Category: Uncategorized

Owen Harries writes in the American Conservative: To the critics, the belief that democratic institutions, behavior, and ways of thought can be exported and transplanted to societies that have no experience of them is profoundly mistaken. While the United States can provide an example to emulate, democracy is not a commodity that can be exported, or a gift that can be bestowed. To be viable, political institutions and political cultures require a long, organic, indigenous growth, and to attempt from without a sudden dislocation of what exists is more likely to produce unintended consequences than intended ones.

Supporters of the policy tend to regard all this as defeatist, an elaborate rationalization for doing nothing. Liberty, they assert, is a universal value, every society and culture desires it. To work for its realization through democratic institutions is not to impose anything, but merely to remove impediments and to render assistance in a learning process.

In terms of achievability, the trump cards in the hands of those who favor the policy and usually the first cards played are the examples of post-World War II Germany and Japan. But neither is particularly valid or relevant. The German and Japanese peoples were utterly defeated and crushed at the end of that conflict, and there were no surviving institutions or centers of opposition. In Iraq today the population is considered liberated, not defeated and deprived of rights. Second, Germany and Japan in 1945 were genuine nation states with homogenous populations and a strong sense of identity. This is true of few of the possible candidates for democratization today. Most of the states of the Middle East are artificial creations, arbitrarily carved out by Western powers. Third, and most important, before falling into the hands of extremist regimes, both Germany and Japan had considerable experience of the rule of law and civil society, as well as some significant experience of democratic practice. They had well-educated populations and substantial middle classes. Again, none of this is true of most of the targeted states today.

Another American experience seems much more relevant. Long before the United States became a global hegemon, it was a regional hegemon in the Caribbean. From the end of the 19th century it dominated the region and intervened as it saw fit. It occupied Haiti for 19 years, Nicaragua for even longer. Yet to this day the region has not produced one genuine, stable democracy. Nor was the United States to lay the foundations for a viable democracy during the three decades that it ruled the Philippines.

I submit that we’re far less likely to succeed in creating viable “democracy” in Iraq than we have been in Haiti. It was a bad idea from the start, a fact which is becoming increasingly obvious even to the administration’s allies and cheerleaders. History is not an inevitable force, but one ignores it at one’s peril. Drawing the correct historical analogies is always an imperative.

Last month, representatives of WTP went to the National Archives to pull the correspondence of the Office of Chief Counsel for the Treasury Department and for 1913 through 1917. The index of records showed the records were available for 1903 through 1912 and for 1918 and after. However, the index contained the statement “No Longer Available,” for the years 1913 through 1917.

At the same time, the researchers requested the correspondence for the House Ways and Means Committee for 1916. What was received was a box with a large, but empty envelope marked “Retained.” The researchers found additional instances of record deletions where, despite the fact the records appeared available in the Archive index – it was discovered after the record group was physically “pulled” from deep storage in the archives, that it was EMPTY.

It is inconceivable – and intolerable — that the official records documenting the planning, strategizing and legal communications of the Department of Treasury and congressional committees during the implementation of the single most oppressive and controversial function of government known to Americans are simply “No Longer Available.”

Management level archivists at NARA were unable to explain these gaping holes of missing records In effect, individuals, in explicit violation of federal law, have, since 1992, been systemically DELETING evidence from the official records of this nation – in an attempt to rewrite history – and to conceal the fraud that has been perpetrated by our government for almost 90 years.

I’m just wondering at what point even the choir of tax cheerleaders is going to start getting suspicious that there is, in fact, something deeply fishy going on with regards to the Federal income tax. It’s already well-documented that the 16th Amendment wasn’t ratified by the states, that Title 26 was never passed as positive law nor signed by the President, and now all the relevant correspondence for the Congress and the Treasury Department for that important period are learned to be missing. It’s difficult to argue “it’s the law” when it is becoming more and more apparent that it isn’t, and never was, the law.

Passion turned to agony early Wednesday morning when a 43-year-old St. Paul woman locked in a kiss with her boyfriend bit off an inch and a half of the man’s tongue, according to police.

43 and still not married. Hard to believe, isn’t it. I imagine they won’t be putting up any mistletoe at her office party this Christmas.

Yesterday’s games went according to what appears to be the usual form – one team won as expected, the other surprisingly drew. I wasn’t the least bit surprised to see England put Switzerland down without any trouble – Wayne Rooney is incredibly solid for a kid who’s only eighteen – but Croatia really deserved to beat France instead of settling for only a point. Trezeguet definitely handled the ball on France’s second goal and I don’t know how the Croatian striker managed to put it wide from four feet out in the final seconds. France doesn’t deserve to go through but they almost surely will, along with England, which will easily shut down Croatia. The English defense is much better than their French counterparts, as I’ve always thought Silvestre was suspect and Desailly, as much as it pains me to say it, is looking as if his long and distinguished international career should have ended before this tournament.

For today, I like Sweden to upset an Italy that lacks Francesco Totti, as the selfless passing and aggressive runs of Ljungberg and Larrson will be difficult for the Azzurri to stop if they can’t dominate the ball-control time. In the other game, Denmark should provide a second Scandinavian spanking to Bulgaria, which looks entirely overmatched. If Italy can’t get a draw today, they could be in real danger of failing to go through. I can’t even imagine the hysterical conspiracy theories that will be flying around if Sweden beats Italy, Denmark beats Bulgaria, followed by a Swedish loss to Denmark. Good times, good times.

Eugene Volokh writes: Women think a lot — much more than men — about how they can become more attractive, and are willing to do a lot to try to become more attractive. Don’t know what to do about that, but there it is.

I agree that women think a lot more about it, but I’m not entirely sure that they actually do any more about it. One problem that I see with both men and women is that both sides seem to spend almost zero time thinking about what appeals to the other sex.

A few months ago, I was talking to two different single 30-something women. Both are well-educated and have good jobs, (one is an architect, the other is a mid-level manager at a glamorous company in NYC), both are flat-chested and have short hair but are otherwise attractive, and both have trouble getting dates. And both were astounded and distressed to hear me say that not five men in one hundred cared about either their education or their jobs.

Now, what is interesting to me is how women know that men love long hair and large breasts – you seldom see a stripper or a porn star without them – and yet few women will seriously consider the first option, still less the latter. Now, no woman should go in for elective surgery unless she really wants to upsize on the topside, but it amazes me how these dateless wonders will sneer at the “tacky stripper hair” of the girl that every man on the street is trying, and failing, to avoid noticing. As I told both women, if you want more attention from men, grow your hair and get a boob job. If you don’t want to do the latter, I completely understand. But at least grow your hair out.

By the same token, I don’t understand how many guys will continue to act like delicate china tea saucers when they’ve been witnessing their bold and brash counterparts date more women in six weeks than these shrinking violets have in six years. Or fail to shave and put on a decent outfit – be it cowpoke gear or Armani, depending on your surroundings – instead of going with the I’m-out-of-college-but-you’d-never-know-it-to-look-at-me look.

I conclude that many of both sexes are simply lazy. As one of Volokh’s contributers said, we want sexy to be us instead of doing what the evidence suggests works. On that note, I take my leave, as it suddenly occurs to me that I am in rather dire need of a shower.

Andrew Sullivan is quoted by Jonah Goldberg: But it’s time to say something very clearly: Bush’s endorsement of antigay discrimination in the U.S. Constitution itself is a deal-breaker. I can’t endorse him this fall. Like many other gay men and women who have supported him, despite serious disagreements, I feel betrayed, abused, attacked…. I will be excoriated by the same people who always denounce anyone who doesn’t toe the Democratic Party line. “What took you so long?” they sneer. Hope, engagement, principle are my answers. I do not regret trying to make conservatism safe for gays. It’s still possible to be in favor of small government, low taxes, a tough foreign policy, and to be a proud gay man. My principles haven’t changed. Nor will they anytime soon. But when a president allies himself with forces that really do want to keep gay people in jail, therapy, or the closet, it’s time to break off. The deal is broken. And no amount of rationalization can make it whole again.

The thing that is so typically stupid about Sullivan – who, with Michael Kinsley, ludicrously regards himself as above all conflicts of interest – is that if he were truly a conservative, he could easily justify a break with Bush over the president’s implacable assault on small government. But, as always, Sullivan is guided by his abnormal desires above all else. As NRO’s Katherine Lopez correctly predicted: “I do wish Sullivan would save time and come out for Kerry now. In just a matter of time he will come up with the rationalizations, but it’s taking him painfully long to get on with it.”

“I feel betrayed, abused, attacked….” Notice how Sullivan’s feelings guide his philosophy. I have far more respect for Michelangelo Signorile than I do for Andrew Sullivan. It’s one thing to be hopelessly and reliably wrong, it’s another to be constantly flailing about in a state of complete cognitive dissonance. It will be a relief to everyone, including Mr. Sullivan himself, when he finally pulls a David Brock and returns to the left’s warm maternal fold. He’s been a counterfeit conservative from the start, not unlike the man he now so dramatically abjures.

Here’s a pair of questions for the Greek Choir. If the IRS is simply following the law, how is it possible that Notices of Lien, which contain the words “there is a lien”:

a) contain no information about where the lien can be found, its identifying number, or the court order that established the lien?

b) usually cannot be found in the list of liens and Federal Tax Liens maintained by each of the 50 states?

In fact, using the service’s method, one can easily place an identical “notice of lien” on any other property-owning individual in one’s favor as long as one has the individual’s name, address and social security number, since the counties do absolutely no fact-checking before they record their notices. If this is not illegal for the IRS, it is clearly not illegal for anyone else. This is why some counties are beginning to maintain a separate category of “notice of lien” which are not to be heeded by third parties as genuine liens must be.

The same thing holds true of Notices of Levy, however, one usually doesn’t know about the notice until the bank has already sent off the money, and at that point it’s too late. No doubt this is why the service harbors such distaste for foreign banks, as they refuse to provide such collection cooperation.

It’s fascinating to read Doug Kenline’s decision to submit to the will of the collection of Puerto Rican revenue agencies that is the IRS. It reads rather like Winston’s embrace of Big Brother, with the added pathos that Doug clearly believes that what he’s doing is wrong. There’s even a demonic Greek choir of tax cheerleaders welcoming him back to the fold.

But I don’t fault Doug for submitting, any more than I fault those millions of people who know better but choose to continue filing because they fear experiencing what Doug has gone through for the past few years. It’s extraordinarily difficult to live the conventional American life and not submit. A corporate job, a mortgage, a bank account, all these things can and will be used against you in a Tax Court of counterfeit law. Unless you want to pull a Fred Reed, sip margaritas and siesta with the signorinas, it’s tremendously difficult.

Now, none of this surprises me or has any impact on me whatsoever. The truth is what is is, and the fact that the service is able to make effective use of third parties in order to bend many targets to its will is of no account. If anything, it tends to suggest the weakness of its legal position. But legalities make little difference since the IRS has operated outside legal parameters from the very beginning. I have understood the true nature of the IRS since my first, accidental encounter with them some years ago, when an agent was kind enough to explain to me that petty things like the law and the Constitution were irrelevant, as nothing was involved except the reality of force. It is an old story, indeed, one of the oldest.

No one ever said that following the truth would be easy. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.

I notice that there’s a new variety on the Nigerian 861 scam. This time, the person claims that you have money coming to you from Swiss banks that are paying out money belonging to Holocaust victims. It sounds a little more plausible than that poor widow of General Abacha, but it won’t help Switzerland get past England tomorrow. (Professional segue, don’t try this at home.)

Yesterday, Holland did manage to self-destruct, as feared, but salvaged a draw all the same thanks to van Nistelroy, whose instinctive goal was not only unexpected, but hard to grasp. I’m still not sure what part of his body hit the ball – I’m thinking his upper thigh – but a great goal. Germany deserved the win, and that young winger, Schweizerschweiger or whatever his name is, was excellent coming in off the bench. And, as I predicted, the Czech Republic put away Latvia despite the surprise early goal.

Tonight, Spain has too much quality for the Greeks, while I expect Portugal to easily take down a Russia without their best player. Mostavoi isn’t the only one who doesn’t think the Russians can get past the group stage; even so, he should have kept his mouth shut.

As for American sports, I was quite happy to see the Lakers lose. When will teams learn that star-collecting doesn’t make a great team? You’d think Daniel Snyder would have figured this out… I’m no Detroit fan, but it’s nice to see team play succeed in the bastion of individual play that is the NBA.

TONY BLAIR has listened to the people of Britain like a man with no ears. His message yesterday should have been: “You have spoken and I am here to represent you. I will go to Brussels and tell them what you want.” Instead we got the same old platitudes, the same “trust me” fixed grin. What Blair said about the two-day summit on the European Constitution ranked alongside Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace in our time” declaration when he capitulated to the Nazis in the 1930s. The Prime Minister declared he was “reasonably optimistic we will negotiate an agreement that we want.”

Reasonably optimistic! You can’t expect to get away with that, Prime Minister. The people of Britain don’t want ANY new agreement. Britain should not be going to the summit with the aim of limiting the damage the constitution will cause us.

Let The Sun tell you what your duty is, Mr Blair:

You should be going to Brussels to demand that Britain is given back the powers it has lost to the EU. You must demand that we retain full sovereignty and full control over our lives, not to mention our money. You should demand top-to-bottom changes in the corrupt, inefficient and undemocratic European system. You must demand that only the British Parliament makes the law for Britain and only British judges administer it.

Just say NO to the constitution which the EU’s elitist leaders so desperately want to further their dream of a European superstate.

This is one of the most important moments in a generation, more important by far than anything happening in Iraq. It is no coincidence that the Sun referred to Nevill Chamberlain’s infamous declaration, as the EU is posed to make Hitler’s dream a reality, a Fourth Reich of united Germany dominating the entire continent of Europe. Only Britain has the ability to deal this panzerblitz-by-stealth a death blow, by refusing to surrender its sovereignty.

If the Euro-elites of Labor, the Liberal Democrats and the Tories are successful in selling out Britain’s birthright, the focus will turn to the United States and removing its sovereignty in a trans-American Union. Already, the seeds have been planted with NAFTA. But if they are thwarted by the rise of populist parties like the UK Independence Party, this may inspire Americans to turn away from its own bi-factional one-party rule.

Interesting times.