Thursday, March 17, 2005
How bout UWM, sheesh!
This Is London: Outrage Over Bush World Bank Nominee
They even quote a handful of extreme leftists to make their case!
Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs said there were many people in
the US and around the world with expertise in development economics, but
Wolfowitz was not one of them.
John Cavanagh, director of the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal
think-tank, said: 'If the Bush administration wanted to poke a finger into the
eye of every nation on Earth, it couldn't have made a better choice.'
I agree nutter, I agree.
Financial Times (this paper I actually do enjoy, takes me back to International Macro Econ)
Surprise, and in some quarters dismay, was a common response in the World
Bank's other large shareholder countries to Paul Wolfowitz's nomination.
The lack of consultation before the announcement meant that European
governments - who collectively hold about 30 per cent of the votes on the bank's
executive board to the US's 17 per cent - were slow to react. "There are going
to be a lot of very unhappy people, but they may be as upset about the process
as about the person," said one European official. "They were supposed to consult
us and there was no consultation."
The beat goes on in FT. Wolfowitz nomination a shock for Europe
Some non-governmental groups fear Mr Wolfowitz will have a different focus,
seeking to enlist the bank in the larger project of building US security by
spreading democracy. "There will be concern about the possibility of introducing
the war on terror into the projects and policies of the World Bank," said Manish
Bapna, executive-director of the Bank Information Center.
Don't forget about Reuters, never one to miss an opportunity to try and kick America.
The U.S. nomination of Paul Wolfowitz as World Bank chief drew a cool
response from European officials on the bank's board but they had little chance
of blocking it, board sources said on Wednesday.
Sources close to the World
Bank board said Wolfowitz's name was informally circulated several weeks ago
among the 23-member board, which represents the bank's 184 member countries, and
the reaction was made clear to U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow.
knows that the reaction from the board was unfavorable," one source said. "Mr.
Wolfowitz's nomination today tells us the U.S. couldn't care less what the rest
of the world thinks."
I especially like the part about the US not caring what Europe thinks. High comedy here folks!
Don't sleep on the US press either, they are none too happy. WaPo leads the way!
Nomination Shocks, Worries Europe
President Bush's nomination of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz as
the next president of the World Bank was met with much surprise, little
enthusiasm and some outright opposition in Europe, where he is best known as a
leading proponent of a conflict deeply unpopular here, the Iraq war.
were led to believe that the neoconservatives were losing ground," said Michael
Cox, a professor of international relations at the London School of Economics.
"But clearly the revolution is alive and well."
Here is a fun sounding board at the BBC where users are free to comment on the nomination of Wolfowitz by President Bush.
This and the appointment of Bolton to the UN are transparent attempts to
destroy all worldwide institutions and make the US the only internationally
relevant power. The neo-cons have not hidden their contempt for these
institutions and it seems that if these appointments are not challenged then the
institutions will be destroyed. Is there not something which can be done to stop
this? Come on Europe, show some mettle and veto this appointment.Kym, Leicester,
Outrageous, dangerous, and against the world tide of progress for humanity. I
am ashamed and chagrined. Europe, flip the deck - challenge this appointment,
don't accept it. Flex your muscles and reject this nomination.Bruce Macdonald,
San Diego, California, USA
Really though, they're all good. Also keep checking out those DU threads, non stop hillarity!
They know not the meaning of shame...They inhabit some kingdom Beyond Shame,
and exhibit breathtaking audacity.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Here is the great "if you voted for drilling you are an environmental rapist" DU thread.
I love these people, they make politics fun!
In addition to defeating the anti-ANWR resoultion, the Senate aso defeated Sen. Boxer (Communist - CA) resolution to give more corporate handouts to the failing Amtrak.
It's been a great day all in all if you're a GOPer. Finally we get some decisive wins.
EDIT: I was right, McCain shows his leftist tendencies. Good luck with that '08 run slick.
Yea (no to drilling)
YEAs ---49Baucus (D-MT)Bayh (D-IN)Biden (D-DE)Bingaman (D-NM)Boxer (D-CA)Byrd (D-WV)Cantwell (D-WA)Carper (D-DE)Chafee (R-RI)Clinton (D-NY)Coleman (R-MN)Collins (R-ME)Conrad (D-ND)Corzine (D-NJ)Dayton (D-MN)DeWine (R-OH)Dodd (D-CT)Dorgan (D-ND)Durbin (D-IL)Feingold (D-WI)Feinstein (D-CA)Harkin (D-IA)Jeffords (I-VT)Johnson (D-SD)Kennedy (D-MA)Kerry (D-MA)Kohl (D-WI)Lautenberg (D-NJ)Leahy (D-VT)Levin (D-MI)Lieberman (D-CT)Lincoln (D-AR)McCain (R-AZ)Mikulski (D-MD)Murray (D-WA)Nelson (D-FL)Nelson (D-NE)Obama (D-IL)Pryor (D-AR)Reed (D-RI)Reid (D-NV)Rockefeller (D-WV)Salazar (D-CO)Sarbanes (D-MD)Schumer (D-NY)Smith (R-OR)Snowe (R-ME)Stabenow (D-MI)Wyden (D-OR)
Nea (yes to drilling)
Akaka (D-HI) Alexander (R-TN)Allard (R-CO)Allen (R-VA)Bennett (R-UT)Bond (R-MO)Brownback (R-KS)Bunning (R-KY)Burns (R-MT)Burr (R-NC)Chambliss (R-GA)Coburn (R-OK)Cochran (R-MS)Cornyn (R-TX)Craig (R-ID)Crapo (R-ID)DeMint (R-SC)Dole (R-NC)Domenici (R-NM)Ensign (R-NV)Enzi (R-WY)Frist (R-TN)Graham (R-SC)Grassley (R-IA)Gregg (R-NH)Hagel (R-NE)Hatch (R-UT)Hutchison (R-TX)Inhofe (R-OK)Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA)Kyl (R-AZ)Landrieu (D-LA) Lott (R-MS)Lugar (R-IN)Martinez (R-FL)McConnell (R-KY)Murkowski (R-AK)Roberts (R-KS)Santorum (R-PA)Sessions (R-AL)Shelby (R-AL)Specter (R-PA)Stevens (R-AK)Sununu (R-NH)Talent (R-MO)Thomas (R-WY)Thune (R-SD)Vitter (R-LA)Voinovich (R-OH)Warner (R-VA)
With freedom on the move across the Middle East and beyond, aggrieved
anti-war protesters here in the United States have nothing better to do this
weekend than what they have always done: stand in the way.
The most unhinged of left-wing activists, from breast-exposing pacifists to the
conspiracy-mongers of MoveOn.org, will descend on New York, Washington and other major media markets to "mark the two-year anniversary of the U.S. bombing and invasion of Iraq." They will do so by clogging the streets, tying up police
resources and leaving behind a trail of anti-Bush propaganda litter...Along the
way, the marchers will stop to harass workers at a local military recruiting
station. Yes, these are the supposed peaceniks who derive pleasure from ripping
yellow ribbon magnets off of minivans and throwing rocks through ROTC campus
offices. These are the acolytes of Michael Moore, who compares Iraqi
head-choppers to American Revolutionary war heroes.
"Oppose the war, support the troops"? Bull.
The Bush-bashers, as always, have impeccable timing. Nothing highlights the
bankrupt obstructionism of the anti-war movement more than the inspiring photos
of the renaissance of freedom taking place in Lebanon. Contrast the faces of
hope and defiance against terrorism pictured at the massive rallies in Beirut's
Martyrs Square this week with the faces of Bush hatred and capitulation to
terrorism that you'll see this weekend. Any question about who's
These are incredible and historic times, and history will show that the left has been on the wrong side from the beginning.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who for more than two decades has been unable to
persuade Congress to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil companies,
said he was optimistic about the prospects.
“We believe we have the votes,”
Stevens said at a news conference. Alaska officials view the refuge’s oil as
replacing dwindling shipments from the aging Prudhoe Bay fields on the North
Plan added to budgetSeeking to sidestep a Democratic filibuster that
would require 60 votes to overcome, Republican leaders have put the Alaska
refuge provision into a budget document that is immune to a filibuster under
I honestly don't understand the opposition to the drilling. I honestly think that the left simply wants us to have Flintstone cars, and animal operated vacuum cleaners. Wait, no that won't work PETA would be pissed. I really don't know what they want. No oil drilling, no wind power, no nuclear plants, opposition to coal plants in Wisconsin...
Do they really want to force us only see at night when they toke a bowl? How can they play their Dead, man, if there is no electricity to run their DAT player?
However, last night--as I was up late listening to her story for a half
hour--I thought to myself, "This entire story is hogwash."All I have is my
intuition on this one, and I'm feeling as if she was lying and that her entire
story was fabricated. Like you, I saw the fake crying. I saw a fairly decent
Do you think maybe he knew her prior to going to her apt? How did he
choose her apt? Isn't it a big complex?
"most" people who lose their husband to murder, would NOT turn
over their one yr old to an aunt to raise. They "might" move in with an aunt,
baby in tow, to get "back on track", but it strikes me as odd that she's "on her
own".. I foresee problems ahead for that daughter..
And my favorite...
If our hunch is right, there are going to be some angry and embarrassed
people. What if he was the person who stabbed and killed her husband? That case
has not been solved. He was waiting there near her house.
Wow. There are actually multiple threads. Here is the other one, a bit more crass. (fishmarket?)
I do not buy her story. I have nothing but my intuition, on which to go. I
just get the feeling that her entire story is cooked.I don't know WHY I feel
this way. I just do.I didn't believe her. I got a "programmed" feel from her. I
listened to her entire story. It's a long story, so there are going to be
inconsistencies and other quirks. Those didn't bother me. It's her entire
There is also some good stuff going on up on Capitol Hill, with Mr. Greenspan testifying before one of the thousands of committees (Special Committee on Aging to be specific). The gist, STOP SPENDING!
We need, in effect, to make the phantom "lock-boxes" around the trust fund real.
For a brief period in the late 1990s, a common commitment emerged to do just
that. But, regrettably, that commitment collapsed when it became apparent that,
in light of a less favorable economic environment, maintaining balance in the
budget excluding Social Security would require lower spending or higher taxes.
Last year, Social Security tax revenues plus interest exceeded benefits by
about $150 billion. If those funds had been removed from the unified budget and
"locked up" and Congress had not made any adjustments in the rest of the budget,
the unified budget deficit would have been $564 billion. A reasonable hypothesis
is that the Congress would, in fact, have responded by taking actions to pare
the deficit. In that case, the end result would have been lowered government
dissaving and correspondingly higher national saving. A simple reshuffling from
the unified accounts to the lock-boxes would not have, in itself, added to
government savings; but higher taxes or lower spending would have accomplished
that important objective.
The major attraction of personal or private
accounts is that they can be constructed to be truly segregated from the unified
budget and, therefore, are more likely to induce the federal government to take
those actions that would reduce public dissaving and raise national saving. But
it is important to recognize that many varieties of private accounts exist, with
significantly different economic consequences. Some types of accounts are
virtually indistinguishable from the current Social Security system, and the
Congress would be unlikely to view them as truly off-budget. Other types of
accounts actually do transfer funds into the private sector as unencumbered
private assets. The Congress is much more likely to view the transfer of funds
to these latter types of accounts as raising the deficit and would then react by
taking measures to lower it.
Nod to Social Security Choice.
The Badgers were eighth in the Pairwise last week, but are now tied for 11th,
which means they went from a third seed to a fourth. They dropped because
Anchorage is no longer a team under consideration for the tournament. Records
against teams under consideration - those with .500 or better power ratings -
are part of the Pairwise criteria. UW was 6-1 vs. the Seawolves this season and
those wins can no longer be used in its Pairwise resume.
It seems the Opinion Journal has discovered some interesting goings on in the Middle East, where President Bush has become the new hero.
That's right, they're quoting President Bush, the simian-American unilateralist
cowboy! And they're not alone. In a Washington Post essay, Youssef Ibrahim, formerly a reporter for the New York Times
and The Wall Street Journal and now a Dubai-based consultant, says that
throughout the Arab world are coming "murmurs of approval for the devoutly
Christian U.S. president, whose persistent calls for democracy in the Middle
East are looking less like preaching and more like timely
encouragement"...Ibraham himself admits to second thoughts: "It's enough for
someone like me, who has felt that Bush's attitude toward the Mideast has been
all wrong, to wonder whether his idea of setting the Muslim house in order is
Over at LGF we find out that trolling DU is a favorite not only of yours truly, but of all bloggers. Nowhere is there more fodder. Today (technically last night) they are predicting the Next Great War as America's great Navy has begun descending on the Middle East.
Justice Antonin Scalia gives a speech that I wholeheartily agree with. I heard him speak at Marquette and he is actually quite funny, in addition to being incredibly intelligent. I don't think even his most ardent detractors could deny his vast intellect. The thrust of his speech was that judges are ruling on issues they have no business ruling on.
In a 35-minute speech Monday, Scalia said unelected judges have no place
deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty. The court's 5-4 ruling
March 1 to outlaw the juvenile death penalty based on "evolving notions of
decency" was simply a mask for the personal policy preferences of the
five-member majority, he said..."If you think aficionados of a living
Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again," Scalia told an
audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. "You think the
death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You
want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That's
"Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine
lawyers?" he said...Scalia said increased politics on the court will create a
bitter nomination fight for the next Supreme Court appointee, since judges are
now more concerned with promoting their personal policy preferences rather than
interpreting the law. "If we're picking people to draw out of their own
conscience and experience a 'new' Constitution, we should not look principally
for good lawyers. We should look to people who agree with us," he said,
explaining that's why senators increasingly probe nominees for their personal
views on positions such as abortion.
He's a judge who just wants to be a judge, a goal to which all Supreme Court justices should aspire.
Monday, March 14, 2005
Basically there is tons going on of importance, here is a guick look at some news:
Sunshine week, I still don't know what to make of it. If it does what it says (unlikely), great. If it turns into a Bush Bahs 05 (likely) then it's just another waste of time. (Question, will Boots n Sabers request for voting records be championed this week in the Urinal?)
I am shocked, SHOCKED, that the media was much harder on President Bush during the election.
PSA Vodkapundit has guest bloggers all week, and the comment sections so far are quite entertaining.
Quiz, what do Washington Post Managing Editor Philip Bennett and Bjork have in common? Apparently, they both dislike America.