CATCH-UP:

- I was proud to learn that one of my alma mater's professors earned the Nobel Prize in Economics.

- Police Chief Charles Moose should either hire a spokesman or stop giving interviews altogether because his demeanor on camera is horrible. I watch Fox and Friends in the mornings before work, and every day since this sniper business began they have interviewed him on that program. Despite the fact the hosts are trying very hard to be supportive of the Chief by lobbing softball questions at him ("Can you tell us anything about the investigation or do you think it might compromise your efforts?"), Chief Moose can't ever give a straight answer, he doesn't comprehend the question half the time, and he always seems kind of hostile. Maybe if didn't have a news conference every 20 minutes ...

- As for the sniper, it is definitely getting a little disconcerting in these parts, especially for those of my friends who have kids. It's one of those things where oyu don't really know what you can do about it other than to keep your eyes open. This guy is going to screw up soon, though, and then the real circus will begin.

- I saw Bernard Goldberg on Donahue last night and what a hoot that was. I think my favorite was when Phil starting going off on corporations for "stealing money from Americans, money that's supposed to go to the general welfare, by moving to off-shore tax havens," to which Bernie replied, "You think that I don't agree with oyu Phil?" But there's no liberal bias in the media is there Phil?

- I also got to catch a little of the O'Reilly Factor last night, including the part where he interviewed Libertarian candidate for U.S. Representative, Rachel Mills. While I did enjoy the campaigning by Ms. Mills, the best part had to be when she hawked her wares (she's Ms. Decenber).

THAT's all for this week. I hope everyone has an enjoyable Columbus Day weekend.

DAILY QUOTE:

"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-Jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary period, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which is likely to be the more ominous for the Axis -- an American decision that this is sport, or that it is business."
- D. W. Brogan, The American Character

DAILY QUOTE:

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."
- Patrick Henry

HANDWRINGERS.COM:

I came across this ad by Peace Action on the Metro during my commute home from work. Normally I read the paper or a book, but on this particular day it was too crowded so I was forced to take in the framed, poster advertising that adorns the Metro cars' interior walls. Compared to some of the other socialist tripe that adorns these walls, a picture of pigs blasting off into outerspace, complete with vapor trails streaming out their hind quarters made for an entertaining ride. I don't agree with a lick of what it says, but funny is good when your crammed into a steel carcass with 150 other smelly, tired and generally irate commuters at the end of a long day in our Nation's capital. I noticed the website at the bottom of the poster and made a mental note to go and visit at some point.

So today I visited, and in general I have to say that this site isn't too terrible and seems to avoid the typical leftist invective, the Enron in Space poster notwithstanding. A couple things did seem rather off to me, however. One was in the list of "Friends and Allies." That list is comprised of several organizations concerned about nuclear proliferation and accountability. That wouldn't be so strange considering Peace Action's stance on SDI, except for the predominant articles posted on the main page of their site that counsel against war with Iraq. If you and your "friends and allies" are so concerned about nuclear proliferation, etc., why wouldn't you be in favor of war with Iraq? Well let's look at some of the reasons:

Poll Numbers --> The site latches on to supposed results from the now-infamous NYTimes/CBS News poll and a Washington Post poll to support the idea that Bush and war with Iraq aren't popular. All this without linking to any source data

Dollar Costs of War --> "Samuel "Sandy" Berger, [says] rebuilding the Iraqi economy after a war could cost $50 to $150 billion."; "Scott R. Feil, estimates that the security forces needed in post-war Iraq would cost $16.5 billion in the first year, and $1 billion each following year for 5 to 10 years. Non-security costs, including humanitarian aid, a transitional administration, and civil service, would cost $15-$25 billion over the next decade"; "The cost of a war on Iraq and the ensuing reconstruction of the country would far outweigh other spending priorities popular with the American public." Of course it is simply assumed that we would pay for the entire thing and that Iraq's vast oil reserves would just be left in the ground after we oust Saddam. Do you think these numbers would seem so big to them if we were talking about National Health Care or paying everyone a "living wage" or some other pet project of the Progressive Caucus? Yeah, me neither.

Unanswered Questions --> Here are the questions with my answers:"Where is Osama bin Laden? Dead. Are we now any safer than we were on September 10, 2001? We will be after Saddam is gone. How long will this war continue? I don't think the Secretary of Future Events has gotten a hearing yet, but I'll venture a guess -- one month. How much will it cost?" Ask "Sandy" Berger or Scott Feil ... oh yeah, you already did that.

All in all, at least these people are trying to offer sensible reasons why we wouldn't want SDI or war, instead of calling their opponents idiots, cowboys, satan, etc. (again, the Enron in Space notwithstanding).

**UPDATE: I went back and corrected a bunch of spelling errors, etc. in this post because it drives me nuts knowing that they're there.

PROPERTY RIGHTS AND N.J. ELECTIONS:

I don't think there's much question that the ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court in the Lautenberg matter is a blatant usurpation of authority and a slap in the face to N.J. lawmakers. The weak reasoning, that the voters deserve a choice, only highlights the inappropriateness of this ruling since (a) the voters do have a choice -- even with no Democrat there are other parties on the ballot; and (b) the voters always have the choice to write in a candidate. Presumably, those who don't want to vote for Forrester would have the option to vote for one of the other party candidates OR to write in Lautenberg, Torricelli, or whomever. Furthermore, those responsible for depriving the voters of their "choice" were the very people who are being rewarded by this decision.

In any case, those are the ex post arguments as to why the N.J. Supreme Court decision is flawed. Radley Balko lays out the ex ante position as to the ruling, illuminating the property rights and rule of law issues, with a little help from David Friedman.

DAILY QUOTE:

This, then, is freedom in the external life of man—that he is independent of the arbitrary power of his fellows.
- Ludwig von Mises, Socialism par. II.9.26

WHAT'S IN A NAME?:

Well a lot really. For example, the way that Democrats and those of their leftist ilk are referred to as "liberals" when in reality they epitomise the exact opposite. David Carr is trying to take back the stolen definition and put it where it truly belongs. I couldn't agree more, and have tried to adhere to the policy of calling the American left anything other than "liberal -- e.g. collectivists; socialists; leftists, commies; pinkos; statists; and sometimes I steal "illiberal utopian statists" from Charles Austin. In fact, I seem to recall that Hayek scolded Americans for letting the left steal away the term "liberal" in The Road To Serfdom.

NY TIMES LIES - YET AGAIN:

In yesterday's edition of the N.Y. Times, the following headline dominated the front page -- Public Says Bush Needs to Pay Heed to Weak Economy. The story didn't actually produce any numbers, however, and I was pretty skeptical from the start. Luckily, David Tell, on The Daily Standard took a look behind the numbers. [link via InstaPundit].

PUNK ROCK CAUCUS:

According to Larry Miller at the Weekly Standard, the punk rock generation holds "W" in higher regard than you might think, and they aren't afraid to say it. [link via Occam's Toothbrush].

HISTORY OF ISLAM:

Recently on 60 Minutes, Rev. Jerry Falwell referred to the founder of Islam as a terrorist. A rather long essay is posted here that would tend to back him up. [link via Stuart Buck]. From what I know of the history of Islam, almost immediately after Muhammad founded the religion he and his followers went on a "cleansing" rampage that didn't peter out until they reached modern-day France.

DAILY QUOTE:

"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious."
- Thomas Jefferson

FACTS TO KEEP IN MIND:

David G. Littman has some interesting facts about the Middle East that should be kept in mind when reading the "news" about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. [link via LGF]

NEW JERSEY DEMS AND CHICAGO THUGS:

Unsurprisingly, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to block the N.J. Supreme Court's order allowing Lautenberg to replace Torricelli on the Nov. 5 ballot. The Republican candidate, Forrestor, warned that letting such a decision stand would encourage the sort of invective delivered in this post by John Coumarianos at Innocents Abroad. I agree with the High Court decision not to grant an injunction since such a mandate should be issued only in the most egregious of circumstances and this doesn't qualify. That's not to say that I agree with the N.J Court's decision -- I don't in the least. As a matter of federalism, however, I think it is important that New Jersey be allowed to interpret its laws as it sees fit, as long as that interpretation doesn't run afoul of the U.S. Constitution. In this particular case, at this particular time, I don't think the N.J. Court's interpretation rises to that level of error (however erroneous it is as a matter of jurisprudence). Unfortunately for those who live and do business in New Jersey, a great deal of uncertainty has been introduced into the State's legal framework (did anyone notice how quickly the market reacted to the recent decisions?).

Meanwhile, Chicago is working hard to create some havoc in its midst as well. By issuing a new law this past week that forces every company selling something to the city to disclose whether or not it had anything to do with slavery, Chicago is effectively requiring certain businesses to set themselves up as defendants in a new class action law suit seeking reparations. Aside from the fact that reparations are simply a bad idea getting worse, this sort of nonsense will only serve to hurt the City's economy by raising its costs of doing business. Companies that want to conduct business with Chicago will have to do extensive background checks in order to comply with this new law. Those costs will certainly be passed along to the consumers (i.e. the Chicago taxpayers). Moreover, those companies that aren't sure about their past, or are on the bubble as to whether or not they have something to disclose, will most likely either refuse to sell anything to the city or charge prices commensurate with the company's heightened risk. Once again, the do-gooders will end up hurting the very people they intend to help, along with a lot of other innocent people.

DAILY QUOTE:

"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding."
- Justice Louis D. Brandeis