Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- sursum on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- KSGolfnut on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- outlander on Open thread 11/24
62 Comments
The author writes about what he see of the Neoconservatives in 1988. I think he may have understated them.http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/HL178.cfm
December 15, 1988
The Neoconservatives: An Endangered Species
by Kirk, Russell
Heritage Lecture #178
(Archived document, may contain errors)
THE NEOCONSERVATIVES: AN ENDANGERED SPECIES
Neoconservatives have tended regrettably to become a little sect, distrusted and reproached by what we may call mainline conservatives, who now and again declare that many of the Neoconservatives are seeking chiefly place and preferment. Incidentally, doubtless many of you present today, ladies and gentlemen, have observed that the addresses of certain eminent Neoconservatives have been rejected by the people round Vice-President Bush; and it appears to me that, for good or ill, President Bush will not be eager to obtain the services of this little Sacred Band – which had made itself exclusive, and now finds itself excluded.Selfish and Uninstructed. I offer you two specimens of the rejection of the Neoconservatives that I encounter nowadays in many quarters. My first extract is from a letter recently received from a very distinguished historian in Pennsylvania. “I have burned my bridges with most (not all) of the Konservatives, and especially with the neo- conservatives, who are selfish and uninstructed radicals and progressives, wishing to pour cement all over the country and make the world safe for democracy, well beyond the dreams of Wilson,” he writes to me. “A feeling for the land, for its conservation, and for the strong modesty of a traditional patriotism (as distinct from nationalism) none of them has.”My second instance of the spreading distaste for Neoconservatives comes from a well-known literary scholar. “I would not be at all surprised to see the Neo-Cons jump ship if Dukakis is elected; they would be perfectly capable of making an accommodation with the socialist wing of the Democratic Party,” he tells me …… It is significant that when the Neo-Cons wish to damn any conservative who has appealed for a grant to a conservative foundation, they tell the officers of the foundation that the conservative is a fascist…. I believe that the chief enemy of American conservatism has not been the Marxists, nor even the socialist liberals in the Democratic Party, but the Neo-Conservatives, who have sabotaged the movement from within and exploited it for their own selfish purposes.”
What is a Neoconservative, really? Is he, as Harrington and Steinfels saw him, a liberal who opportunistically has turned his coat? Is he primarily a seeker after power and the main chance? Or is he a man who has new ideas about the defense of the Permanent Things? For my part, I wish that certain so-called Neoconservatives whose views and lives I approve, like certain libertarians for whom I have a fellow feeling, would content themselves, as do I, with the simple old label Conservative.In their publications, the Neoconservatives thrust upon us a great deal of useful information, and obviously are possessed of considerable knowledge of the world about us. But in the understanding of the human condition and in the apprehension of the accumulated wisdom of our civilization, they are painfully deficient.
Infatuation with Ideology. An instance of this lack of wisdom is the Neoconservatives’ infatuation with ideology. Some of you ladies and gentlemen present here today may have heard some years ago my exchange, on this very platform, with Mr. Irving Kristol, concerning ideology. He and various of his colleagues wish to persuade us to adopt an ideology of our own to set against Marxist and other totalist ideologies. Ideology, I venture to remind you, is political fanaticism: at best it is the substitution of slogans for real political thought. Ideology animates, in George Orwell’s phrase, “the streamlined men who think in slogans and talk in bullets.”What is this ideology that Kristol and Novak would have us embrace? Why, the ideology of a term Mr. Novak has popularized, “Democratic Capitalism.”
By vigorous advocacy of Democratic Capitalism, by doctrinaire attachment to that ideology, Mr. Kristol and Mr. Novak are saying in effect, Marxism will be undone and the American people will be given a vision of social perfection. What a feeble reed they put into one’s hand.
Not caring to break a butterfly on the wheel, I offer you merely a very succinct refutation of the strange notion that the ideology called Democratic Capitalism can set our collective American steps aright. First of all, the phrase is a contradiction in terms; for capitalism is not democratic, nor should it be, nor can it be. The test of the market is not a matter of counting noses and soliciting votes; and the mark of capitalism is not the fallacy that “one man is as good as another, or maybe a little better,” but large decisions by shrewd
6entrepreneurs and managers. Nor is there any egalitarianism in the distribution of the rewards of a market economy.
Second, “Capitalism” is a word popularized by Karl Marx; it implies that the selfish accumulation and enjoyment of capital is the sole purpose of our society, soon to be overthrown by the proletariat. “Capitalism” is represented as a complete system, moral, intellectual, political, and economic: an ideology that has been devised by the greedy capitalists to serve as a false front for this enslaving of the workers of the world. Such is the Marxist argument; and Messrs. Kristol and Novak appear to be fulfilling Marx’s prophecies by cobbling up just such an ideology.
The “Terrible Simpliflers.” Now in truth our society is not a “capitalist system” at all, but a complex cultural and social arrangement that comprehends religion, morals, prescriptive political institutions, literary culture, a competitive economy, private property, and much more besides. It is not a system designed to secure and advance the interests of great possessors of capital goods unjustly acquired. Do Kristol and Novak, in the role of [Jacob Christoph] Burckhardt’s “terrible simplifiers,” think they will gain the affections of the peoples of the world by actually declaring Americans (and their allies) to be the very capitalist exploiters the Marxists have been denouncing all these years? By promulgating an ideological manifesto that offers nothing better than a utopia of “democratic” creature-comforts?
As for the democratic aspect of this Neoconservative ideology, “the Constitution of the United States is not for export,” as Dr. Daniel Boorstin puts it. To expect that all the world should, and must, adopt the peculiar political institutions of the United States – which often do not work very well even at home – is to indulge the most unrealistic of visions; yet just that seems to be the hope and expectation of many Neoconservatives. Such naive doctrine led us into the wars in Indo-China – the notion that we could establish or prop up in Vietnam a “democracy” that never had existed anywhere in southeastern Asia. Such foreign policies are such stuff as dreams are made of; yet they lead to the heaps of corpses of men who died in vain. We need to ask ourselves whether the Neoconservative architects of international policy are very different from the foreign policy advisors who surrounded Lyndon Johnson
Insisting on Abstract Democracy. Let me make myself a little clearer in this matter by repeating here what I wrote some months ago in my review of Dr. Jeane Kirkpatrick’s two volumes of speeches and papers. Mrs. Kirkpatrick declares that the United States should pursue a foreign policy of advancing “human rights,” rather than one of the national interest; and she tells us, in effect, that only democratic governments are legitimate governments. That is the Neoconservatives’ ideological dogma.
Yet Ambassador Kirkpatrick remarks that we ought not to reject the alliance of autocratic or authoritarian states (as distinguished from totalist regimes), which share with America the will to resist communism and the Soviet Union. So ought she not to base her argument for legitimacy upon the existence of constitutional government or constitutional order, justice, and freedom, or representative government, or simply tolerable government, rather than insisting upon an abstract democracy?
7For the word democracy has come to resemble an old hat that everybody wears and nobody respects. As she observes herself, some of the most oppressive regimes in our world pretend to be democracies. And have not democracies often been unholy alliances between a successful demagogue and a greedy mob?
Is the government of Saudi Arabia – distinctly not democratic – less legitimate than the government of the typical Marxist “people’s republic”? Is the government of Israel, a garrison state, illegitimate because it excludes from full civic participation one-fifth of its population on ethnic and religious grounds – scarcely a democratic principle of just government.
A Quasi-Religion. Most of the world never was satisfactorily democratic in the past, is distinctly undemocratic today, and has no prospect of decent democracy in the future. Were the United States to insist upon the attainment of democracy (plus capitalism) by every nation-state with which it has satisfactory relations, before long its principal trading partner might be Switzerland. The United States cannot be forever unsettling the governments of client states, or small countries, or of allies, on the ground that they are not sufficiently democratic in obedience to the doctrines of Rousseau, or that they “discriminate” against somebody or other, or that they prefer traditional economies to a full-blown abstract capitalism. One thinks of the aphorism of Vietnam’s Madame Nhu: “If you have the United States for a friend, you don’t need any enemies.” Successful foreign policy, like political success generally, is produced through the art of the possible – not through ideological rigidity. It will not do for the Department of State to repeat, like an incantation, “Democracy good, all other government bad.”
In short, I am saying that a quasi-religion of Democratic Capitalism cannot do duty for imagination and right reason and prescriptive wisdom, in domestic politics or in foreign relations. An ideology of Democratic Capitalism might be less malign than an ideology of Communism or National Socialism or Syndicalism or Anarchism, but it would not be much more intelligent or humane.
You will have gathered, ladies and gentlemen, that I am disappointed, generally speaking, with the Neoconservative faction. I had hope that they might bring lively imagination into the conservative camp; instead, they have urged conservatives to engage in ideological sloganizing, the death of political imagination.Dull Standardization. I had expected the Neoconservatives to address themselves to the great social difficulties of the U.S. today, especially to the swelling growth of a dismal urban proletariat, and the decay of the moral order. Instead, with some exceptions, their concern has been mainly with the gross national product and with “global wealth.” They offer few alternatives to the alleged benefits of the Welfare State, shrugging their shoulders; and the creed of most of them is no better than a latter-day Utilitarianism.I had thought that the Neoconservatives might become the champions of diversity in the world; instead, they aspire to bring about a world of uniformity and dull standardization,8
Americanized, industrialized, democratized, logicalized, boring. They are cultural and economic imperialists, many of them.I had conjectured that the Neoconservatives might be so many new brooms sweeping clean: that they would set new standards of political rectitude, and leaven healthily the lump of the stolid conservative interest. Instead, they have behaved rather as if they were the cadre of a political machine of a type all too frequently encountered in American political history – eager for place and preferment and power, skillful at intrigue, ready to exclude from office any persons who might not be counted upon as faithful to the Neoconservative ideology. Often, backstairs, they have seemed more eager to frustrate their allies than to confute those presumptive adversaries the liberals and radicals. The strategy of Volpone or of Sir Giles Overreach, nevertheless, may prove vain in the long run; and so it is coming to pass nowadays with the Neoconservatives.Clever Creatures. Do I then write “Ichabod!” upon the lot of them? Nay, not so. Among them, as I mentioned earlier, are men and women who have risen superior to the foibles and fallacies that have marred the Neoconservative clique generally; and it would be a great pity for the American nation to lose the talents of such people. And whatever blunders the Neoconservatives have made from time to time, all the same they have stirred up some intellectual activity among conservatives generally, not an easy thing to do.In The Wall Street Joumal, on August 22, 1988, Mr. Irving Kristol expressed his concern as to whether Mr. George Bush has the motivation to learn anything, and disparaged “managerial skills” in government. He urged the appointment to cabinet posts of “superior academics” – presumably of the Kristol kidney. “For the real political talents,” Mr. Kristol wrote in a revealing passage, “are quick-wittedness, articulateness, a clear sense of one’s ideological agenda and the devious routes necessary for its enactment.” Machiavelli!Such have been the talents of the Neoconservatives in Washington during the past eight years – clever creatures, glib, committed to an ideology, and devious at attaining their objects. The seven cardinal virtues go unmentioned by Mr. Kristol. (The virtue of prudence, according to both Plato and Burke, is the virtue most needed in the statesman.) Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge, Neoconservatives? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?Playing the Comic Role. Mr. Bush, not grown up in the backbiting ideological jungle of New York City, seems unlikely to accept Mr. Kristol’s councils of deviousness. For George Bush is no ideologue and no intellectual, praise be: rather, he is, as KristoI writes, “a fine gentleman of good breeding, a true patriot, an experienced, reliable and trustworthy public servant.” Later in the same article, incidentally, Mr. Kristol makes it clear enough that he is no respecter of fine gentlemen: he commends Mrs. Thatcher for having in her cabinet “none of the traditional aristocratic coloration,” and rejoices that the Conservative majority in the House of Commons has fewer members “who have gone to Eton or Harrow, Oxford or Cambridge.”It is a reasonable presumption that Mr. Kristol and certain of his colleagues would prefer to install in the White House some person, not at all a fine gentleman, who might be deviously manipulated by Neoconservative ideologues. Mr. Bush has far too much practical9
experience of federal office to be so managed by the “first-class academic ‘brain trust”‘ that Mr. Kristol desires to establish in the White House. “In politics, the professor always plays the comic role,” Nietzsche wrote. So it is coming to pass with the Neoconservatives, of whose “guiding vision” the Bush people are healthily skeptical.No Promise for Neoliberalism. Do I think, what with my mordant comments in this series of four lectures on the Cultural Conservatives, the Libertarians, popular conservatism, and the Neoconservatives, that the conservative movement, near the end of the year 1988, is in the sere and yellow leaf, a mere congeries of warring factions, doomed to early dissolution as a political force? Not at all. Already, despite the complexion of the majority in Congress, the conservatives are dominant in the country. The Democratic candidates for office now find it necessary, nationally, to pretend to be conservatives; a number of Democratic aspirants to office actually have turned conservative. No longer is there talk of the promise of Neoliberalism.On the contrary, during the next four years we will benefit as a people, I think, from a prudent conservative administration that has gained confidence and practical abilities from the eight years of Mr. Reagan’s success. It will not be a Neoconservative administration; yet neither will it be an administration from which honest Neoconservatives are excluded. Able cultural conservatives, and sensible libertarians, and plain mainstream conservatively minded politicians will have their places in such an administration. Let us pray that the conservative movement of the 1990s will resemble Cicero’s Optimates – “the party of all good men.” Some of us, once upon a time, had fixed lifelong in our brains by the standard exercises in typewriting manuals Cicero’s exhortation “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their party.” This day I do similarly exhort you, ladies and gentlemen – yea, even the publicans, sinners, and Neoconservatives in your midst.
Someone posted an income gap site the other day, was wondering if you could repost it please.
According to a gay dude/former colleague of mine in 2005, the majority of married men in Wichita are closet cases. Closet cases who frequent gay bars on the weekends, spending their hard-earned bread on this aging Queen Nefertiti and not on their wives and progeny.
Sheesh – if that’s the case, that’s pretty darned depressing. Even Queenie admitted to me that “these men aren’t being fair to their families.” Yet he takes their dough to fund his jewelry jones.
Instead of persecuting homosexuals, perhaps the Christian Ultra-Right should denigrate this sort of behavior. Unless, of course, a good portion of ‘em are C-Cubeds (Clear Closet Cases) themselves.
Because I don’t like purchasing a DVD of a movie I once loved (”Edge of Seventeen”) – only to hear the lead actor (former thespian Chris Stafford) crow to “Advocate” mag that “straight America doesn’t know what’s going on” in a certain scene.
I’m glad I didn’t know – and I’m even sadder that I know now. The last thing I’d want to do if I were gay would be to buttress one of Fred Phelps’s baleful claims.
Oh, and here’s one last pearl strand for Queenie: If I’m ever married and my husband strays your way, I’ll choke myself on the biggest, juiciest, pulpiest Florida orange I can find……..
Uh ok then.
Nice writings dog, however, you have fallen into the trap of assigning political ideology as a general assignment of what a human being is.
Life doesn’t work that way bro’.
One can be compassionate about animals and want to be Green and be conservative on monetary aspects. One can be a fantasy artist, then in the next moment of their life enjoy the thrill of NASCAR or perhaps like duck hunting with a friend.
When we resort assigning humans to a certain political ideology we show the failings of our interpretation of life.
Oh, and all Libs are Liars. :D
Give ‘Em a Brake! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071128/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan_27
Kansas for you and me no, but that is what I am stressing that the Neoconservatives are not basing their thoughts on reality. The driving force for them is the Ideology, it supercedes country and the people. Promoting the general welfare is not a concern for them, it is promoting the ideology that matters. Our troops and our citizens are nothing but a ways to a means. The likes of Irving Kristol feels that we as American citizens have to great of freedoms. So much so that they blame the very Constitutional rights as the cause of the moral and social decay in this nation.
“ It is a reasonable presumption that Mr. Kristol and certain of his colleagues would prefer to install in the White House some person, not at all a fine gentleman, who might be deviously manipulated by Neoconservative ideologues”.
Those words were from 1988, have they then found that “not at all a fine gentleman” in G.W. Bush? Certainly the invasion of Iraq came from left field, but did follow the list made by the PNAC of countries that needed to be deposed. Stop and think, in the back of your mind did the invasion of Iraq in the name of fighting terrorism make sense? If you were making a list of state sponsors of terrorism would Iraq been at the top of that list?Iran would have been mine, maybe Libya and certainly not until those that actually committed 9-11 had been ran to ground.
I may be seeing a spook behind every tree, but are you not seeing the Neocons specter in this? True that some of it is that ole adage, “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…”. There is no doubt these are troubling times, the threat of the Islamic extremists can not be denied. But they do not and can not effect this country and the Government as the Neoconservatives can. And the happenings since 2003 bare more witness to their continuing plan then perhaps happenstance.
Oh, and all Libs are Liars. :DThat statement maybe truer then you meant. Did you miss that the Neocons consider themselves “the true Liberals”
Here ya go Pmom
http://www.lcurve.org/
Thanks KFG
Well dog, things are things if you know what I mean.
Having been crossed paths with the large yellow “wet floor” signs, I often find myself in a dilemma. Is the shiny floor I’m about to step on, indeed wet and highly hazardous or is the floor has hence been dried for many hours and I’m the victim of yet another forgetful custodian?
Neocons perhaps may consider themselves reformed Liberals, but are they really?
Or are they seeking the path of least resistance?
One might think that going to war is not in any way the path of least resistance, but let’s think about that.
What were the alternatives? Doing nothing is always an option, but not very electable.
Saying something on the matter but doing nothing is electable, but will not win any friends of those being oppressed or ignored.
I imagine many times, Iraqi guards taunted their prisoners with the phrase, “Who is going to save you? The Americans?” They guessed wrong.
However, let’s say an Isolationist such as Ron Paul was elected. The Iraqi guard would be absolutely correct. The Iraqi prisoner would languish in eternal torment at the hands of the Iraqi guard because there is no justice under a dictator.
But why should we care? We can sit back here all comfy.
I’d be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts, that if we removed all Americans, bases and military from every Islamic based country in the world, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference on how radical Islam views American.
They would go back to their effigy burning ways and start bombing a few embassies here and there. On occasion they would hijack a cruise ship or a airliner, perhaps blow up a shopping mall here in the U.S.
But why should we care right? It’s not anyone we know right?
What I’m saying is that Neo-cons are the ultimate in proactive foreign affairs. It’s carry a big stick and then carry a second big stick.
There are problems with that policy and there are problems with being totally Liberally based and being an isolationist.
“Most” married men are in the closet? Please!Why do people engaged in certain behaviors always want to validate themselves by saying “everyone does it”, and what makes them such an expert? Has your friend actually seen “most the married men of Wichita” in a gay bar? I think not.I guess I should be grateful that my guy spends every evening and weekend watching TV and tinkering in his workshop.
I just saw that the Mass. legislature is considering a bill that would outlaw spanking even in the home. What in the hell is wrong with this country?
Freebird,
Just look at the emotional knee jerk reactions happening in the pit bull thread to see what is wrong with this country.
Nathan,I see what you mean. Iy kind of reminds me when I was in boot camp, one guy screws up so lets punish everybody.
An anti-spanking bill being debated is an example of what is wrong with America? I thought debating issues was a good thing.
Maybe some think that hitting children is a good idea. Some do not. Thus, a debate.
The bill’s sponsor says it is an attempt to prevent abuse. Sounds like an issue worth at least discussing…. But feel free to decry the crumbling of civilization as we know it…
I’m against someone telling me what I can do in my own home,but then again maybe you don’t mind government intrusion in your personal life. Tell me how will this bill prevent child abuse?
If the bill becomes law look out! Any kid in that state who gets pissed at mom and dad can say they were spanked, off to jail mom and dad goes. If Mass does enact this bill they better line up a bunch of foster homes for the kids and appoint more judges to hear these cases
Banning spanking is just the next logical step. From the moment you get up in the morning, until you go to bed – big brother already regulates your life. It’s not just telling us which breeds of dog to kill, it’s everything.
Wake up:
Take a sh*t: Government regulates the water size of the toilet.
Take a shower: Government has mandated flow restricters in the shower head.
Shave: Government regulates the ingredients in the shaving creme. Razor blades: labeled for idiots safety.
Make the bed: Government has flame fire standards for the mattress you slept on.
Eat Breakfast: Government regulates the foods we may eat, the farmers who grow/raise them, and advise us on percent of daily requirements we are eating/vitamins.
Drive to work: In your government regulated car from glass standards, tires, right down to MPG. Drive on the government controlled MPH roads, stop lights and stop signs.
Work: OSHA all over the place. Got a safety officer I’ll bet on the payroll? Labor relations person/EEA or Ethics in Government person?
Buy Lunch: OSHA regulations on that automatic fire extinguisher over the cooks head. Food regs again. Pay tax.
Drive home: Stop for gas tax, buy dinner food tax,
Eat dinner: Ditto all the above
Drink a nightcap: Government bonded booze/alcohol content and tax.
Go to bed: Sweet government dreams!
AM,
Good post. Where do you think it will end?
I forgot evening entertainment!
Watch TV: Feds control language and nudity we can view. Broadcast frequency of the TV stations (and soon mandate HD!), hours of operation, and how much electric juice the darn thing can use! Cable TV viewer? Government tax and deregulation, regulation. Rent a movie? Better be PG, R17, or X…
Interesting posts. I think at some point, maybe not in our life times, The American people are going to say enough, and there will be a 2nd American revolution
With the bushonomy is such shambles who can blame the guy for quitting to spend more time with the kids?http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071128/pl_nm/bush_economy_hubbard_dc_7
“American Way” –
Your little cut-and-paste demonstrates what a joke it is every time a corporation or Con advocates “voluntary self-regulation.”
Every law on the books is the direct result of “voluntary self regulation” failing.
Why are their limits on toilet size and shower head flow restrictions? Because people didn’t reduce water consumption when asked to. (Look how people in Georgia “vouluntarily” didn’t cut back water use during the current drought.)
Why are there product standards for shaving creme? Because coporations would put anything and everything into the goop it it made an extra penny-a-can profit. (That’s why Chinese manufactures tainted food and toys, etc.)
Government has flame fire standards for the mattress you slept on because mattress manufacturers voluntarily made bedding from explosive foam, and straw and horse hair.
Government regulates the foods we may eat because food producers voluntarily included tainted ingredience in their products. (Without a limit to the amount of rat parts allowed in hot dogs my kitty would insist on going to the ball game with me.)
Oooh, and the big bad “socialists” “…advise us on percent of daily requirements we are eating/vitamins?!?!” Horrors!
You’ve gone so far as to object to stop lights and traffic signs! That’s not the “American Way,” that’s certifiably insane.
OSHA isn’t some mad socialist scheme to steal power away from you, “American Way.” There got to be a problem with bloody factory-worker body parts littering the workplace, thanks to “voluntary self-regulation.”
America lived your libertarian dream a hundred years ago. Tainted food, child labor, over-the-market heroin, cocaine in soda pop, the Triangle Dress Factory fire, Jim Crow laws, Homestead Steel, regular financial panics, epidemics, polluted water and air… you know, the “Guilded” Age.
Moneyhawk,
So you are ok with the government telling you what you can and can’t do? I guess you are one of those who can’t take responsibility for your own actions and saftey. Thank God I’m not like you
Moneyhawk,My feeling is you are part of the problem. What ever the government does to control and regulate your life is fine by you, just as long as you are not responsible for your own safety and actions.
Oh yeah..the flow control toilets is SUCH a success, isn’t it? Restricted flow so much that many times it is necessary to flush it twice–end result of WASTING water. Yep…leave it to our government to ‘protect’ us from everything.
Since people slip and fall in showers, when can we expect the government to mandate helmet use in the shower? Since obesity leads to huge numbers of deaths, when can we expect the government to mandate exercise and weight management programs?
Sound ridiculous? Not at all…the scariest phrase ever uttered by a politician is: “if it saves ONE life, it is worth it”.
Do we REALLY want everything that has the slightest risk to be outlawed? Do we REALLY want our government to controll every single aspect of our lives?
Taz, My answer is HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think Monkeyhawk is quite uninformed.
Do you think that the only reason children don’t work today is because of the law?
Where can I read those shaving cream product standards?
I think over-the-counter herion would be great, as it, along with legalization of other drugs, would decrease the motivating factors behind much crime.
I think, Monkeyhawk, that you place way too much trust in government.
By the way, the “libertarian” dream you referred to was hardly that. Many of the “robber barons” relied on favors granted by government. Railroads come to mind.
Those who didn’t, Rockefeller comes to mind: do you know what happened to the price of kerosene as he built his company?
MoneyhawkYour silence is deafening
Our federal government and it’s associated bureaucracy has become bloated and unmanageable.
The government has become the biggest corporation in America. The largest employer.
And libs don’t kid yourselves – federal laws have made many many rich men. This isn’t restricted to Bush’s period – it’s throughout American History.
It’s fingers reach into all aspects of our lives public and private.
We are nearing total control.
Someone mentioned government to mandate exercise and weight management programs. Well it’s coming and it’s called socialized medicine. The government will decide who gets the operations and who doesn’t. Eat too many quarter pounders? Sorry – no operation for you. We reserve the resources to those who qualify. (Guess who decides who qualifies!)
The pendulum has swung too far already for many Americans.
And that illustration works both ways doesn’t it? There are those who advocate MORE government control and interference in our lives – and those who feel it’s gone way to far now.
Someone once said a little government is o.k.,…….. but
“too” instead of “to” (spelling police are watching us too)
Quick question while we are thinking small govt. Would the “would-be town” of West Valley, if incorporated be provided fire and police protection from Sed. County?
Or would they have to provide their own fire and police?
I don’t think I should as a tax payer in Wichita have to pay Sed County taxes to provied those services.
What are the facts here?
What about police protection, will they call Sed Co about a break-in?
More on the ‘teddy bear’/teacher incident. Those people are batshit nuts.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071128/ap_on_re_mi_ea/sudan_british_teacherThe British ought to pull all their teachers out of Sudan.
http://www.pr-inside.com/us-withdraws-subpoena-seeking-identity-of-r320059.htm
US withdraws subpoena seeking identity of 24,000 Amazon customers
2007-11-27 20:14:18 -
MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) – U.S. prosecutors have withdrawn a subpoena seeking the identities of thousands of people who bought used books through online retailer Amazon.com Inc., newly unsealed court records show.The withdrawal came after a judge ruled the customers have a right to keep their reading habits from the government.
“The (subpoena’s) chilling effect on expressive e-commerce would frost keyboards across America,” U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker wrote in a June ruling.
“Well-founded or not, rumors of an Orwellian federal criminal investigation into the reading habits of Amazon’s customers could frighten countless potential customers into canceling planned online book purchases,” the judge wrote in a ruling he unsealed last week.Amazon said in court documents it hopes Crocker’s decision will make it more difficult for prosecutors to obtain records involving book purchases.Crocker — who unsealed documents detailing the showdown against prosecutors’ wishes — said he believed prosecutors were seeking the information for a legitimate purpose. But he said First Amendment concerns about freedom of speech were justified and outweighed the subpoena’s law enforcement purpose.
“The subpoena is troubling because it permits the government to peek into the reading habits of specific individuals without their knowledge or permission,” Crocker wrote. “It is an unsettling and un-American scenario to envision federal agents nosing through the reading lists of law-abiding citizens while hunting for evidence against somebody else.”
Federal prosecutors issued the subpoena last year as part of a grand jury investigation into a former Wisconsin official who was a prolific seller of used books on Amazon.com. They were looking for buyers who could be witnesses in the case.
Why would Fed. prosecutors care if the guy was selling used books??
Since we don’t really have a sports blog near as good as the news blogs (and since sports isn’t really a liberal/conservative thing), I want to run this past you all and hear your thoughts.I–and a growing number of Real Kansans–think K-State Athletic Director Tim Weiser and Head Football Coach Ron Prince should be fired before the football program sinks back to pre-Bill Snyder levels…assuming it hasn’t already.Someone–who refuses to identify himself–said it would be racist to fire Prince after two years.Prince was not hired on the basis of his skin color. He shouldn’t be fired on that basis either.
But is it “racist” to say he hasn’t gotten the job done…and to keep him will only make matters worse?
mrcontroversy, I’ve been following some of this debate, and have been a bit amazed by it all. It seems to me that while the hiring choices by Mr. Weiser are subject to criticism, as both the current football and men’s basketball coaches had no head coaching experience at the Division I level, that in and of itself isn’t disqualifying (see, e.g., Bill Snyder; Roy Williams).
As a KU alum, from what I’ve seen of Coach Prince in his first two years, I encourage his continued employment by KSU for the foreseeable future. :-)
More seriously, I think Prince is in over his head, but I also think he needs to be given at least one more year. As to whether the color of his skin played into his hiring, I don’t know. I would suggest as an outsider that he consider hiring more experienced assistants, and, perhaps, do something that challenges his starting quarterback for his job next season.
I understand from reading and listening to comments from certain of the KSU faithful that there have been changes made in the football program which have been perceived as less than beneficial. I sometimes wonder if the success of Coach Snyder, once he got his program well established, spoiled the KSU fan base to the point that the members thereof expect a bowl game every year, which, to my mind, is unrealistic, regardless of the school (see, e.g., Nebraska).
Just my thoughts, as requested.
I’m always fascinated by the amount of sweat and strain football fans put themselves through bitching and moaning about the coach, when it is absolutely none of their business in the first place.
Who cares?
I was at KSU for the Toilet Bowl, suffering in a bar when winless Cats and KU teams couldn’t beat each other! No way did I want to watch that game! It was a night game making the experience more pitiful.
Stan Parrish, terrible coach at KSU went to Michigan as assistant, they won a National Championship and became an assistant coach a little in the NFL.
Stan loved roided up guys and hated walk ons for the most part. Nebraska then had that legendary walk on players system that seem to work well.
Snyder’s early days players, some weren’t great athletes and made poor decisions on the field.
Snyder lost a game they should of won at home, giving up 28 points in the fourth quarter to a Division 1 AA team.
He eventually coached the Big 12 Champion, but it was fits and starts, failures then some success getting to that point.
Snyder did play some of the weakest teams out of conference.
Just like KU did this season and has done. Will continue to do.
Prince chastised for going to Auburn? Why, that was great. They barely lost.
He’s beaten Texas twice. Lost to KU twice.
That loss to Iowa State caused headaches!
That coaching mistake passing on a long fourth down at Nebraska. Too much time was on the clock for that hail mary hoping for a penalty on the pass.
Weakened defense quickly gave up a Nebraska score.
Defensively the Cats lost their way. It maybe bad coaching and lack of talent at the same time.
They gave up scores on kick offs too often. Probably too much field position Cats lost when kicking off.
From my perspective, Prince is doing okay. KSU has less talent and a young coaching staff.
He’s a former offensive lineman, that group shouldn’t stink. They didn’t have a good quality of skill players beyond Jordy Nelson.
They didn’t have game changers on defense creating turnovers.
Josh Freeman is talented but not when he’s under too much pressure. He felt the need to risk some throws and made bad ones.
He’s always told to play better when defensively the Cats are terrible. Some receivers dropped his passes at key times. They didn’t get yards after a catch.
It was only Jordy with that ability.
Next year has questions, but its not about his job. Play on the field has to be more competitive.
Head coaches can be fired in three years, 4 to 5 is preferable.
He’s done just well enough to still be considered a possible longer time coach.
He does have to stop remarking on other teams and players great abilities the way he does.
Both Mangino and Pinkel could have been fired at KU and Missouri, but those schools held on.
The facilities were improved. Scheduling tweaked. Talent given time getting to their Senior year.
Who knows what Josh Freeman can be time he’s a Senior.
I’d say Prince gets the ride with Freeman for the four years.
NEW YORK, Nov. 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Fewer than one in three middle-class families in America is financially secure, and the remaining majority are either borderline or at high risk of falling out of the middle class altogether, according to a new study published this week by Demos and the Institute for Assets and Social Policy (IASP) at Brandeis University.
“By a Thread: The New Experience of America’s Middle Class” is the first comprehensive report to measure economic stability across the American middle class. Based on national government data, “By a Thread” is the first in a series of reports and briefing papers that will utilize the new “Middle Class Security Index” developed by the non-partisan policy center Demos and IASP/Brandeis.
This Index measures the financial security of the middle class by rating household stability across five core economic factors: assets, educational achievement, housing costs, budget and healthcare. Based on how a family ranked in each of these factors, they were defined as financially “secure,” “borderline” or “at risk”.
“Much like a common cholesterol test that shows whether someone’s cardiovascular health is at risk, the Middle Class Security Index shows that financial health eludes the majority of the American middle class,” said Thomas M. Shapiro, Director of the Institute on Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis and one of the co-authors of the report. “It also points to specific areas-like lack of assets-that inhibit financial security.”
The “Middle Class Security” Index shows worrying trends:
– Only 31 percent of families who would be considered middle-class by income are financially secure.
– One in four middle-class families match the profile for being at high risk of slipping out of the middle class altogether.
– More than half of middle-class families have no net financial assets whatsoever.
– Middle-class families have median debt of $3,500 and at least half of them have no assets.
– Only 13 percent of middle-class families are secure in their asset levels – meaning that they have enough to cover most of their living expenses for nine months should their regular income cease; 79 percent are “at risk” in this category, meaning they could not cover the majority of their expenses for even three months. Another 9 percent are “borderline.”
– Twenty-one percent of middle-class families have less than $100 per week ($5,000 per year) remaining after meeting essential living expenses. These families are living from paycheck to paycheck with very little margin of security.
The participants of a press conference to launch the report commented on these findings:”If we look back at the public investments of the mid-twentieth century – the GI Bill, federal home loan guarantees, better funding for public education and college – we see that they were geared at two key benchmarks on the way to the middle-class: assets and education,” said Henry Cisneros, Chairman of CityView and former U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. “But the Middle Class Security Index provides a real measurement of where we are after years of seeing those investments whittled away.
American families are at risk of falling out of the middle class and never getting back in, and many of those who were excluded from the initial public investment – Latinos and African Americans – are among those with the greatest vulnerability. It’s time for a new public investment to stabilize the household economy and build the future middle class.”
“The ‘By a Thread’ report findings mirror a reality of today’s unstable economy: The nation’s mortgage lending crisis is threatening the fabric of the urban communities that we revitalized by providing economic opportunity for more than 30 years. The ramifications of foreclosures on property values, municipal costs, crime, and consumer credit extends beyond the middle class and the neighborhoods most widely impacted by irresponsible lending practices,” said Jean Pogge, Executive Vice President, Consumer and Community Banking for ShoreBank.
“Workers in America are suffering a now generation-long stagnation of wages and rising insecurity,” said Ron Blackwell, Chief Economist at AFL-CIO. “‘By a Thread’ provides a unique metric for the resulting stress on middle class living standards and outlines bold policies to create an economy that works for all.”
The “Middle Class Security Index” findings reported in “By a Thread” spotlight the strengths and vulnerabilities of the middle class by identifying barriers to financial security and offering solutions that would enable the broad majority of American families to enjoy a stable middle-class life. The report recommends a set of policies that will help open access to, and strengthen, America’s middle class. Legislative proposals cover a range of important issues affecting American households, including asset building and debt reduction, making higher education more accessible and affordable, and addressing the healthcare crisis.
“The Index is the launching point for a range of new work that will examine economic stability in America’s middle class,” said Jennifer Wheary, Senior Fellow at Demos and report co-author. “In the coming months we’ll be adding new reports that illuminate middle-class stability by age, race and income-several of the key demographic factors that will inform future public policy investments.”
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,232081.shtml
Six Thousand Sunni Arabs Join Security Pact to Help U.S. Forces Block Terrorist Escape Routes
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
HAWIJA, Iraq — Nearly 6,000 Sunni Arab residents joined a security pact with American forces Wednesday in what U.S. officers described as a critical step in plugging the remaining escape routes for extremists flushed from former strongholds.
The new alliance — called the single largest single volunteer mobilization since the war began — covers the “last gateway” for groups such as Al Qaeda in Iraq seeking new havens in northern Iraq, U.S. military officials said.
U.S. commanders have tried to build a ring around insurgents who fled military offensives launched earlier this year in the western Anbar province and later into Baghdad and surrounding areas. In many places, the U.S.-led battles were given key help from tribal militias — mainly Sunnis — that had turned again Al Qaeda and other groups.
Extremists have sought new footholds in northern areas once loyal to Saddam Hussein’s Baath party as the U.S.-led gains have mounted across central regions. But their ability to strike near the capital remains.
The ceremony to pledge the 6,000 new fighters was presided over by a dozen sheiks — each draped in black robes trimmed with gold braiding — who signed the contract on behalf of tribesmen at a small U.S. outpost in north-central Iraq.
For about $275 a month — nearly the salary for the typical Iraqi policeman — the tribesmen will man about 200 security checkpoints beginning Dec. 7, supplementing hundreds of Iraqi forces already in the area.
About 77,000 Iraqis nationwide, mostly Sunnis, have broken with the insurgents and joined U.S.-backed self-defense groups.
The recently arrived militants have waged a campaign of killing and intimidation to try to establish a new base, said Sheikh Khalaf Ali Issa, mayor of Zaab village.
“They killed 476 of my citizens, and I will not let them continue their killing,” Issa said.
With the help of the new Sunni allies, “the Hawija area will be an obstacle to militants, rather than a pathway for them,” said Maj. Sean Wilson, with the Army’s 1st Brigade, 10th Mountain Division. “They’re another set of eyes that we needed in this critical area.”
By defeating militants in Hawija, U.S. and Iraqi leaders hope to keep them away from Kirkuk, an ethnically diverse city that is also the hub of Iraq’s northern oil fields.
“They want to go north into Kirkuk and wreak havoc there, and that’s exactly what we’re trying to avoid,” Army Maj. Gen. Mark P. Hertling, the top U.S. commander in northern Iraq, told The Associated Press this week.
Kurds often consider Kurkik part of their ancestral homeland and often refer to the city as the “Kurdish Jerusalem.” Saddam, however, relocated tens of thousands of pro-regime Arabs to the city in the 1980s and 1990s under his “Arabization” policy.
The Iraqi government has begun resettling some of those Arabs to their home regions, making room for thousands of Kurds who have gradually returned to Kirkuk since Saddam’s ouster.
Tension has been rising over the city’s status — whether it will join the semi-autonomous Kurdish region or continue being governed by Baghdad.
“Hawija is the gateway through which all our communities — Kurdish, Turkomen and Arab alike — can become unsafe,” said Abu Saif al-Jabouri, mayor of al-Multaqa village north of Kirkuk. “Do I love my neighbor in Hawija? That question no longer matters. I must work to help him, because his safety helps me.”
In Baghdad, crowds waited until nightfall for the arrival a bus convoy carrying more than 800 Iraqi refugees home from Syria. The buses — funded by the Iraqi government — left Damascus on Tuesday and were expected in the Iraqi capital on Wednesday. Government officials gave no details on the delay.”
THERE IS A GOD!
Wichita city manager to announce resignation
Wichita City Manager George Kolb, who was hired in May 2004, is expected to announce his resignation this afternoon. Mayor Carl Brewer and Kolb have scheduled a 4 p.m. news conference at City Hall.
Ding dong, the Kolb is gone!
Great post capn, but I see no way to make people start saving. or live within their means. I have this talk with my son every couple months. but kids just won’t listen.
George Colb just announced his resignation, I thought that he’d messed up when he went after sunflower protesters. Wonder if that had anything to do with it.
“Six Thousand Sunni Arabs Join Security Pact to Help U.S. Forces Block Terrorist Escape Routes”Now if we’d just seal the Saudi border, or get them to quit exporting their terrorist.
Kind of like the munitions thing, where we went in and bypassed the ammo dumps just to later have to lose many lives trying to capture caches.
Well, well, well: Rudy Giuliani secretly billed public agencies to pay for his security detail while visiting his mistress for sex.
“As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records.
The documents, obtained by Politico under New York’s Freedom of Information Law, show that the mayoral costs had nothing to do with the functions of the little-known city offices that defrayed his tabs, including agencies responsible for regulating loft apartments, aiding the disabled and providing lawyers for indigent defendants.
At the time, the mayor’s office refused to explain the accounting to city auditors, citing “security.”
The Hamptons visits resulted in hotel, gas and other costs for Giuliani’s New York Police Department security detail.”
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004795.php
CF2K has no doubt that the “liberal” media will decline to say much, at all, about these documented “expenses.” But still, tell me again why this thieving ratf*cker is a credible candidate for the Presidency?
Oh, right–he’s a Republican. Stealing from the public is expected.
As usual, they got the wrong person. Kolb was rumored to be the scapegoat if Wichita lost the bowling tournament again, but the fact remains that the Good Old Boy Network is back in power again.
Sharon Fearey will, no doubt, push hard to make Cathy Holdeman the permanent City Manager, which will only make things worse.The only way City Hall is every going to get better is if Holdeman and Gary Rebenstorf leave.
Tony,
You have no better ideas for this community than Kolb. He’s leaving because of obstructionists.
Dumb civic people rejected the development money from the casino and CEO’s foolishness threating to move businesses threats interfering in a free choice vote.
City council waffled on the idea downtown, for what reason? Head up their butts, because this community needs growth and its easy to see.
All the rejectors here when projects are discussed, they suck!
Nothing is preferred instead of progress!
Actually I could care less if Brewer had philosophical differences with Kolb.
Kolb was hired as a manager, not to adhere to political party rhetoric.
I’m sure Mr. Kolb will be hired by some large City for his talents.
Mrage, Kansas,
You know as well as I do…it’s all about the GOBN.
Kolb didn’t look to happy during the announcement, I wonder if this means we can expect the city to get sued.
Mrage, Kansas,You know as well as I do…it’s all about the GOBN.
Posted by: mrcontroversy | November 28, 2007 at 05:34 PM
Aye Mr. C., you’re correct as usual.
vigilante traffic control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5ZwbDj7sQM
to: Mrage, good article. This is a problem that will continue until the “average” citizen quits using easy to get money. Like the mortage crisis, everyone should be more into responsibile money handling than into credit cards.
Kansas I tend to think in Probabilities and possibilities, though almost everything is possible the real question is that if it is probable. It is possible that on the way to work tonight I will encounter a drunk driver who will run the stop sign and kill me. With that possibility I would be safer to stay home, but to do so means I will not get paid for my nights service. So I depend on the probability that it will not happen.
I live my life weighting the two, the problem is the Ideologist (Neoconservatives) goes with the possibility.A for instance is during the Ford Administration Paul Wolfowitz argued for continuing tensions between the Soviets even though all the intelligence services stated that in fact the Soviet Union was on the verge of failing. Wolfowitz reasoning was because the Soviets had developed a new way of tracking our subs, but when asked for his proof and it being pointed out that no one was saying they had. His response was that it would be logical to assume they had. And just because there was no proof does not mean they had not!
We can agree there is a lot of evil in the world, that indeed there are people in more countries that wish for a better place to live. “All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing” and all, should we then throw all our lives and treasure to fighting that evil? You might argue not to is selfish, but I say to go all out in such a action would put us in such a weaken state we can help no one. By all means if the Iraqis had been actively fighting for their own freedom. We should have helped, but you can not impose freedom on people that are not fighting for their own freedom.
And as to the Neoconservatives, their desire is not to free these people but to impose their version of Democracy upon them. It can be argued that if not for France’s help our own attempt at freedom would have failed. But how would it have gone if the French had came here and said “you are going to be free so say we!.
By all means if the Iraqis had been actively fighting for their own freedom. We should have helped, but you can not impose freedom on people that are not fighting for their own freedom.
Posted by: writerdog | November 28, 2007 at 07:03 PM
Here ya go dog,
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/11/open-thread–25.html#comment-91488002
American scientists are using tissue from aborted babies in genetically engineered mice to study how certain diseases are spread, and the experiments are being paid for with U.S. tax dollars, then hushed up.Scientists involved in some of the research at the National Institutes of Health refused to speak with Cybercast News Service about their work. The chimera mice, now used in several areas of research, are being implanted with fresh fetal tissue, often from aborted second-trimester babies such as might be killed and sold in Tiller’s late-term Wichita abortion mill, or Planned Parenthood’s Overland Park abortion mill.
You might recall that your Congress legalized the selling of aborted baby parts for “recovery fees”. In 1993, William the Slick ordered Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala to remove the ban President Reagan had ordered in 1988 on federal funding of any “therapeutic transplantation research” that used human fetal tissue derived from induced abortions. Congress later passed a law, Public Law 103-43, which states, “no official of the executive branch may impose a policy that the Department of Health and Human Services is prohibited from conducting or supporting any research on the transplantation of human fetal tissue for therapeutic purposes . . .”This should not be legal, much less taxpayer funded.Stop this.
Parkay, the research being done is helping SAVE lives… you know, that little matter you SAY you are in favor of??? But yet, you are against the research that can DO that?? What hypocrisy!!
Watching the rerun of the Republican debate.
They are ALL for tax cuts.
Well you can’t do that and fund wars and keep promises long ago made to seniors, the sick, and education.
The repeal of the estate tax, that has to go. It benefits only a few hundred of the super rich.
The repeal of the capital gains tax. That also has to go. If you make your money making MORE money and not working, well you need to be taxed more. Tax people who make money and let folks who EARN money alone.
That doesnt have much of a chance of working, JR Some kind of compromise will need to be worked out between the Congresional membes…