Category: Uncategorized

CNN will shut down its struggling CNNfn financial news network in mid-December, giving up its attempt to compete with CNBC after nine years. A handful of programs will be shifted to the main network. CNN also said it is planning changes for its Headline News offshoot, offering prime-time programming instead of a constantly repeating 30-minute newscast.

CNNfn is only available in about 30 million of the nation’s 110 million television homes. With the coming expiration of its deal with the DirecTV satellite system, it faced the prospect of losing more distribution. It launched in December 1995 when business, and business news, was hot. CNBC’s ratings plunged when the Internet bubble burst on Wall Street, and CNNfn failed to gain footing, too.

We’ll know to start looking for an end to Wave 3 when CNBC goes off the air too.

From WND:

Here are the facts the NTSB failed to address and resolve before resorting to a theory without credible factual support:

Many credible witnesses described a modest initial explosion that created a fire toward the rear of AA587. At least one rear passenger door and a cargo door appeared to have separated from the plane in the opening seconds of the tragedy.

The NTSB made no attempt to interview and obtain comprehensive statements from the witnesses and attempt to use those statements to develop an initial investigative hypothesis. An honest investigation would have expeditiously taken this step. Then, evidence would be built around those statements, or the statements would be shown by objective analysis to be in error. And the reasons for judging witness statements in error would be fully explained in writing. This did not happen.

The NTSB did not release photos and a debris field map showing where the first parts of the aircraft rested on the Bay floor under only a few feet of salt water.

Potentially critical video tape of AA587 has been withheld from the public.

Within minutes of AA587 going down, Colin Powell and other high-ranking federal officials raced for the media microphones and began chanting a propaganda mantra: It was not a terrorist act.

This would seem to suggest that combining strong offensive operations in the Middle East along with lying to the public would make for an effective means of eliminating terrorism in America. I wonder how they’ll spin it if a nuke goes off in New York Harbor? Maybe the NTSB can draw up a cartoon of how an atom moved the wrong way at just the wrong moment and chalk it all up to proton error.

As people, in general. Don’t get me wrong, I have plenty of friends who are on the left side of the spectrum and are voting for Kerry next week, (although not very enthusiastically, it’s been interesting to note), and in my experience it’s mostly the younger sort, the 12-25 year olds, who are unable to control their reaction to someone who dares to disagree with them.

In my Kerry-Edwards shirt, I enter Red America certain that I am on the verge of inciting to rage a gang of angry yachtsmen who would soon be strapping me and my lefty leisurewear to their mizzenmast. Instead, I encounter only shades of indifference—head shaking, “crazy idiot” expressions from older, very wealthy, very white folks in Newport Beach; terse nods from the middle- to working-class citizens of Bakersfield, which seem to indicate that people here have much bigger things to worry about than whatever is on my stupid T-shirt….

Dressed to impress in my Bush-Cheney T-shirt, tote bag, and “W.” button, I first stop at Silverlake’s Über-cafe, the Coffee Table…. A fashionably dressed woman seated at a sidewalk table makes a disgusted face at the sight of me. On line at Psychobabble coffee house, another woman in a blue velour tracksuit rolls her eyes and grimaces at me with undisguised hatred. Realizing there are no seats but the one next to me, she stares intently into her cup, avoiding my polluting glance, until another table opens and she quickly relocates. Out on the avenue once again, I am gifted with my second “Asshole” of the day, this time muttered by a young man with bright dyed raspberry hair.

That sort of name-calling is pretty tame compared to what I get from both outraged Three Monkeys who see me as some sort of traitor and clueless lefties who simply don’t have any ammunition to use against me, but it pretty much corresponds to my daily experience. I do find it amusing, though, to see the look of shock on someone’s face when after they finish a diatribe against Bush, I agree with them because he’s far too statist, far too leftist and is leading the country into global socialist ruin….

“Vox, even a libertarian pitbull like Vin Suprynowicz (Vin’s the sort who believes that the 2nd Am means *personal nukes* are legitimately allowed for) can figure out that Bush needs to win this election over Kerry…”

He doesn’t need to win it, he doesn’t deserve to win it and it makes very little difference to the country who does win it. The fact that Suprynowicz understands proper political theory does not mean that he knows his history or understands how the theory has played out in the real world.

For the Nth time, you media-mesmerized folk dwelling in the political matrix need to understand that both men belong to the same elite and share the same long-term goals. It’s all a charade and Bush=Clinton=Bush=Kerry. Do you realize that the same fake dichotomy is set up in almost every European democracy as well? Chirac and Jospin were the bifactional ruling party’s two candidates in France during the last election, but when huge voter disgust and low turnout allowed the populist Le Pen to sneak past Jospin, the supposedly virulently opposed Conservatives and Socialists immediately united behind Chirac in the run-off to ensure his victory.

Perhaps when George Bush introduces a variant of Hillarycare and we see pro-choice justices seated on the Supreme Court in his second term then some of you will begin to believe me. Obviously the UN support, the Wilsonian nation-building and the new Medicare entitlement wasn’t enough.

From the Washington Times:

Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein’s weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned. John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, “almost certainly” removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad.

“The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units,” Mr. Shaw said. “Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units.”

Debka reported that the weapons had been moved to Syria right around the time the invasion began, if I recall correctly. The notion that it was the Russians who did the moving is certainly new to me and is a pretty big deal that raises some serious questions about our “ally”, but I don’t quite understand how the idea that the weapons are in Syria – along with many families from the Iraqi Ba’ath elite, by the way – can possibly be considered breaking news.

Don’t get me wrong, confirmation is always a good thing, but it was pretty obvious that Hussein wasn’t ever going to send his toys to Iran and Syria is not just the only other Ba’athist regime in the world, it’s also right next door.

… that the IRS is in league with the devil. From WND.

In a letter of clarification requested by a traveling minister, the Internal Revenue Service has declared people gathered in tax-exempt churches can’t pray for President Bush to win the election on Tuesday.

The ruling comes in response to a request by the Christian Defense Coalition, which is in the midst of a 15-day prayer tour through Ohio and Pennsylvania. The Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, director of the organization, had planned to lead in prayer for a Bush victory during evening services in each town. Though he had hoped to hold the services in churches, Mahoney says he has used American Legion halls, hotels and other venues pending a clarification from the IRS.

Yes, those government-funded faith based initiatives are looking better and better all the time, aren’t they? When a quasi-government agency is telling churches what they can and cannot pray for, it seems hard to assert that one is living in a free country.

I hope that one day conservatives will finally realize that government money is pure poison; the fact that George Delano is now being credited in a new book as the first “conservative” president to openly reject small government philosophy in favor of transforming and streamlining big government’s agenda, (THE RIGHT NATION), is not a healthy sign for conservatism, freedom or the future prosperity of the nation.

bls has a question:

“What is it about my support of Bush’s crusade against Islamic terror that renders me unable to be a conservative by any meaningful definition of the word?”

Utopian nation-building by force is inherently a progressive, totalitarian action. There is nothing conservative about it. It violates the Washingtonian principle of not getting involved in entangling alliances, the isolationist principle and the national sovereignty principle. One will not find any support for it in conservative philosophers such as Burke, Kirk or Tocqueville.

In other words, you’re casting aside conservatism for progressive liberalism, albeit in the name of national security. There’s nothing conservative about that, some variant of the “national security” argument has been used to justify otherwise unpopular political actions since the days of the Roman Republic.

Another problem with the self-defense justification is that the global jihad is not truly targeting America, like China, it primarily wants America out of the way in order to pursue its real goals. In the case of the jihad, that goal is reclaiming the lost lands of Islam in a reverse reconquest of Europe. Their communications are quite clear about this, as even Israel is secondary to that goal, which is very different than older terrorist organizations like the more provincial PLO and Hamas. 9/11 was nothing more than a shot across the bow and a flexing of muscle, much like Pearl Harbor was intended to be on the part of the Japanese. The global jihadists would surely like to see the black flag of Islam raised over the entire Earth, but they are practical enough to be focused on lands where they have a sizeable minority, such as Nigeria.

I believe that’s why they haven’t bothered making any attacks in the USA for over three years now, because the US itself is a tertiary concern and the warning shot turned out to be at least somewhat counterproductive. If/when the jihad perceives that the Bush administration is making a serious dent in their ability to strike where they want, that is the point at which they would likely turn their attention to the United States again. Occam’s Razor strongly suggests this is the most logical explanation, as the almost complete absence of real arrests resulting in prosecutions inside the United States combined with de facto open borders means that concluding American counterterrorism agents are far more successful than their much more experienced Israeli counterparts is unlikely to be anything but wishful thinking.

To be honest, I think the entire American public debate on the subject is almost entirely worthless. I mean, giving “they hate our freedom” as an explanation is so transparently stupid, and is almost completely contrary to the history of Islamic conquest. Basically, it’s safe to assume that any explanation relying on the notion of human beings being completely insane is incorrect.

A minor tangent, sorry, but I think I answered your question somewhere in there….

UPDATE: for a good article touching on what conservatism was perceived by one who is strangely considered a hero by many of today’s conservatives, Hayek’s “Why I am not a Conservative” is well worth reading. I have no doubt that he’d be voting for Badnarik, were he alive today, as the Libertarians are the clear intellectual heirs to the Old Whigs of whom Hayek speaks so favorably.

VDH unintentionally makes the case against George Delano:

Had Lincoln lost the 1864 vote, a victorious General McClellan would have settled for an American continent divided, with slavery intact. Without Woodrow Wilson’s reelection in 1916 — opposed by the isolationists — Western Europe would have lost millions only to be trampled by Prussian militarism. Franklin Roosevelt’s interventionism saved liberal democracy. And without the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan and his unpopular agenda for remaking the military, the Soviet Union might still be subsidizing global murder.

This election marks a similar crossroads in our history. We are presented with two radically different candidates with profound disagreements about how to conduct a historic worldwide war.

By the thousand dark young of Shub-Niggurath, VDH inadvertantly makes a better case against George Delano than I ever have. He pulls no punches in equating a vote for Bush with voting for Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt. If that’s not enough to scare you straight into the Peroutka camp and the Constitution Party, you may be many things, but you’re not a conservative by any meaningful definition of the word.

Things are looking pretty good for the political book. It’s not definite yet, but we’re over the previous hurdle and it should be confirmed soon. It is definite that my artillery will be, shall we say, guided in one direction, however, on this first book. I don’t have a problem with that as it’s the publisher’s call and I’ll be perfectly content to save some of the material I’ve already written for book two, assuming that the first one is successful enough to justify it. But as you see here, the sort of compromise about which I’ve written – and honestly, that I’m making here – is very real; I happen think it’s justified in this circumstance because the publisher has a right to publish what they want and the book makes absolutely no claim to be encyclopedic, but if you feel that I’m starting to make the same sort of compromises in my column or on this blog, don’t hesitate to call me on it.

As for the comic book, the first volume is out to the distributor already although it won’t be officially in stores until November 15. If anyone has a sighting of Archangels: The Fall in a CBA bookstore, do let me know. I believe it can also be ordered from christianbooks.com and I’ll try to put up a sample page or two at voxday.net soon.

GS isn’t the biggest fan:

The writer known as BM is right when he compares you to Pat Buchannan, except that Pat has a better haircut and doesn’t waste so such effort bashing conservatives. You don’t just bite the hand that feeds you, you eat it. I have rarely seen anyone so impressed with himself as you are. If vanity really is one of the seven deadly sins, you are in serious trouble.

I can see why your column gets the third most number of hits on WND. It is entertaining and you take positions that are supported by few and offend practically everyone. But don’t think that you are going to be a nationally known or respected columnist like George Will or John Leo. Fat chance of that happening so long as you are determined to offend everyone who might support some of your positions.

It’s no wonder than no major newspaper or magazine carries your column but it is fun to see you whine about it at your website. A review of your most recent columns illustrates why they don’t invite you to parties. First you call George Bush “Traitor to the Constitution” and quote your hero, Libertarian presidential candidate Michael Badnarik, who few Americans have ever heard of and who will undoubtedly get fewer votes than Ralph Nader next election. You should follow the advice contained in his quote.

You then spend two columns attacking Michelle Malkin and John Leo, who write far more interesting columns than you do. You top that off by indicating that Al Franken is right in his criticism of conservatives, although he was not talking about you and probably never heard of you either. In your next column, you criticize American corporations in a manner that would make Ralph Nader proud. Then your “Slick Willy and Bad Billy” attacks Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity in a manner that would make George Soros proud.

Your final attack is upon FOX news, which is putting forth the conservative position and having a greater impact on the liberal media than any other news source. Maybe you think FOX News it should be more like Trinity Broadcasting, but it has become far bigger in a very short time and gives millions of Americans a good alternative news source. In summary, don’t interpret the number of hits on your column at WND to mean that there are a large number of people who share your opinions. Some of us are looking for comic relief and want to see how reasonable ideas can be taken to illogical extremes.

This is really funny. First, Fox News swears up and down that it is not conservative, as did most of those who defended it as “fair and balanced” in response to last week’s column. Second, the writer to whom GS refers wrote: ” I stand corrected on my assertion that you are a PB clone” so GS is agreeing with an already abandoned position. Third, it’s illogical to say that I’m biting or devouring the hand that feeds me when, by GS’ own admission, it’s not feeding me at all.

Fourth and most important, GS fails to understand that I am repeatedly pointing out that the conservatism he is defending is fraudulent. Malkin defends FDR and race-based internment. Leo’s account of Pearl Harbor is as revisionist as any Soviet-era Russian history. The Freaky Factor is yet to deny the phone sex charges. The multinational corporations are investing millions into shutting down the free operation of capitalism. If conservatism has become, like liberalism, so intellectually blind that it no longer knows what it is, it will, like liberalism, devolve completely into another mutant variant of statism. Indeed, the widespread acceptance of the Bush administration as a “conservative” one suggests that this process has already begun.

Finally, it gets a little tiresome to constantly hear how impressed with myself I am. Sean Hannity’s being a bit of a dim bulb has nothing to do with me. Go check the math in his book yourself. As I have stated repeatedly, the vast majority of people who go to journalism school or major in English don’t know much because they haven’t really studied anything and the nature of journalism is such that it encourages obtaining only most superficial knowledge before writing on a subject and moving on to the next one. That’s why most journalists and columnists are so dependably clueless and reliant on talking points being provided to them; again, that has nothing to do with me.

The fact that I expect to be able to regularly exceed a very low bar does not mean that I’m impressed with my ability to do so. I’d quit if I couldn’t. If that means I don’t get invited on one of the National Review’s cruises, well, I’ll just have to find a way to survive somehow.