the mayor was cursing out the Feds, churches were paying rent for evacuated residents to find temporary housing (not in a crowded sports arena) and when our wonderful Congress was passing bills for billions, laden with pork which went to different parts of the country not even disturbed by the hurricaine, Craigslist.com members were offering peole to stay in their own homes.

If anything, this disaster should show us that no matter what the government prepares for, it is ill-suited to provide for the people in times of crisis. The wonderful people of this country showed their true colors and came through for those in need. I believe this disaster shows us what a disaster government is and that we can probably save a lot of suffering and about three billion dollars by just terminating FEMA. Is that too radical a solution? Probably, but I am just fed up with all politicians telling me that government is the solution. As President Reagan once said (and somehow Republicans forgot), I don't believe that government is the solution to the problem, but the source.

New York Times

Tomorrow is the last day that the most popular sections of the online version of the New York Times will be provided free of charge. For those of you who want to read the newspaper going forward, you will either have to get a paper subscription (which will cost about $125 per year, or subscribe to the online content, which will cost $49.95.

While I will miss not being able to read columnists Tom Friedman, Nicholas Kristof, and David Brooks, I'll get over it. The Times, while establishment, is a "left-wing" American paper. This means, that in America, it caters to the left-wing establishment. It is undoubtedly conservative, say in Europe, but not here.

One example is a news artilce I read this morning. It was very interesting, written by a John Leland. The topic was abortion and the author travelled to an Arkansas abortion clinic. It was largely apologetic that there was such a stigma associated with abortion. In fact, this stigma, which coupled with mountains of regulations, is making abortions more difficult to obtain, the author lamented.

Aw shucks. It seems mountains of regulations are OK for every industry except abortions, eh? I am quite familiar with this regulation regime. However, the industry in which I work is regulated far more than the abortion industry. In fact, if you listen to other NY Times authors, my industry is not regulated enough. While I choose not to disclose my industry (doing so may violate my company's Blog policy), I can assure you that decisions I make do not affect life or death.

Having said all of this, the Washington Post is a far superior (and balanced) paper, with a far superior on-line precense. Congrats to that paper's editors, because their sponsors should stand to benefit immensely from the Times err in judgement.

How 'bout them Cowboys?!

Both of you who read this periodically probably know that I am a big Dallas Cowboys fan. Even though my Dad's dedication to the team has been wavering as of late, I will continue to carry the flag. And my patience through these difficult times (at least for 1 day) has paid off. The Cowboys defeated a very difficult San Diego Chargers team in San Diego; no small feat.

This rebuilding they have most recently gone through reminds me of the rebuilding they did in the late 1980's. Fans, and even players, were very upset at the sacking of Tom Landry, and those of us in Thousand Oaks, California were very upset at the Cowboys moving their training camp back to Texas.

Nonetheless, the Cowboys went on to win 3 championships and drafted three of the top 20 players the NFL has ever seen. Sometimes, you just have to keep the faith.

So far, that patience is paying off. Go Cowboys (now 1-0).

"The Mongol Warlords"

My most recent readings concerned the Mongol Warlords, specifically, Genghis, Kublai, and Hulegu Khan, as well as Tamerlane (or more appropriately, Timur the Lame).

I decided I wanted to know a little more about Central Asia, so I looked back, way back.

The Mongol empire ruled nearly all of Asia in the 13th through the 15th centuries, and theirs was a brutal and highly effective empire. Their skills were matched by few, and consequently, they instilled fear everywhere they went. In fact, many lands immediately gave up upon the Mongols coming.

What I found most interesting about the book is that, despite the fact that they were utterly dominant in the region, to include all of the Muslim lands east of Arabia, ultimately, they had largely converted from shamanists to Muslims. How bizarre is it that conquerers accept the relgion of the people they conquer? I am sure there is a good answer out there, but it was an interesting anamoly.

My next bood is, "In the Land of Magic Soldiers," which is about the civil war in Sierra Leone, a nation in Western Africa. It, like the above is a quick read, as I will probably finish it in 4 days.

I'll soon let you know the details of this.

My Birthday

As both of you who read these postings know (and thanks for the calls), yesterday was my birthday. As I am quickly approaching the age of 30, I have recently been reflecting that I don't particularly feel old, simply by my age. Rather, what makes me feel old is when I go to a store or mini-market and view the sign which indicates that you had to be born on such and such a date to purchase cigarettes, for example.

So I was at the mini-market the other day, and I looked at this sign and it said you had to have been born on or before August 31, 1987. Then I thought back to what I was doing at in that year, and now I am starting to feel old.

Katrina 2

Earlier this week, Rep Dennis Hastert (R-IL) made a comment something akin to it making more sense to abandoning the old New Orleans and rebuilding in a safer place. This brought outrage among Louisiana politicians and others.

But why? New Orleans, although historic and a tourist spot, is on ground which has been sinking for hundreds of years. This instability caused the "fish-bowl" effect which caused the city to continue to suffer such horrific disasters.

Some are calling for the reconstruction and shoring up of additional levees. The truth of this tragedy is that the levees were constructed for protection of nearly any devestation. The levees were thought to have a 99.5% liklihood of success, meaning that about once every 200 years, some storm might come and breach the levees. Statistics are that this is about as good as it gets. No matter what you build there, there is some probability of failure. How are we going to protect against that when it happens?

Every community has some liklihood of devestation, whether it be tornadoes in the Midwest, earthquakes in the West, or tsunamis in the Pacific and Indian oceans. What community planners must do is to design to reduce the liklihood of failure. They should at least seriously consider this option.

Finally, John Thierney of the New York Times, today proposed some changes to how this country insures against floods. As you may or may not know, 2/3 of the homes in the region that was just devestated had no flood insurance. This is often the case in the regions that need it most. The more expensive the insurance, the less likely people are to build in a specific region, thereby making it less likely that this kind of devestation will occur. Because the Federal Government essentially offers free insurance to people in the hurricaine zones, there is no incentive to not build here.

If you'd like to check out the article, it can be accessed at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/03/opinion/03tierney.html?oref=login

Have a great Labor Day weekend!

Hurricaine Katrina

This past week, Hurricaine Katrina, a hurricaine which measured a category 4 (or once in a 300 year hurricaine to hit the United States) did hit the Gulf Coast. Without a doubt, this catastrophe was devestating. In these kinds of times, peoples' generosity overwhelms you. My wife and I just donated to Mercy Corps, a locally based charity which allowed us to earmark our contribution for this disaster.

I suggest for those of you who have an interest, to look up the website, www.charitynavigator.org. This will allow you to pledge money to the most efficient charity you wish to contribute.

Donate if you can.

Outraged About Gasoline!

No, it's not what you think. I am not outraged by the prices; not even the $6 print in Atlanta. Anybody who wishes to pay $6 per gallon for gasoline has every right to do so. And the government has no obligation in protecting people from their own stupidity.

What I am outraged about is the commentary and the whining by consumers. No government is telling you that you must drive. Further, no government is telling you to buy an automobile that gets less than 25 miles per gallon. We as individuals freely make choices, and one of those choices is to pay for gasoline.

While I am not thrilled by paying $3 per gallon for gasoline, the prices have risen so dramatically for two reasons: demand is outstripping supply, and frankly, prices should rise to whatever level sellers can make a profit, even an outsized profit.

Let me put it this way. Gasoline is no different than a home, except that shelter is a requirement of life. If I wanted to try to sell my 1050 square foot home for $1 million, would I be accused of "price gouging?" Probably not, because nobody would be stupid enough to buy my little home, as cute as it is, for $1 million. In fact, I'd be lucky to get an agent who would waste his time trying to market my house for $1 million. But I have every right to try to list it at this price, even though it would be nearly 8 times my purchase price.

If housing prices had gotten so hot that somebody was actually willing to buy my home for $1 million, should I go to jail for price gouging? Of course not. The counter party has every right to purchase any house they want (or rent for that matter), and they should attempt to bargain for the best price. That is what makes the system work.

If you willingly choose to pay $6 for gas, you are solely to blame for telling the market that $6 is an appropriate price. I don't fault gas stations for raising their prices. They should. In fact, they should raise prices enough to make a sufficient profit (in their eyes, not the governments) and still be competitive with other stations, so long as they are not colluding with other stations, which probably should be against the law.

So if you don't like the high prices for gasoline, I have a tip: Don't buy gas! If someone is charging what is too much in your eyes, don't buy from them ever again. And tell them. It is your choice to pay higher prices for gasoline.

Most recent book

I recently completed another book, this one about Uzbekistan. I chose this topic for a couple of reasons:

First, Uzbekistan, if not at the heart of the war on terrorism, is certainly in one of its ventricles.

Secondly, I knew so little about Central Asia that I figured I wanted to know something about it.

The book (once again, a travelogue), called "Chasing the Sea" by Tom Bissell, was the reporting of a former Peace Corps Volunteer, who had returned after terminating his service early in the mid 90's. The country is largely a desert flatland, consisting of steppe and even some mountainous regions east of its capital in Tashkent.

Uzbekistan is interesting because while nominally Muslim for more than 1000 years, religion, particularly ardent, practicing religion had not been embraced until very recently, when an insurgent form of Islam began to develop with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

I predict that Central Asia will be a cross roads of sorts in the war on terrorism within the next decade, or so.

Colonoscopy

Yesterday, I had my second colonoscopy in three years. The main purpose of this analysis was to see if I had developed any additional pollyps, one of which was determined to be pre-cancerous in my previous scope.

As I had thought, the worst part was the prep, where I had to drink 2 liters of a substance roughly akin to drinking storm drain water. Once that was complete, I felt much better. The scope itself was brief, painless and non-memorable (thanks to the Verced).

For people who should get one, don't hesitate. It is such a simple procedure, which is mostly painless and it can, in fact, save your life.

I am likely to have at least one every five years for the rest of my life to assure the doctors and myself that I am not developing colon cancer (a slow moving but very deadly killer).

And, after not eating for nearly 48 hours, my first meal was terriyaki chicken from the local grocery store in Tualatin, Haagen. It was even better than I remembered.

Whiz Wit'

Last night, my good friend Mat came over for a weekly bull session/barbecue and we grilled up some flank steak (choice from Fred Meyer, only $2.50 per pound) for a menu item he refers to as a "Whiz Wit'" which is basically a Philly Cheese Steak minus the peppers. It includes steak (sliced), onions, a french roll and of course, Cheese Whiz. Yes, it is as good as it sounds, particularly since we used Walla Wallas for the onions.

Once a week we try to get together and cook up some kind of different meal (utilizing his culinary expertise). Since it is the Summer now, we have largely been barbecuing, which we both enjoy tremendously. Kari doesn't benefit as much since she won't eat most any kind of meat, but she is quite a good sport.

Pseudoephedrine

Recently, the Oregon legislature became the first in the country to require a prescription to get common cold medicine.

First, some points of reference:

For the past year or so, all pseudoephedrine products are located in the pharmacy, "behind the counter," and require proof of identification to purchase these products (Sudafed, Migraine and allergy medication).

Also, Washington state does not require a prescrption for this medicine (although they also may hold the products behind the counter).

It is not required by Oregon State law for a doctor to meet with a patient to dispense prescriptions.

As with all things government, their intentions are good. Obviously, methanphetamine is a dangerous illicit drug. Furhter, we do not wants labs which turn pseudoephedrine (and other ingredients) into methanphetamine. However, requiring a prescription will only serve to harm the vast majority of the population. People will spend far more time going to their doctors because of the common cold. This will monopolize doctors valuable time and increase the cost of health care.

Further, if we want to prevent the conumption of methanphetamine, this will not work. We already know that other drugs with completely illegal ingredients are prevalent in the state, despite the fact that you cannot legally obtain any of the ingredients (such as heroin, cocaine, and marijuana).

If we want to prevent the manufacture of these drugs in the state (homemade labs), this legislation will not impact that aspect either. Drug dealers can import pseudoephedrine in from Washington, Idaho, California, or as is currently common, Mexico. Because of these restrictions, the cost (and therefore profit) of methanphetamine will rise, encouraging additional participants into the market, especially organized crime.

So we have to ask ourselves, how do we reduce consumption and production of a drug (or anything for that matter). Economically speaking, to reduce demand of any item with inelastic demand (not price sensitive), requires allowing people to choose not to consume that item on their own (such as cigarettes). Unfortunately, the only two items which work in this capacity are stigma and education. Price does not provide much impact. If we are looking to reduce supply of any item, it must become economically unattractive for the producers. This is caused by driving prices down, making it less profitable, driving high cost manufacturers out of business. This cannot be accomplished by any of the current legislation which will only drive prices higher.

Judge Roberts Again

As some of his recent writings are coming to light, I find the judge more and more to my liking. In one memo, Judge Roberts suggested that the government shouldn't attempt to motivate housewives to become lawyers (presumably anybody, as the last thing this nation needs is more lawyers).

Additionally, he penned the below (from the Washington Post), which is equally humorous.

"While some of the tales of woe emanating from the Court are enough to bring tears to the eyes, it is true that only Supreme Court Justices and school children are expected to and do take the entire summer off," Roberts wrote. But, he added, there was an upside to that break: "We know that the Constitution is safe for the summer."

Judge John Roberts

Say what you will about the President (as a matter of full disclosure, I voted for President Bush in 2000, but not 2004), but despite the joke that he is continuously "misunderestimated," he continues to be underestimated.

This is amazing considering all of the press attempting to trip him up. The Roberts pick was truly brilliant. As I have said before and will continue to say, those who underestimate the President and dismiss him as an idiot, do so at their own peril. Despite being a poor public speaker, he is a very smart guy (especially politically).

Roberts is a great pick whom, unless someone finds a Klan robe in his closet, will win confirmation. The President could have picked any number of candidates but made a good choice. He could have been swayed by some strategists who undoubtedly wanted him to pick a woman. He could have been swayed by his own feelings and picked an Hispanic. But, he chose to pick a candidate who will flummox the Democrats, and that is exactly what is happening. In fact, President Bush has nearly single-handedly turned public opinion against NARAL, the pro-abortion group, without saying a word.

Further, Senator Hillary Clinton, who is likely running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008, finds herself backed into a corner. She even came out modestly in support for Judge Roberts, subject to her own investigation.

From a strategic point of view, this pick is doing what Karl Rove never could. If the Democrats think they can get the President to nominate a democrat to the Supreme Court, they have made a serious miscalculation and will suffer because of it.

Recent Happenings

As of today, Kari and I are still recovering from a wicked Summer cold which we have had for more than a week, but we are certainly feeling better. I can't remember the last time I had a cold in the Summer time. In fact, I can't really remember the last time I had a cold, period, but it's definately not fun. The one plus is that I was able to finish reading my last book. Aside from that, though, I am just glad to be feeling better.

It is supposed to be in the high 80's today, and I am looking forward to some barbecue, and perhaps one or two ice cold beers.

Polling Data

As someone who is somewhat versed in statistics, I find the media's fascination with polls to be....fascinating. It is truly amazing how many polls tell different stories and how some data is outright manipulated. It is also an interesting American (possibly international, but definately American) phenomenon that people want to be part of the middle or average. For whatever reason, if you tell somebody to answer a question yes, no, or maybe, they will usually choose maybe.

I can't explain why this is, but it does help to answer alot of questions about how insignificant polling data is.

For example, I was looking into polling data on the issue of abortion. One poll, conducted at the beginning of the month suggested that about 15% of this country believes that there should be more restrictions nationwide on abortion. 33% believes that abortions should only be performed in the case of rape, incest, or when the woman's life is in danger. Another 15% believes that only an endangered woman's life warrants a legal abortion, and 5% say abortions should never be legal. This is a rather nondescript question more subject to "middling" as some people might call it.

On the other hand, in a poll conducted in April by Fox News/Opinion Dynamics suggested that 72% of respondents believe that children (women under the age of 18) must require the consent of their parents to receive an abortion. A CBS News poll in July confirms this. This issue is less subject to "middling" because it is a specific question.

The news media should use less polls to attempt to figure out what they want to know, because until they are done correctly, they won't reveal anything

The Estate Tax

The estate tax has been making the rounds in the press lately. I find the debate to be quite lame. I'd rather not focus on who deserves to be taxed on their death (at what price point), and rather focus on the righteousness of such a tax in the first place.

As in too many debates, people get lost in the details. The estate tax, like the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) because people don't seem to have a problem forcing the wealthy to pay an unfair tax. After all, they have enough money, right?

I'm sorry, but that is where I end the debate. The estate tax is a Communist idea, probably developed by Karl Marx in his "Communist Manifesto." In fact, the concept is plank #3, "Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance."

The principle in and of itself is so un-American, it is surprising that any Americans will stand for it. If the tax were to affect all American families, rather than just the very wealthy, at least it would be intellectually consistent. But, unfortunately, that would also likely completely erode the support of the tax.

I have no problems with wealthy people paying more in taxes than the poor (numerically, not on a rate basis, which is plank number 2 on the Marx hit list), but tax these individuals in ways that are consistent regardless of wealth. You can certainly find a way to make sure that these families pay their "fair share."

Recent Reading

My most recent book was called, "Highlanders" by Yo'av Karny. I found the book to be the most in-depth of current issues surrounding many of the states within the Caucasus region. For now, this shall be the end of my studies of the Caucasus. My next journey takes me a little east to Uzbekistan in a book called, "Chasing the Sea." I will keep you up to date, but thus far it is quite interesting. The author, Tom Bissell, was a Peace Corps volunteer from the mid-90's and is roughly my age, so it is certainly an interesting perspective.

After this, I am going to read more about the Mongol invasion and how it impacted this region of the world.

Two Proufound Events

I may be naive about such things, but it seems there were two recent profound events that recently ocurred that should have implications for years.

The first, and most important, was the passing of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia. While in a coma for nearly a decade, certain factions of the Saudi royal family have been hoping for him to outlive the Crowned Prince Abdullah (now King Abdullah). This faction believed Abdullah to be too much of a reformer in the kingdom. Fortunately for this country, that faction has lost. Now we shall see the direction the kingdom shall take.

Second is the United States involvement in Kyrgystan and Uzbekistan. Both countries recently asked us to wrap up our military involvement in those countries in relation to our operations in Afghanistan. Uzbekistan is by far the least democratic of the two nations and has recently been accused of slaughtering several hundred dissidents. Despite our military necessity, we have been diplomatically nudging Uzbekistan to reform, which admittedly will be a difficult task. After hearing too much of this, Islam Karimov (president of Uzbekistan) asked the US to leave. To our credit, we did not tone down our reformer rhetoric despite our interests there (not to mention from an energy perspective). If we can follow through, this shall have positive ramifications for years to come.

Oregon State Budget

Today, the Oregon legislature tentatively has agreed to a budget for the 2006-2007 biennium. Of course, as most states do, more than 50% of the state budget goes towards funding public education.

One statement, however, caught my ear. This was that the Hillsboro, Oregon school district was going to have to suffer with a teacher to student ratio of 30 to 1. In reality, this probably means 35 to 40 students per classroom, with administration filling out the rest.

If I recall correctly, as a youngster in a private school (you know, the independently wealthy), every single year, each class I was in (2nd through 8th grade), started with 40 students. We didn't have teacher's aides. We never had a parent volunteer in the classroom.

I am not sure what the answer to the nation's school funding problems are. I don't claim to be an expert. But I know, that the more money that is spent on schools, the more money that is wasted. Kids don't need lower teacher to student ratios. They need more discipline and less lawyers involved in their education. They need parents who care about their kids succeeding in education and are willing to sacrifice everything in order to make sure this happens.

Until then, you can reduce the classroom size to 3 students per teacher, and it won't make a difference. Education costs will rise (read that taxes will rise) and students will be less and less successful.

The Coming Hyperflation?

One of the reasons I am such a proponent of studying history (now that I am no longer in school) is that I believe if we don't know our history, we will most certainly repeat our mistakes. While this is an oft-used cliche, it is most certainly a truism.

Recently, Hawaiian legislators have decided to put a "price-cap" on gasoline prices. They have attempted to do this by capping wholesale sale prices. Have people forgotten why we had hyperinflation and gas lines in the 1970's? Apparently so.

It is quite simple, folks. If you put a cap on the price of an item in demand, shortages will occur. Hawaiian gas stations will need to begin rationing gas so that they can somewhat match supply with demand. When people get sick of the rationing, legislators will remove caps and cause prices to spike upward.

This example is not isolated. The same thing occurs because of rent-control in apartments, food in the former Soviet Union, etc. It is a very simple cause-and-effect and legislators in Hawaii are preparing to see it happen again. Hopefully, this virus will not spread.

From the provocative to the mundane....

Today is the first day of my first vacation of the year. I will be at home through July 31 and am very much looking forward to it. The weather appears to be cooperating and my Father will be in town.

Additionally, one week from today will be my fourth wedding anniversary. While it is not much compared with my Grandparents of more than 60 years, it is a start.

Hope you have a great weekend and you may hear from me before this weekend is yet out.

Troubling Statements from Democratic Lawmakers

Yes, I am a public policy junkie. I was watching C-Span today and at the hearing were several former intelligence officers. The topic of the hearing was the release of Valerie Plame Wilson's identity to the press, which had no problem then disseminating this information far and wide.

The statement came from Rep Henry Waxman (D-CA), who mentioned that the Congress had authorized the President to take this country to war on some snappy metaphors that the White House staff came up with.

In other news, Sen Charles Schumer (D-NY), in a press conference with Sen Patrick Leahy (D-VT), stated that it was important to ask Supreme Court nominee, Judge John Roberts, questions about his legal philosophy because here is a man who will be helping to create law for at least 25 to 30 years.

What are our representatives doing? Rewriting the Constitution? I believe it is important for the American people to understand our law enough to be repulsed by these comments. First, Congress cannot authorize the President to take us to war; only Congress can declare war. I believe that every member of Congress who did in fact authorize the President to take us to war should be impeached. It is a clear violation of our beloved Constitution.

Second, the Supreme Court does not create law. Only the legislative branch can create law. Senator Schumer should and does know this. Perhaps it was a Freudian slip, but I highly doubt it. I am sure it was Senator Schumer suggesting what other Democratic legislators and many Republican legislators hope for, which is the Supreme Court creating laws for them (without the political blowback).

I for one am not amused.

Recent Reading....again

I just finished Robert Kaplan's, "Eastward to Tartary: Travels in the Balkans, Middle East and the Caucasus." I found the book very enjoyable, but unusual in that Mr. Kaplan seems to drink an awful lot of plum brandy and chai tea.

Seriously, though, I found the discussion of the regions very interesting. Most of the history of the regions date back to within the last 50 or so years, but Mr. Kaplan sure has quite a grasp of the history of these diverse regions.

All in all, I found Nicholas Griffin's, "Caucasus: Mountain Men Holy Warriors" more interesting in that the study was much more geographically isolated and it took a deeper look at the history of the region (going back around 200 years). Both of these journeys have caused me to check out yet another book on the region which I will report on shortly.

All of this reading will hopefully increase my enjoyment of an Oregon World Affairs Council event I will be attending this Thursday regarding Georgian (the country) wine and political issues at a local Russian restaurant. As with the event with Dr. Saltzel, I will report back after this event.

London Bombing

I have a couple of very controversial thoughts regarding the recent terrorist attacks in London last Thursday. The first is that this bombing is an example of two things: first, international jihadism in the developed world is losing. Frankly, I am surprised that we aren't seeing this kind of thing every week! Despite the alleged complexity of the bombs themselves, this kind of activity doesn't require massive planning. I believe it shows that the movement is running out of people in developed countries who want to kill themselves (at this time, the bombing is not believed to have been carried out by suicide bombers).

The second comment I have is by far the more controversial: were it not for Spain's reaction to the Madrid bombings, this London attack may not have ocurred.

My thesis about the appeal of jihadism has been that these groups are emboldened by success, and they wain by defeat. Osama bin Laden said as much in his 1996 fatwa declaring war on the United States:

"...when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut , Aden and Mogadishu."

This leads me to another unpopular statement which is that fighting against these groups will require many more thousands of American lives over maybe several decades. And while we should not allow ourselves to enter joyously into war, we must realize that this fight is far from over. And despite what some might believe (including former CIA Bin Laden chief, Michael Scheuer, whom I respect tremendously), if we were to withdraw our troops from the Middle East and stop supporting Israel, this will not end.

Summer in Portland

They say that summer in Portland begins around July 5th every year. While this hasn't been my experience in the past 9 years I have lived here, it is certainly acting that way now. Actually, yesterday was a beautiful day. Mat came over around noon and we barbecued some steaks, creating a masterpiece food item called a Whiz-wit. In short, it is like a Philly cheese steak, only slightly different. We grill the steak, after it has been marinating, heat of some Cheeze Whiz, lightly toast the buns, saute some onions and put it all together. It is quite tasty.

After Mat left, Kari and I watched the movie, "Shag," which is kind of a lady's version of "Animal House."

Finally, I finished the evening by reading a little from my book, "Eastward to Tartary." I have finally gotten to the last section, that of Tartary (or central Asian former USSR republics), like Georgia, Armenia, Kazahkstan, Uzbekistan, etc.). Good thing, too, because it is due back to the library on Wednesday.

Hope your 4th goes well and take the time to read the Declaration of Independece. It is well worth it.

I am an extremist!

Since the announced retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the polticos are bantering using typical political dialogue. The Democrats suggest that the President should be advised by their troupe. They warn that the President not select an extremist (under their breath they mention people like Antonin Scalia). Rather, he should seek middle ground on this issue, like President Clinton had done.

I have a very big problem with this for two reasons: first, the term "extremist" has come to mean someone who is ideolocially consistent. Unless you are willing to compromise your integrity, you are an extremist. I am truly SHOCKED that the people are willing to accept this assinign definition by such un-ideologically driven representatives, such as Senator Charles Schumer (D - NY) and Senator Edward Kennedy (D - MA). Are you kidding me? Have people gone crazy. Of course we want justices who are ideologically consistent. We don't need weak minded people who are willing to compromise the wisdom of our founding documents for political expediency.

Second, Presidents will always (and should always) select those individuals whom they believe will see cases through their own ideological framework. I don't care what anyone will try to tell me, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is not a moderate. In fact, for conservatives, she is the antithesis. As an abortion advocate, no conservative Senator would have advised support for her candidacy. However, despite this, she was selected and confirmed by a vote of 97 to 3. This is despite the fact that she has consistently voted in a manner diametrically opposed to by conservatives. Hell, they knew she would.

So Senators Kennedy and Schumer, while you are expert politicians, please don't mislead the American public into believing that it is people like President Bush who are inflaming the partisianship in government these days. In fact it is people exactly like you and your Republican counterparts.

Weekend of Independence Day

Don't forget to watch C-Span and the History Channel this weekend to watch some truly excellent programming surrounding the independence of this nation.

World Affairs Council: Dr Michael Haltzel

Last night, I attended an event sponsored by the Oregon World Affairs Coucil and the Portland Committee on Foreign Relations. It featured the speaker Dr Michael Haltzel, former foreign policy advisor to Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del). I found his speech most interesting. His stipulation was that the 5 most important foreign policy challenges over the forseeable future include 1) Islamic Fundamentalism, 2) WMD (particularly nuclear) proliferation, 3) the US economy, 4) an Avian flu pandemic, and 5) climate change (or more in reality the environment).

While largely partisan arguments, I found his perspective to be very moderate. Amazingly, these are five challenges that most Republicans would agree upon. What I have yet to see is representatives from both sides confront these challenges together. For most, it seems that absolute power is most important. This is a tragic mistake for the American people who will continue to run into difficulty because otherwise reasonable men have been reduced to name calling.

Senator Richard Durbin

Would you like to see the prototype of what is wrong in politics today? Look no further than Senator Dick Durbin's recent speech on the floor of the Senate.

First, Senator Durbin states, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings."

For days, Sen. Durbin (D-IL) refused to retract or apologize for his outrageous statement. However, after facing much pressure, Sen. Durbin followed up his treasonous remark with, "I have learned from my statement that historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood," Durbin explained. "I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings: Our soldiers around the world and their families at home deserve our respect, admiration and total support."

Of course, shortly thereafter, Senator Durbin responded to talk of his apology with the following, ""It's not that my remarks were wrong or that there's any need for apology," Durbin told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Friday. "It's the fact that [my critics] have successfully twisted them out of context." Durbin blamed conservatives for his troubles, saying that he refused to be "intimidated by the right-wing message machine."

And finally, after there was talk of censure, Senator Durbin was really sorry, even seeming to be choked up by his own lack of couth, "Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line," said the Illinois Democrat, at times holding back tears. "To them I extend my heartfelt apologies."

Recently, I watched a program w/ Senator George Mitchell (D-ME). What ever happened to respectable politicians like him.

Housing Bubble? (Pt 2)

I a previous post I opined on the state of the real estate market. I believe it is very important to remember the words of one of history's greatest economists who said, "The markets can remain irrational far longer than we can remain solvent" (or something to that effect. What John Maynard Keynes was suggesting is that asset prices will not necessarily reflect what they should be priced.

In any market (stocks, bonds, houses, and tuna fish), prices are a function of supply and demand. Sometimes, either factor can be artificially enhanced. One example is an "urban growth boundary." I have heard this used as a reason why Portland real estate cannot significantly decline in price. All I have to say about that is to look at Manhattan, which has a very significant urban growth boundary, namely the Hudson and East Rivers. It would be difficult to extend that boundary by law.

Another artificial enhancement is the tax break extended to home owners on mortgage interest. Of course, this enhances demand. Another is derivative mortgage products, allowing people to finance their homes interest only, or fluctuating monthly based upon some measure of interest rates. All of these factors serve to enhance the demand of housing. For prices to change, supply or demand (or both) must fluctuate.

Bottom line: can housing prices decline? Absolutely. Will any measured decline pose a very real problem for some borrowers? Absolutely. If you are in year 1 of a 30 year fixed mortgage and you do not have to move, are you in danger? Probably not. Will housing prices recover from a protracted decline? Sure. Just look to history for precedents. It may take a decade or more (depending upon the severity), but it should happen.

In a related sidenote, based upon an anonymous e-mail I received from a reader, I leaned that this post came up # 2 in popularity when I searched "housing bubble"+"oregon." Pretty cool, even if it did only bring in like 10 readers.

Hope the rest of your weekend goes well.

War

In one of the books I recently read (Caucasus: Mountain Men, Holy Warriors), I found a passage from Leo Tolstoy (author of Anna Karenina & War and Peace), who wrote about a 19th century warrior from the Caucasus named Hadji Murad (published in 1904). Murad had been fighting against the Russian empire who had been attempting to extend their empire into the Caucasus. This observation was:

"What always happens when a state, having large-scale military strength, enters into relations with a primitive, small peoples, living their own independent life. Under the pretext of self-defence (even though attacks are provoked by the powerful neighbour), or the pretext of civilizing the ways of a savage people (even though the savage people are living a life incomparably better and more peacable than the civilizers) or else under some other pretext, the servants of large military states commit all sorts of villainy against small peoples, while maintaining that one cannot deal with them otherwise."

And while this does not necessarily apply to our missions into Iraq, it is important for us to know why we are fighting. Is it for the defense of our nation, or that of ambition?

Recent Reading

Just finished two very good book. First was "The Big Picture" by Edward Jay Epstein about the entertainment industry. Second was "Caucusus: Mountain Men and Holy Warriors" about the Caucus region south of Russia and north of Iran.

Both were fascinating reads for their own reasons. "The Big Picture" is great for anyone who is puzzled by why Hollywood does the wierd things it does, like "why the hell is Tom Cruise dating Katie Holmes even a relevant news story?" Read the book and you'll understand.

"Caucusus" was very interesting because this is a very volatile region of the world that we don't know near enough about. The main areas in the region are Georgia, Chechnya, Albania, Azerbijian, and Dagestan. I picked up this book because I had heard alot about Chechnya as it applies to terrorism and wanted to learn more.

Both are very good.

Enjoy

The Fate of the European Union

While some media outlets are attempting to downplay France's rejection of the EU Constitution, they do so at their own peril. In my opinion, this is a huge story. France, one of the founders of the EU and one of the protagonists of the Europe versus America power bloc, will not be a part of the supranational European Union.

This action was taken by voters for two main reasons: approving the Constitution would likely dismantle the welfare state the French are so proud of and would also likely destroy the labor unions and send artificially high paying jobs to low wage countries such as the former Eastern Block countries.

Because of this rejection, France faces a major problem: their economy is a major drag on growth and employment. Unemployment in France (like other major European economies) is about 10%. Further, employees cannot work more than 35 hours per week. Without the support of Europe, France faces the real problem of a long-term declining economy.

Hopefully a force will emerge within France to reinvigorate their economy.

American Exceptionalism

What a term, eh? It has been a long time since this government has unequivocally said that we live in the greatest nation on Earth. Why is that? I believe we are lost in worrying about what others will think of us, rather than looking to us for inspiration.

In the book I am reading (The Big Picture), the author, Edward Jay Esptein mentions that many movies are molded into a format that Americans will enjoy. This format is where the good guys prevail in the end.

After watching Ronald Reagan's biography (which my sister-in-law got for me for Christmas) again, I remembered the things that make us great. We are an optimistic people. We are a kind people. And we are a generous people. And it is about time that we remember why our country is the best country out there.

I am simply exhausted by the moral equivalency that we hear from the press on a day-to-day basis. I don't care what happens in Iraq, Afghanistan or Guantanamo Bay; we live in the greatest nation on Earth.

Housing Bubble?

This morning, the New York Times ran an article about the surge in housing prices and asked if there was, in fact, a housing bubble. The answer: not really. Because in many towns, rental rates have been rising, this partly justifies the soaring cost of homes. In fact, when converted into a rental ratio (price of home/annual rent), this is much less of a bubble than the stock market was in 1999.

The article went on to indicate that some of the hottest markets have rental ratios between 20 and 35; much lower than price-to-earnings ratios on stocks in 1999.

I find this kind of weak analysis very amusing. The reason? Try to sell your home into a declining market and you will quickly find out. Stocks have (and must have for that matter) higher valuation metrics because of their liquidity. Furthermore, rents are ostensibly based upon personal income, which is probably a much more prudent measuring tool since rental rates fluctuate as much as housing prices. And, if you look at home values relative to median income figures, the statistics are much more telling.

Homes should sell at something like 3 X an area's median income. Of course, this is a rough estimate, but it should be based upon an individual's ability to service his mortgage debt. The above ratio, of course, assumes average interest rates. It also assumes that people aren't constantly cashing equity out of their homes (which is a significant problem, as families are relying upon this tool to fund consumption).

If you want to know what the average home in your part of town should be valued, look for the area's median income and median home price. In Portland, the median family income is $50,000. Therefore, the median home price should be about $150,000. In reality, the median home price in Portland as of about 6 months ago was about $185,000. This equates to approximately 25% overvalued. When this corrects (and it will), the decline generally overshoots the target. In short, when housing prices begin to fall, the decline will likely go to below $150,000. Maybe $140,000 or $130,000, causing value buyers to enter the market.

For some people, this will not be a problem. They don't need to move, have a fixed rate mortgage and aren't pulling equity out of their home. For some others, this could be devastating.

Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi

As some of you may know, since September the 11th, I have attempted to get my hands on as much data about terrorism and terrorism networks as I could possilby read. This has led me to some interesting information about what is going on out there.

Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi is alleged by some to be injured, by some to be dead, and by some to be doing well and planning additional insurgent attacks.

Right now, a disinformation campaign is occurring (probably by our CIA in conjunction with the Iraqi ruling parties). We are betting that by claiming Zarqawi is injured or dead (and leaking intelligence as such), that the insurgent networks that support him will do three things: scramble to verify his health, claim he is healthy, and those who cannot confirm this will struggle for power. So far, this is exactly what is happening. When there is a power vacuum, bad things happen to those in the vacuum.

The New Yorker Magazine

About 18 months ago, one of my clients proffered a complimentary subuscription of the New Yorker magazine to me. The New Yorker is not exactly a bastion of libertarianism, but nontheless, each month, the magazine publishes one really good, in-depth, well-researched article. The May 16th issue is no different.

The title of the article is, "A Hard Faith; How the New Pope and His Predecessor Redefined Vatican II." While I can't say that I know that much about Vatican II (other than it allowed Catholics to eat meat on most Fridays and Latin was no longer the language of Mass), I would guess most of the synopsis is rubbish. Having said that, there is a great sidestory about the bishops appointed under John Paul II and how the more orthodox sects of the faith are growing like the evangelicals, while the more "mainstream, liberal" sects are losing vast followings.

There are also some great quotes about doctrine I had never heard, but found fascinating, such as:

"We're at a time for the Church in our country when some Catholics - too many - are discovering that they've gradually become non-Catholics who happen to go to Mass. That's sad and difficult, and a judgment on a generation of Catholic leadership. But it may be exactly the moment of truth the Church needs." Archbishop Charles Chaput, Denver, Colorado

If you have an interest in reading the article online, you can access it via the following link: http://www.ctaww.org/articles/boyer_ahardfaith.htm

Sorry there is no hyperlink above, but I haven't yet figured out how to do that, or post pictures for that matter. Just copy and paste.

Enjoy!

Today's Agenda

Today is the Pug Crawl. The sun is shining and hopefully, we will be heading out to Northwest Portland to join dozens of other pug lovers. It is a great Oregon Humane Society event, and a good way to get our girls out of the house. It should be lots of fun. The website to the event is www.pugcrawl.org (sorry no hyperlink; I am still learning).

Political Parties: Root, Root, Root for the Home Team

I have an operating thesis about mainstream political parties: Ideology is lacking. Mainstream political parties want you to support their parties/candidates regardless of what their views are. There are no longer real platforms that people support, only home teams. Let me give you an example.

I became a Republican in 1994 (when I turned 18) because I believed in the party of limited government & limited taxes. I believed in firebrand idealogues like Newt Gingrich and Joe Scarborough. I didn't believe in all of their social policies, but I certainly didn't believe in the unlimited governement policies of the Clinton administration.

However, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It started rather benignly. Republican congressmen went back on their word about how many terms they would pursue in office. I first noticed it with George Nethercutt (R-Washington). I found it unsettling, but in my "home-team" mentality I speculated that it was better than the alternative.

George W Bush ran and became President on a ticket of limited government and more personal responsibility; fiscal discipline and tax cuts. As his term proceeded and more and more expansive government was created (ostensibly under the rubrick of national security), I began to think about what the conservative party was all about. I started reading writings of "Reagan Republicans" and one of President Reagan's lines stood out markedly to me. I don't have the exact quote, but it went something like, "some people believe that government is the answer to the problem; I believe government is the problem."

I started reading writings from our founders. I read the Declaration of Independence. I purchased a copy of the pocket Constitution. I started understanding the reasons for our declaration of independence from England and I noticed that while many of the reasons we seceded from the English empire were contained within the Democrats platform, they were also being adopted by the Republicans. This is when my radicalization occurred. I decided it was better to be an ideologue than a party to the destruction of our founding principles. I began to listen to the rhetoric of the political parties, such as, "a vote for Nader is a wasted vote."

Now, don't get me wrong. I wouldn't vote for Ralph Nader as I am diametrically opposed to most of what he believes. However, I do respect the man as he is certainly a crusader against the status quo. I also began to ask, "was a vote for Al Gore in 2000 a wasted vote?" After all, he did lose. If you voted for him, was your vote irrelevant? Of course not. Nor is a vote for someone in whom you believe. So I became a Libertarian. Now, there are certainly some interesting characters in the Libertarian party, and I may not be a Libertarian for life, but I did realize that I supported many more of the policies of Michael Badnarik for president than I did for George Bush.

So that was my change. The political parties decry the partisianship, but they love it. They know that the more activist their base, the greater they are to contribute to their causes. Why do you think that politicians make such enormous issues out of things like the tragic life and death of Terri Schiavo. After all, while what happened to her was tragic, it was certainly an issue that families conflict with every day. There is simply no reason that our Federal government should take up the issue and pass legislation upon the outcome of one person. That is expansive government. In the same way, why do you think the Democrats are so loud about the filibuster. These causes rally their bases, create more activists and attract capital. The activites serve to entrench the dividing lines between the parties and establish the permanance of the parties.

Well, enough of my soapbox for now. More later.

B

Great Movie!

Just saw Hotel Rwanda last weekend. This was a great movie. Too many of these scenarios play out each year around the globe. It is time we began to understand them and try to learn from our mistakes.

Despite the violence, this is a film that should be shown in classrooms around the country.

New Book again

After my most recent read, I picked up "The Big Picture" by Edward Jay Epstein. This is about the genesis of the movie industry, including the major developers and how movies are financed.

Here is a hint: it is more complex than ticket sales. I'll give the Cliff Notes version once I finish it.

Kari is feeling better

In a recent post, I had mentioned that Kari was feeling ill. Turns out she developed "walking pneumonia." She finally went to the doctor and is feeling much better now, but she was in bed for more than a week.

New Book

I just finished the book, "Ghost Wars," by Steve Coll. This is the book that just won the Pulitzer for non-fiction. It was fantastic. If you were wondering about the United States relationship with Afghanistan/Pakistan and Saudi Arabia from 1979 to September 10, 2001, this is the book. There wasn't alot that I didn't know the main story of, but it fills in lots of background data.

2005 Dodgers

Since it has been some time since I have been to a Dodger's game (probably 16 years) due to a geographic problem, I was pleased to see the Dodgers on ESPN last night. And what a great game it was. Although I didn't recognize many of the players, it was nice to see some offensive and even defensive production.

The Dodgers started Jeff Weaver, whom I recently discovered played little league around the same time I did in the same area (Simi Valley). He sported his usual scowl and did give up a dinger to the Reds' pitcher Eric Milton, but otherwise pitched a good game. The only comment I would make is that can't he give up grounders instead of all those fly balls? Some of them haven't landed yet.

Portland in May

Well, it is back to normal for our weather here in Portland. At 7:00 p.m. this evening, it is about 48 degrees and it has been raining all day. That certainly doesn't help Kari's flu/cold or whatever it is that she has. Fortunately, I have been thusfar immune to the sickness. She seems to be getting slightly better, although I am sure she doesn't feel like it.

Pope Benedict XVI

Now that we have a new pope, it is time for everyone to stop treating the Catholic Church like it is a democracy.

The Catholic Church follows a very fine line: life and charity. It is not time to start breaking these important traditions. Not now, not ever. If American Catholics have a problem with the tradition of the Church, they can always fall out, convert or become excommunicated.

New NY Times Columnist

This morning, the New York Times newest opinion columnist, John Thierney, wrote about a recent book detailing New York's drop in crime over the past decade. You may recall that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani ran a campaign to "clean up the city." He kicked porn vendors and "Squeegie Men" off the street, particularly Times Square. Due to hiring additional cops and being tougher on crime than his predecessors (David Dinkens, Mario Cuomo, etc.), crime dropped, or so thought many public policy analysts.

Fortunately, however, the real reason comes out, as Mr. Thierney reluctantly seems to agree. Abortion. Yes, because abortion became legal in the early 1970's, less would-be criminals existed because of abortions, and therefore, the crime rate dropped. Because, obviously, these aborted children would have been unloved, spent their entire youths in foster-homes, taking drugs and committing crimes.

Whew, am I glad we solved that! And New Yorkers want to know why people don't like them? Thomas Frank, what's the matter with New York?

New Name

I decided to turn down the flaming rhetoric and make this more of a site describing my daily life. So the blog's name is now Vandyblog.

I won't change my passions, but I will try to speak more about my ordinary life.

RINO (Republicans In Name Only)

I left the Republican party more than two years ago. Beginning in high school, and through President Bush's first presidential victory, I thought I was a staunch Republican. I thought Conservative and Republican were synonomous. I was a big fan of the 1994 Repuplican Revolution. Newt Gingrich was one of my heros.

I believe in small government, big military protection of our country and national interests, and individual responsibility. I believe in term limits of politicians and no majority rule.

All that Republicans stood for in 1994 has come crashing down. I have become disenfranchised with institutional politics. These politicians have a vested interest in keeping their jobs. Therefore, what do they do? They please their constituents with "free" money. They build federal roads in a 1/2 mile stretch in my small Milwaukie community. They subsidize scientists studying if they can convert pig shit into energy. They give tax breaks to one armed paper hangers. Government is a racket. This is not how it was supposed to be. Our founders established certain protections for us against the government of our own country. They declared that Congress is in power to protect and secure our rights; nothing more.

Today, Congress regularly takes rights away from us. They tell us that we cannot choose our own provider of electricity. They tell us that we must pay largesse so that they can fund their self-interested spending.

And now, Senator Gordon Smith (R-Oregon), has led an effort to eliminate the suggested cuts in the growth of Medicaid, a health care program for the impoverished. This would save approximately $17 billion. These "representatives" have lost their way. It is time to elect more ideologues and less partisans.

Steroids in Baseball

Ok. So using steroids without a prescription is against the law. And transporting illegal drugs across state lines is a federal crime. So why didn't the FBI arrest someone they thought was illegally using drugs?

Probably because doing so wouldn't allow them to grandstand on television.

Mayor Buddy Dyer, Orlando, Florida

Who? You may recall a big flap about Republican operatives trying to prevent blacks from voting in Florida in the 2004 presidential election. Does that ring a bell? If not, Democratic operatives around the country, including Paul Krugman and Bob Herbert of the New York Times, claimed that the Bush administration was employing the FBI to intimidate blacks in Florida (and by proxy, around the country) from voting. This was evicenced by the investigation into some voting practices.

Well on Friday, Mayor Dyer was indicted and arrested, along with several members of his campaign over payments made by the campaing to collect votes. In fact, one of those indicted, Ezzie Thomas (a prominent African American campaign consultant) was paid just over $10,000 to collect approximately 250 ballots and ostensibly take them to a polling places. Not bad for a couple of days work, eh? In fact, he was used in many Democratic campaigns for the same purpose, including a Judge Alan Apte.

Why was he paid so much for so little? Well, Mr. Thomas has been accused by some of telling certain African American voters to vote for the Democrat on the ballot (a violation of federal law), and in some cases, filling out the ballots himself (also, not surprisingly, a violation of federal law). At the time, this was clear evicence of the Bush administration intimidating black voters from going to the polls. Now it seems a clear indication of people like Herbert and Krugman too far on the lunatic fringe. Demand a retractment!

Recent Reading

I haven't written recently about the books I have recently read until now, as they are somewhat contrary in their assessment of terrorism today.

The first book I read was Bernard Lewis', "What Went Wrong," about what has caused Islamic peoples to lose their superiority of culture, education and military over the past millenium. His thesis is essentially that while Europe was embracing modernity, the middle eastern peoples of Messopotamia, Phoenicia, etc. did not. In large part, Lewis says, it was essentially hubris. These peoples did not believe that the European heathens could provide anything worthwhile. By the time the Islamic peoples realized this, Europe's military overpowered the middle eastern peoples. Lewis believes this is critical to understanding Arabs and other Muslims in their behavior today, as some are attempting to reclaim their former glory.

The second book I read was "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" This was written by Madmood Mamdani. Mamdani is a professor from Columbia University and this book gives a uniquely African perspective. Mamdani argues that the "proxy war principle" of American foreign policy is to blame for today's terrorism. This was the effort by America from the mid 1960's to the late 1980's to launch wars with non-American armies, funded in US dollars. Specifically, Mamdani cites Cambodia, Mozambique, Nicuragua, and Afghanistan. Obviously, the Afghanistan war was the most profound as we funded, trained and implanted the ideology of the mujihadeen we are currently fighting. I found Mamdani's book very interesting and informative, but thought he particularly blamed the Reagan administration more than Nixon, Ford, or Carter. His other main thesis was that the UN sanctions on Iraq was the first instance of a multilateral proxy war on Muslim peoples, causing the deaths of several hundred thousand Iraqi peoples, over half of whom were children. I believe this last statement goes toward the "success" of the sanctions against Iraq. Human rights organizations around the globe would adamantly disagree this was a success.

Overall, I found both very interesting, contributing to my understanding of the history of this extremism.

AARP & Social Security Part 2

To continue, the AARP is just another "bomb thrower" in public debate in this country. Unfortunately, in politics, everybody has something to gain or lose. Because of this, there is often not very reasoned debate. And this is what transpired in the meeting I attended.

The bottom line in this debate is that the Bush administration (and many other like-minded individuals) are preapring the system to be terminated. This hasn't been stated, but the policies will lead to the end of the social security system. This is great in my opinion. Social Security is a ponzi scheme of taxation. It makes assumptions that each generation will have roughly the same life expectancy, greater affluence, and roughly the same size as the prior generation. These assumptions probably would have held for centuries if Congress had not been spending the surplus of SS revenues over expenditures. Although I am not sure, I believe this probably began with President Johnson's, "Great Society" programs.

The bottom line is this:

The AARP acknowledges there is a funding problem. Their solutions are to raise taxes (up to $6,000 per person, depending upon income), push out the retirement age, and ask the younger generation to save more (even though we will be getting reduced benefits and higher taxes). What an insult. I am looking forward to Gen X'ers like myself totally abandoning the AARP as we age. If they do in fact push for these proposals to "save the social security system," their organization will certainly have a limited lifespan.

Social Security and the AARP

Today, I attended a luncheon at Portland's CityClub. I found it to be an excellent place to meet people who are active in the Portland community and a great place to discuss policies, etc.

The speaker today was the AARP's president, Marie Smith. Ms. Smith spoke for approximately 45 minutes and took 20 minutes of questions. Unfortunately, although a good speaker, she really didn't answer any questions, other than the ones she wanted to.

Ms. Smith said that private accounts as a portion of the social security system were risky and a gamble, compared to the "guaranteed" benefits of social security. She seemed to be concerned about deficits, except when someone mentioned the AARP's support of the Medicare prescription drug benefit (or the siginficantly larger unfunded liablity within the Medicare system).

More later...

Social Security ..... Again

I am glad I got my wish from several months ago. I believed it was time for America to have a debate about social security. Unfortunately, the only debate we have is partisan bomb throwing. Frankly, commentators are simply lying.

To set the record straight, the Social Security system currently receives approximately $200 billion per year more than it sends out. This "surplus" is spent by Congress on various programs and bonds are issued to pay this money back, plus interest, years from now. However, the money is still being spent. Between now and 2017 (when more money will begin coming out of the SS system than what goes in), the annual surplus will shrink.

So unless Congress is planning on spending $200 billion (and greater each successive year)less, there are only three other ways to "fix" social security. One way is to print dollar bills. This will greatly reduce the purchasing power of ordinary Americans, not just abroad, but at home as well. The second way is to raise taxes to close this gap. You can parse this many ways, but at the end of the day, taxes must go up. Or, you can reduce benefits to social security beneficiaries. This is obviously not popular. Nobody wants to to be guaranteed to receive a pay cut.

These are the only answers. Private accounts are benefit cuts. It is less money that the government is responsible for (it is also a cut in government spending as Congress will not have this extra money to spend). Raising the retirement age is a benefit cut. Increasing the maximum social security income level is a tax increase.

The scary thing is that Social Security is not even the most pressing looming unfunded liability; Medicare is. And unfortunately, the situation just got much worse with the prescription drug benefit.

Start saving now folks!

Farm Subsidies

Yahoo recently ran an article which contained the following quote from a farmer in Minnesota, "What do they want from us? Do they really want us to succeed out here and support our local communities? Or do they want us to quietly go away and sell out to an investor?"

I found this line to be classic. This woman was complaining that the new Bush budget suggested pretty hefty cuts to classic farm programs. I can compare it to a welfare mother complain about how, after 70 years, her payments were being cut, leading her to not be successful. Does that make sense? Then why are we paying farmers tens of billions of dollars per year?

It is probably helpful to start from the beginning. Farm subsidies began around the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, when farms were closing up shop. The were being bankrupted by failing banks and natural disasters. They have continued to receive payments because small states (farming states) have just as many senators as large states.

Now, farmers are paid billions to produce more, less, and sometimes no crops at all. All of these factors, of course, affecting the prices of the items they farm. In fact, 10% of all farms out there receive nearly 3/4 of all of the subsidies. This generally means agribusinesses, like Archer Daniels and Corn Products. So next time you wonder about how we can lower taxes, think about all of the subsidies we pay to the largest agricultural corporations.

NY Times

Tom Friedman came out in the Times today declazring that the US should decrease the reward on bin-Laden and Zarqawi to 1 penny and an autographed picture of GW Bush. I think this is a great idea. As he says, the only thing increasing the reward serves to do is to increase the value of bin-Laden in the eyes of the crazies. If $25 million isn't enough, then nothing is.

Additiomally, Friedman met with Russert this weekend. He sounded pretty optimistic regarding Iraq's elections. Even France and Germany are finally siding with the Americans. Is this good? Hopefully this will allow others to risk their lives, rather than just our brave soldiers. Maybe even the chickenshit French and Germans will decide that fighting is in thier best interests.

Democracy in Iraq

First, I would like to congratulate the people of Iraq who are the most recent liberty achievers. You're road will be diificult and contentious, but well worth it.

Second, prior to yesterday's elections, the sociopath Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi addressed the Iraqi people. He declared that democracy on its face was effectively idolatry, where citizens worship their elected leaders, and not God. However, deeper into his statement he declared, "That which the people permits is permitted, that which it forbids is forbidden, and that which it accepts as law and regime must be accepted as such. Anything else has not sanctity nor value nor weight, even if it is religion or divine law given by the Lord of the world."

If he is referring to straight domocracy, he is factually correct. However, this is what a constitution is all about. The reason our Constitution is so important, why we can't afford to let it "evolve" over time is that it protects us from the whims of legisltors. We have protections from them with laws defining government powers (Article I, Section VIII), including specific acts Congress cannot legislate. I sincerely hope the new interim Iraqi legislators take heed.

I'm back....

For both of you who have been wondering what have I been doing, I have been taking a break.

However, now that the political rhetoric is back in full swing, I will be as well. And not a moment too soon. The topic of the day is social security reform. Well it's about time.

I'll be back for more later.