Andrew Hagen

Barring unplanned changes, the presidential debates for 2004 are set. (*)

• Thursday, 30 September 2004. First Presidential Debate. University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida.
• Tuesday, 5 October 2004. Vice-Presidential Debate. Case Western Reserve University. Cleveland, Ohio.
• Friday, 8 October 2004. Second Presidential Debate. Washington University in St Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri.
• Wednesday, 13 October 2004. Third Presidential Debate. Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.

The election is on Tuesday, 2 November. If you haven’t already, remember to register to vote ahead of time.

Update: 7 September 2004. Bush would be foolish to try and nix the October 8th debate, as Matt Drudge is now reporting. (†) Bush’s excuse would be unwanted partisan questions from the audience. Kerry would be able to turn this around on Bush, calling him out as a coward. Liberal talking heads will try to link it to Bush’s National Guard service during the Vietnam War, and perhaps even the look of confusion in the Florida schoolroom after 9/11. Bush is not a fool, and I believe we are going to have all of the scheduled debates.

Space.com reports that the rover Opportunity has made a major discovery on Mars. Lips are sealed for now. (*) Rumor says it has something to do with water and perhaps with life.

Space.com expects a press conference early this week.

A few years ago, scientists made the claim that upon re-examining data from the 1976 Viking Mars landers, those early missions found evidence of microorganisms. (†)

A meteor found in Antarctica in 1984 and thought to have come from Mars provided evidence of Martian life, said a study released in 1996. (‡)

A frequent criticism of movies by cultural conservatives is that they are “violent.” Now that most cultural conservatives embrace Mel Gibson’s new cinematic sensation, Passion of the Christ, their criticism of “movie violence” may be undercut. Passion depicts the torture and crucifixion of Jesus in extremely graphic detail.

(Sidebar: There is no such thing as “movie violence.” The violence portrayed in movies is simulated. When filming, special effects and camera tricks are used to suggest violence. Very little actual violence filmed is ever shown in entertainment features. During a boxing match scene, for example, actors might accidentally hit one another with force, and footage of that may be filmed. Yet lasting injuries are not meant to occur. Real violence on film usually only appears in news coverage.)

“Awe-inspiring” is Dr Robert Schuller’s description of Passion. (*) A cultural conservative, Schuller appears on the Crystal Cathedral/Hour of Power.

Would a cultural conservative say the same thing about a non-Christian film with similar levels of extremely graphic depictions of violence? Of course not. This provides an opening to antinomians and paleoliberals who will cry “Hypocrisy!” the next time a cultural conservative criticizes the pseudo violence of a movie.

One web site that reviews movies for their questionable content is Kids-in-Mind. (†) It gives Passion a rating of very high simulated violent content. It notes that Passion has no nudity, sexual content, or profanity. (‡)

That gives rise to a counterargument for cultural conservatives. They could say depictions of violence on screen are okay so long as the overall message is moral and the film does not have nudity, sexual content, or profanity. Thus Passion is acceptable but Pulp Fiction is not. (§) Liberals will continue to cry “Hypocrisy!” and a useless shouting match will ensue.

This could very well lead to several more rounds of raging shouting matches between TV talking heads, all of which I will try to avoid.

Movies are only visual and symbolic. Movies do not have great impact on matters of public affairs.

Update: 4 March 2004. John A Kalb adds insight. (**)

In all of this talk of Mel Gibson’s new movie, the Passion of the Christ, on whether it is a faithful depiction of the story told in Gospels, on whether it is anti-Semitic, on whether it will make money, on whether Gibson will ever work in Hollywood again, a key point has been forgotten.

It’s just a movie.

Americans invented the movie a century ago and today regard it as perhaps the highest form of art, and certainly the most commercially lucrative. This attitude could only be the result of our unfortunate cultural narcissism. Americans have created great art, but it is primarily jazz that has lasting value, not movies.

Movies are supposed to educate us. Many people base their lives on movies. Electronically broadcast moving pictures, also known as television, are a related obsession. These dark days you hear more references to Simpsons episodes than to Shakespeare or works of literature. We raise our children to know a forest of detail about the lives of cartoon characters, but not to properly spell. This is all terribly sad.

Movie making is inherently a commercial venture. There is no reason to believe that any kind of video production can ever faithfully portray any real event that ever occurred. Video can only portray a myth, a set of events that could not occur, because the view of the characters is limited by that of the audience and that of the audience is constrained by the small window through which the subject is filmed. (*)

Americans take movies far too seriously. Mel Gibson apparently expects that masses of people will start converting to Christianity after viewing the film. I have only skepticism that the movie will do anything other than make money and provoke some discussion. The movie is not a form of high art and it has little consequence in human affairs. Film buffs often cite the Triumph of the Will as proof that movies have great impact upon the world, but historians have no need to refer to it when they explain how World War II or the Holocaust started. Propaganda does have effect, but visual propaganda is weak compared to the power of the spoken or written word.

If I start hearing verbal abuse heaped upon Jews, then I would become concerned. Yet we must recall that the current great wave of Jew-hatred primarily comes from Islamofascists and their supporters, not Christians. (†) Hearing no verbal abuse heaped upon Jews other than that which was done before, my advice is not to worry about this movie or any other. Be concerned not with the phony two-dimensional world, but with the real one. Don’t watch a movie. Read a book.

Bill Wallo of Walloworld (*) names this as one of his favorite web logs in the course of his interesting profile at Normblog. (†)

Thanks, Bill. The feeling is mutual.

Civil disobedience was employed honorably in the civil rights movement. People of certain races refused to sit in the back of the bus or stay out of “whites only” restaurants despite the clear violation of law. Frequently, they were arrested. Their peaceful, nonviolent protest helped end de jure segregation and shepherded us to a more just society.

Civil disobedience today, however, is employed dishonorably.

In recent days, the mayor of San Francisco, Newsom, has purported to marry couples of the same sex in defiance of the law. Now the City of San Francisco has sued the State of California for recognition of these gay-marriages, or pseudo marriages. (*) California law definitively states that only a man and a woman shall be married.

The actions of the mayor are an outrage. Citizen civil disobedience is much less problematic than a public official’s “civil disobedience.” A public official cannot engage in civil disobedience. Any such thing is tantamount to revolution.

It is totally irrelevant whether these pseudo marriages should be legal.

What matters is that the mayor is whipping up a frenzy of social chaos and open defiance of the rule of law. He is not just a citizen. He is entrusted by the public to maintain the constitutional order. When “civil disobedience” is done by a public official, it is far beyond civil disobedience. It is an anarchistic, suicidal attack on law and government per se.

This illegal outrage cannot lead to gay-marriage. It can only lead to a breakdown of the institutions of law and order, and hence a breakdown of marriage itself.

I’m not sure whether the mayor can be arrested, sued, or legally restrained. Whatever action can be taken, however, should be taken immediately. Such a solution is necessary to remedy the problem of heightening disrespect for the rule of law that is even now rapidly spreading across the country. Left unchecked, there would be no end of obliquity, criminality, and mayhem.

Furthermore, it amazes me that there is apparently no court in California that is willing to rule on this matter. Is there not a judge in the entire state who has courage enough to rule on this matter and enjoin the mayor from further illegal action?

The rule of law is the only thing that holds this country together. It is all that prevents us from behaving like animals.

It is high time for President Bush, Governor Schwarzenegger, and the justices of the California Supreme Court to take action in this matter.

Let the lawsuit filed by the City of San Francisco go forward normally. That is the proper course.

The mayor’s illegal marriage scheme is an outrage that must be quenched before this California wildfire of anarchy unleashes massive social breakdown and disruption.

Yet, we should remember that social disruption is one of the foremost goals of the paleoliberals.

Update: Citing the rule of law, Governor Schwarzenegger acts. (†) Now we need a court injunction to shut it down.

Howard Dean has quit his pursuit of the Democratic nomination. (*) A quick analysis of his campaign is in order.

Dean shot from obscurity to front-runner status due to his trenchant opposition to the liberation of Iraq. He enjoyed a huge lead in the polls in the crucial states of Iowa and New Hampshire. A series of gaffes and irresponsible assertions such as his statement that “Bush knew” about 9/11 beforehand (†) hurt his ratings against George Bush. (‡) As his unelectability became clear, Democrats took a second look at the former governor and liked less of what they saw. (§)

Many Democrats then formed a negative opinion of Dean, while few had done so of John Kerry or John Edwards. This led to Dean’s crushing defeat in Iowa, a state he had expected to win. (**) Dean’s angry post-defeat speech in which he screamed was widely mocked. John Kerry took hold of front-runner status.

The Dean campaign then got a new advisor, Roy Neel. He did an excellent job of damage control. (††) Unfortunately for Dean, neither his negative attacks on Kerry for his Washington lobbyist connections nor the false rumors of Kerry’s infidelity could budge Kerry from the lead. (‡‡) Roy Neel’s brilliantly conceived Wisconsin strategy was not enough. Dean finished a lowly third in the Badger State. (§§) With his money and support drying up, Dean left the race today.

Now it is over. My post-mortem analysis is that in an electoral campaign, the candidate’s character matters a great deal. (***) You cannot build a successful liberation movement around one person, because it will turn into a cult of personality. You cannot run an election campaign like a liberation movement, because ultimately you are talking about the character of one person who seeks a job.

Dean has decided to transform his campaign into something of a people’s movement. (†††) Active involvement in civic affairs is praiseworthy. The first step in building such a movement will be Howard Dean unlinking himself from the goals of the movement. That can be done. What would the future of such a movement hold?

Prior attempts to transform election campaigns into people’s campaigns have not turned out well. Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition faded over time. If you want political change in the USA, you have to do it through that old, established mechanism called the political party. Dean wants to push the Democratic Party to the far Left. He has already done enough damage. Let’s hope his further efforts fail.

Update: 4 March 2004. John A Kalb adds insight. (‡‡‡)

Steve Emerson has endured death threats and unending abuse for his courageous reporting on the Global War on Terrorism. Excerpts from his book, American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us, are available online. First excerpt. (*) Second excerpt. (†) Book. (‡)

Middle East Quarterly (MEQ) interviewed Emerson in 1997. He spoke of da’wa, the peaceful invitation of Muslims to non-Muslims to convert to Islam. The interview continued.

MEQ: What are the short-range goals of fundamentalist Muslims in the United States?

Emerson: To strengthen worldwide their movements financially, politically and militarily.

MEQ: What about ultimate goals?

Emerson: Ultimately, incredible as it seems to us, to turn the United States into an Islamic country. They believe the world has to be made Muslim, preferably through da’wa but if necessary through other means. They seek to impose the Shari’a [Islamic sacred law] and even to resurrect the caliphate. The success of the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan prompted some of them to turn their sights on Western targets. Strange as it sounds, they think that they brought down one super power: one down, one to go. You have to see the World Trade Center bombing in light of that ambition.

They are sometimes publicly explicit about this goal. The Muslim, a British-based Islamic fundamentalist publication, appeals to Muslims, “let us not hesitate in preparing for Jihad against the unbeliever–to subjugate the world to Islam.” Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (or CAIR) openly declares that he would like to see the U.S. become a Muslim country. Abdulrahman Alamoudi, head of the American Muslim Council, stated at the Islamic Association for Palestine conference in December 1996 that the United States will become a Muslim country, even if it takes a hundred years.

(§) (brackets in original)

Emerson recently ran into more trouble. He writes:

The post–9/11 designation of various Islamic “humanitarian” groups, which had previously raised more than $100 million tax-free for terrorist groups, as terrorist fronts and the post–9/11 indictments of various “mainstream” Islamic leaders for secretly operating terrorist organizations in the United States demonstrated how Islamic extremists had murderously immersed themselves for years into American society. The veneer used by Islamic terrorists and militants was the equivalent of a perfect crime: the militants and terrorists publicly claimed themselves to be the victims of “hate crimes” and of “human rights violations.”

And so, whenever Islamic militants were exposed, as they were in my film, radical groups claimed that it was Islam that was under attack. It represented a deliberate deceit to have the public believe that criticism of militant Islam was the equivalent of criticizing mainstream Islam.

(**) That is a point that must be understood.

Update: More on attempts to smear Emerson’s good name. (††)

Insurgent attacks in Iraq have switched from targeting American troops to targeting Iraqi civilians. The common inference to be drawn is a gradual shift in the attackers from predominantly Baathist holdouts to predominantly non-Iraqi terrorists linked to Al Qaeda. (*)

The recent discovery of a letter from the Al Qaeda leader Zarqawi, a Jordanian, supports the point. (†) The text of that letter is available online. (‡)

Earlier I suggested that Izzat Ibrahim Al-Duri would continue Baathist operations in Iraq. (§) Al Duri appears ineffectual, though remaining a wanted man. (**)

Now it appears that Zarqawi has become the chief adversary (††) due to his coordination of Al Qaeda’s terrorist operations.

Update: Another copy of the letter. (‡‡) Read the letter. Here are some key passages.

THIS REGION IS OUR BASE OF OPERATIONS FROM WHERE WE DEPART AND TO WHERE WE RETURN.… WE CAN PACK UP AND LEAVE AND LOOK FOR ANOTHER LAND, JUST LIKE IT HAS HAPPENED IN SO MANY LANDS OF JIHAD. OUR ENEMY IS GROWING STRONGER DAY AFTER DAY, AND ITS INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION INCREASES. BY GOD, THIS IS SUFFOCATION!… THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO STRIKE THE RELIGIOUS, MILITARY, AND OTHER CADRES OF THE SHI’A SO THAT THEY REVOLT AGAINST THE SUNNIS. SOME PEOPLE WILL SAY, THAT THIS WILL BE A RECKLESS AND IRRESPONSIBLE ACTION THAT WILL BRING THE ISLAMIC NATION TO A BATTLE FOR WHICH THE ISLAMIC NATION IS UNPREPARED. SOULS WILL PERISH AND BLOOD WILL BE SPILLED. THIS IS, HOWEVER, EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT.…

It is as I have said many times. Al Qaeda wants to shed a great deal of blood, especially the blood of Muslims.

John McKellar gives his lively, interesting take on the gay movement and marriage. (*)

Anecdotes, rumors, hearsay, and other highly questionable sources suggest that the black population of South Africa conspires to massacre the white population of South Africa upon Nelson Mandela’s death. (*) Of South Africa’s total population of 42.7 million, 13.6% are white. (†) Therefore, up to several million lives would be at stake if the rumors reflect truth. Due to the extraordinary amount of harm that is possible, it is worthwhile to look into these rumors, even though the very suggestion of them sounds incredibly absurd.

The rumors are worthy of some attention by South Africans and that part of the world possessed of a basic understanding of history. Sometimes when a former oppressor loses power or becomes a minority, a slaughter ensues of the former oppressor. There are numerous reports of black abuses of power in the new South African government specifically at the expense of whites. (I stress the word “abuse,” meaning that the allegations suggest that more is taken from whites than what justice requires.) Here, the Zimbabwe situation provides an example. (‡) Additionally, the region has a recent history of genocide in Rwanda and the Congo.

The proper stance on this matter is: intense withering skepticism that this event will happen, coupled with a willingness to look for facts, however uncomfortable, that lead to a conclusion of whether this theory is true or false. If there is a reason to believe the theory is accurate, all due precautions are warranted.

Below are Google searches on some of the names that swirl about.

Operation Our Rainy Day.

Operation White Clean-up.

Operation Vula

Night of the Long Knives south africa

Operation Iron Eagle

Red October campaign

Operation Uhuru

If there are rumors of any other planned genocide in the world, I am not aware of them. I would like to know about any such thing.

The House of Representatives of South Dakota has passed new legislation to ban abortion except in cases where the life of the mother is endangered. (*) (†)

If passed and signed into law, the legislation will result in a legal challenge before federal courts of the constitutional propriety of Roe v Wade. Such litigation could reach the Supreme Court in a few years. The last major challenge to Roe was Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1991. In that ruling, the right to an abortion was upheld 5–4.

Rumors suggest that up to four Supreme Court Justices may retire soon. These include Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Stevens, Justice O’Connor, and Justice Ginsburg. Of these four, three would vote to uphold Roe and Casey. The president elected in 2004 will likely make one or more new appointments before a South Dakota abortion case could reach the High Court. If Bush is reelected, his appointments could tip the majority against abortion rights.

Hence, abortion may become an issue in the 2004 campaign.

In a comment to reporters, the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, N Gregory Mankiw said:

Outsourcing is a growing phenomenon, but it’s something that we should realize is probably a plus for the economy in the long run.

(*) They said that the mechanization of agriculture was good because it would lead to new industrial jobs. When the deindustrialization of America became a reality, they said it was good because it would lead to new information technology (IT) jobs. Now that the information technology jobs are being outsourced to India and other countries where replacement workers will earn a small fraction of the wages and salaries earned by Americans for doing the same job, they say it’s good. Yet, they have no plan. What jobs will replace the lost IT jobs?

If a new wave of job growth does take hold, Americans who get those jobs will find themselves replaceable by any person in the world willing to take a lower wage or salary under George W Bush’s immigration plan. Any poor person from anywhere in the world could get a US visa and green card if he agreed to take a job in America even if the rate of pay is below the market rate. There would be no limit to the number of job-replacing immigrants. Say you earned $20 an hour. If your employer posted an ad on a web site and someone from the far side of the world responded, he could get on a plane, come to America, and take your job for $10 an hour or less. Your choice would be unemployment or accepting a pay cut to a fraction of what you used to make. That is Bushonomics in a nutshell.

Who cares how fast the economy grows if the rich live off the fatted calf while the bottom 90% are reduced to penury?

The wreckage of the Bush economy has only begun.

Update: 15 February 2004. In terms of economics, the massive wave of white collar outsourcing is wreaking havoc in the labor market. Max Sawicky gives his informed take. (†)

Rush Limbaugh and many, many other American commentators are busy weaving webs of conspiracy theory, putting Hillary Clinton on the hook for the allegations of adultery against John Kerry. They say she is doing it to become the Democratic presidential nominee.

Not a single shred of evidence supports it. If they employed Ockham’s razor, they would adopt the simpler explanation: the allegations from Drudge are coming from somewhere that we are not aware of. That may not be appealing to feckless pundits, but it has the advantage of being solidly grounded in fact.

If we do the same thing ourselves, who are we to decry Iraqis for conjuring up conspiracy theories about the US secretly using super weapons, using alien technology, keeping Osama secretly in custody, or trying to steal all the oil?

The public should demand that conspiracy theorizing pundits produce evidence and supportive arguments for their claims, or the public should start listening to new pundits.

CNN runs a surreal story that treats, with what is apparently irony, plastic dolls as if they were real people. Mattel’s Barbie and Ken are no longer dating. (*) I thought the characters were married, not dating.

I don’t know which is worse: the culture’s obsession with humorless irony or the amoral lesson this will teach to children.

I signed a “Draft Clark” petition because I wanted new blood injected into the presidential election. I read much of his book, Winning Modern Wars, a few years ago. It changed how I saw the subject and made me respect the General for his superb, flexible leadership style, and particularly how he applied it to the Kosovo campaign.

Wesley Clark (*) (†) acquitted himself well on the campaign trail. It was an honorable and decent campaign run by an honorable and decent man. An unheralded potential future political star turned out to be Wesley Clark, Jr.

Unfortunately, General Clark could not muster enough support and dropped out. I criticized him for a lack of substantive policy proposals, and a failure to communicate those he had on the stump. He relied too much on his record; and while it was excellent, it was not sufficiently complemented with new policy ideas.

Clark improved the discourse among the Democrats, particularly on foreign policy and the military. He should hold his head proudly. He would make a great vice-presidential candidate or cabinet officer.

Of course, with the recent John Kerry scandal underway perhaps Clark will re-enter the race.

Can the Democratic nominee, John Kerry or other, beat George Bush without competing in the South? The Federal Election Commission lists the each state’s electoral votes for the 2001-2010 period. (*)

There are a number of interesting points. First, there are still 538 total electoral votes. Thus, a majority, 270, clinch victory in the Electoral College.

Second, the states with the most electoral votes are now: California (55), Texas (34), New York (31), Florida (27), Illinois (21), and Pennsylvania (21).

Third, the distribution of electoral votes tends to hurt the viability of the non-southern strategy of some Democrats. In that proposed strategy, the Democratic nominee would bypass the South and court voters in other states. A full 134 electoral votes come from the southern states of: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. While Florida is a southern state, the Democrats will compete there. Bypassing the South with the exception of Florida hands George Bush 134 electoral votes, almost half of the 270 he needs to win reelection.

Fourth, again leaving out Florida, the electoral votes of the southern states have increased in recent decades from 126 to 130 to now, 134. This reflects the growing population below the Mason-Dixon line. If there were ever a time for the Democrats to bypass the South, it was in prior decades, not now.

Adoption of a southern bypass strategy would warrant skepticism for the Democratic nominee’s chances on November 2nd.

Kerry’s grandfather was an immigrant to America from Austro-Hungary. Fritz Kohn converted from Judaism to Catholicism and changed his name to Frederick A Kerry in 1902. (*) (†)

Kerry has an interesting family history. (‡)

John Forbes Kerry is not related to the Forbes family of Forbes magazine fame. (§)

John Kerry was born in Denver, Colorado. (**)

John Kerry was born in 1943. Under its most accepted definition, the Baby Boom generation includes those born between 1946 and 1964. (††) Hence, Kerry would not be a baby boomer. If the Baby Boom began in 1943, as some hold, then he would be a Baby Boomer.

While at Yale in the 1960s, after having signed up for the Navy and prior to going to Vietnam, Kerry gave a speech critical of US foreign policy. (‡‡)

Kerry attended Yale at the same time as Garry Trudeau. A full-fledged Baby Boomer born in 1948, Trudeau went on to create his famous Doonesbury comic strip. (§§) Later, in the early 1970s, Trudeau parodied Kerry in Doonesbury when Kerry led protests against the Vietnam War. (***) The three strips are online. (†††)

Kerry testified to Congress against the Vietnam War. (‡‡‡) His testimony remains relevant today, especially in light of the Global War on Terrorism and the Iraq theater.

Three of Kerry’s major foreign policy speeches are below.
(more…)