April 12, 2006
M.Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, writing an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal is claiming -
Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.
What? Alarmism? An industry of stooges? And worse?! How could lies about climate change ever gain credence?!
April 11, 2006
As opposed to Terri Schiavo, because honestly the way this man acted he was all about himself. And seeing as he "kept his promise" by engraving that and the date of Terri's death as the day she slipped into her brain disabled state on her tombstone, he's now gone and written a book. And that book has apparently been optioned by Hollywood.
For those out there who couldn't get enough of the whole Terri Schiavo debate/controversy when the news was flooded with it early last year... it seems her husband wrote a book called Terri: The Truth which has been optioned by former Tarantino producer Lawrence Bender and Mike Farrell. They haven't decided if the story is going to go big screen or small screen, yet so that's something. I really have no interest in this... at all.
April 10, 2006
Dominique de Villepin, his poll numbers down as a result of the student protest and subsequent "victory" over his youth employment law, now finds his own job security in question:
Opposition politicians and many protesters have called for Villepin to resign. Until the crisis gained momentum, Villepin was considered a leading candidate for the French presidency next year.
On TV tonight, he denied that his presidential prospects had suffered, telling TF-1 television he had never been interested in the job, Reuters reported.
Ah the dark irony. Of course such humor is apparently lost on the French, who seem content to consign their country to the ash heap of history. No law against that of course. A country is free to choose economic suicide if they want. But the absolute sterility of the French youth is stunning.
Joblessness is endemic among the 15-24 age-group in France.
About 23% are registered as unemployed - an extremely high figure by international standards. Many more youths are not even looking for work.
Not only does France create few entry-level jobs - but most are being offered on a casual basis.
The reasons for the lack of good jobs are many and complex. Mr Torres says a university system divorced from the world of business is one factor.
"Typically French youths come out of four or five years in universities with no work experience whatsoever," he says.
Furthermore, employers are reluctant to hire as shedding staff is cumbersome and risky.
"The legal uncertainty surrounding dismissals is a major source of labour rigidity and that may explain why employers are loathe to give permanent contracts," Mr Torres adds.
Whatever the cause, the result is that the young in France crave job security above all - 75% say they want to be public servants.
This explains their opposition to the government's plan, which is aimed at making labour markets more fluid.
By not releasing employers from the shackles of the employed, the students have all but ensured a further stagnation of French business, and a continuance of contract labor. A day's pay for a day's work, and no security to speak of. And that's probably why they all want to work for the government.
As the Wall Street Journal muses, France's inherent wealth may save them for a while, but the slow death will only accelerate with time.
France remains a wealthy country, and its economic decline can be masked for a time as it lives off accumulated capital. But already the promises that its unions have extracted from the government seem unlikely to be kept. A growth rate of between 1% and 2% a year won't be enough to finance the pensions and health care of an aging nation. And facing up to those facts will require an increasingly painful political reckoning.
April 09, 2006
Possibly on the assumption that his recent New York Times op-ed was an excuse for sound international U.S. policy, Senator John Kerry fleshed out his agenda with a huge display of arrogance, opportunism and outright defeatism on "Meet the Press" this morning.
The transcript is not available yet, but his message was essentially the same: that only by withdrawing troops can we win, that only by threatening to leave will the Iraqis form a government, that only by leaving Iraq to Iran and the terrorists will we (somehow) defeat the terrorists because in doing so we will put an end to their number one recruitment tactic and thus put an end to the civil war (being conducted by ordinary Iraqis who have nothing to do with terrorism, or so Kerry says).
And of course all of this can be accomplished easily, as Kerry told us in his op-ed.
For three years now, the administration has told us that terrible things will happen if we get tough with the Iraqis. In fact, terrible things are happening now because we haven't gotten tough enough. With two deadlines, we can change all that. We can put the American leadership on the side of our soldiers and push the Iraqi leadership to do what only it can do: build a democracy.
Deadlines. That's it! Get those people some day planners and Palm Treos immediately! The war is won!
This of course coming from the man, and party, who screamed to high heaven that if only Bush would delay the election, would delay the constitution, would delay delay delay delay...then all of our problems in Iraq would be solved. If only Bush has listened.
And now if only Bush would set deadlines, everything would be fine... Of course the only deadline Democrats seem interested in is the one that would create the most chaos. How stupid are Democrats that they cannot see the strategy of the enemy? If terrorists hear we're about to pull out, do Democrats really believe the terrorists are going to pack it in and leave? Or that they're going to hurry up to "get their war in with America" before they miss out on the chance to fight the infidel? Or that they'll somehow cry over "reduced" recruiting?
Of course not.
They're going to sit back and bide their time, biting our rear-ends on the way out and then celebrating that they've a new country to pillage. They will trumpet the "defeat of America" to the heavens and recruit jihadists to their hearts' content. Because they only thing terrorists understand (oddly enough, as Osama has talked about in every one of his home movies) is strength. And regardless of what moral relevance and mindless military strategy Kerry proffers, pulling our troops out before the job is done is called defeat.
Yet on "Meet the Press" Kerry lamented how the administration had not contacted him even once on Iraq, to seek his advice.
Shocking, I know. But perhaps if Tim Russert had promoted Kerry's credentials and commitment to the Koran? Maybe then the Bush administration would give him a call?
A Roman Catholic who has struggled at times to talk about his own faith, Mr. Kerry also told the group that he believed "deeply in my faith" and that the Koran, the Torah, the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles had influenced a social conscience that he exercised in politics.
"I will tell you, nowhere in there, nowhere, not in one page, not in one phrase uttered and reported by the Lord Jesus Christ, can you find anything that suggests that there is a virtue in cutting children from Medicaid and taking money from the poor and giving it to the rich," Mr. Kerry said.
Yes, the parable about government health care was a good one.
(h/t Dr. Sanity)