Highway 99
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
 
It would be interesting to know how the Indian vote in South Dakota affected the outcome of the Senate race narrowly won by John Thune over Tom Daschle.

You might recall that in 2002, Thune lost to Democrat Tim Johnson by a few hundred votes in a poll almost certainly tainted by widespread pro-Democrat fraud, especially on the Indian reservations. So the idea that a shift in the Native American vote -- or a reduction of fraud at reservation polling places -- could have made the difference this time around is an intriguing one.

Less than three weeks before the election, Kimberley Strassel wrote an article in the WSJ surveying the strengths and weaknesses of Daschle and Thune. Most of the article dealt with Daschle's inconsistency in what he said to his constituents versus what he said in Washington, how this hypocrisy had been ignored by the Argus Leader, and how the blogs had finally outed him. But there was one brief paragraph, almost a throwaway, that touched on the issue of the Indian vote:
Mr. Daschle has other things working against him this year. On the Pine Ridge reservation, home of the Oglala Sioux, Mr. Thune stands next to Indian activist Russell Means to open a GOP office on the rez. It comes the day after Mr. Means, a vocal critic of the current tribal system, won a huge upset in a primary for tribal president. "If Daschle is elected, the graft and corruption and the communist set-up in the Sioux nations will continue," Mr. Means tells me, right before he praises Mr. Thune. Such endorsements matter, especially in a county where Mr. Thune got only (a highly suspicious) 8% of the vote in 2002, and in a state where the election may again come down to a few hundred votes.
When I read that paragraph, it immediately brought to mind the eye-opening cover story I'd read from the December 31, 2002 issue of National Review. (Sorry, no link; I couldn't find it anywhere on National Review Online.) The cover read "Red Man's Burden: How Tribal Socialism Crushes America's Indians," and pictured an Indian in silhouette leaning wearily on what appeared to be some farming tool as he stood in the middle of a bleak and barren landscape. Inside, John J. Miller's article was titled "Off the Rez" and subheadlined, "It's time to close the Indian reservations."

If Russell Means's description of the Pine Ridge reservation as a "communist set-up" seems exaggerated, it might seem less so after you've read the Miller article:
"If you want to start a business on the reservation, here's what you have to do," says Mark St. Pierre, executive director of the Pine Ridge Chamber of Commerce, on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. "First you have to go to the tribal government to see if there's an appropriate piece of land for you. Nothing's been set aside for business development, so this is harder than it sounds. If you do identify a piece of land, you apply for a five-year lease, which won't help you with the banks because they prefer 25-year leases. Next, your application goes before the tribal land committee, which often doesn't have a single businessperson on it. This part can get very political, and it matters who's in your family. If the committee approves your application, then it must go before the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This is usually a rubber stamp, except that it can take months or more than a year before you actually receive it. If the BIA signs off, you're finally done. And what does it give you? A short-term lease on a bare piece of prairie."

It's no wonder, then, that few businesses get started on the Pine Ridge reservation. The reservation's boundaries box in an area about the size of Rhode Island, just south of the desolate Badlands. Nowhere in its rolling spaces is there a store to buy shoes. There's not a single bank, hotel, or movie theater within its borders, either. Many of its tiny towns don't even have a barbershop. Yet the place is home to about 41,000 Lakota Indians (also known as the Oglala Sioux). They are the direct descendants of Crazy Horse, Red Cloud, and Sitting Bull--some of them the fiercest fighters to roam the Great Plains. Yet none of them can walk into a store on their own reservation and purchase a pair of pants, because nobody sells them.

Most communities of any size have a chamber of commerce building. St. Pierre makes do in just a single room, with two desks, a table, and a dry-erase chalkboard. Sometimes there's nobody around to answer the phone, which isn't a big problem because there aren't too many incoming calls. St. Pierre works hard at what he does--his chamber has grown to nearly a hundred members since it was founded three years ago--but it's tough to get recognition. "If there's a chamber of commerce at Pine Ridge, I haven't heard about it," says David Owen, president of the state chamber.

THE POVERTY ARCHIPELAGO
While there may be a chamber at Pine Ridge, there isn't much in the way of commerce. The rez itself is a grab bag of mortifying statistics. In the 1990s, the poorest county in America, as determined by the Census Bureau, was wholly contained within its boundaries. Unemployment is currently at 88 percent. About one-third of its households don't have electricity or indoor plumbing. The place is supposedly dry--it's against tribal law even to possess a can of Budweiser--but alcoholism is rampant. The town of Whiteclay, just across the border in Nebraska, isn't really a town at all; it's a glorified liquor stand catering to carloads of thirsty Indians. Traffic accidents are a leading cause of death at Pine Ridge, because of all the drunk driving. The typical Lakota male can expect to live a few months shy of his 57th birthday; women get about a decade longer. In the Western Hemisphere, only Haitians fare worse.

What may be most depressing about Pine Ridge, however, is that it's not unique in Indian country. It's the second-biggest reservation in the nation, and many of its problems afflict other tribes as well. To be sure, a handful of reservations seem to succeed, even among those that don't cash in on lucrative casino operations (and most don't). On the whole, however, reservations are rural slums--demographic disaster areas in which the economy shows few signs of life. Through a suffocating combination of government meddling, political incompetence, and cultural suspicion, they have let down the very people they're supposed to serve. The problem is so severe, in fact, that the time has come to rethink the whole concept of reservations.

There's certainly no shortage of explanations for reservation failure, and among the most popular is the old grievance of stolen land. When Bill Clinton set foot in Pine Ridge on his 1999 tour of poverty-stricken areas, someone displayed a sign: "Stop Lakota Ethnic Cleansing." It's not entirely clear what the message meant. The most recent example of what might be called Lakota ethnic cleansing occurred more than a century ago, at the Wounded Knee massacre in 1890. That event was certainly reprehensible--U.S. soldiers were trying to disarm a band of Lakota, fighting broke out, and some 300 Indians, including women and children, were slaughtered. What this sorry incident has to do with economic development in Pine Ridge nowadays isn't obvious, except that the site has become a minor tourist attraction where locals sell their handicrafts to visitors during the warm months. Modern-day Indian activists have done an amazing job of deflecting attention from the real problems of reservation life in favor of turning the events of the past into a morbid fetish. Writing on the most famous locale in the nearby Black Hills, in a University of Nebraska publication called American Indian Quarterly, Lilian Friedberg had this to say: "Mount Rushmore is [our] Bitburg." Listening to other tribal spokesmen, it would seem that the most pressing concern for Indians today isn't a lousy reservation economy that can barely support more than a handful of private-sector jobs, but Atlanta Braves fans performing the "tomahawk chop" during late-inning rallies.

The main problem for Indians on reservations isn't that land was stolen from their ancestors a few generations ago, but that the federal government owns or controls most of the land they live on now. This means that Indians have a hard time securing bank loans, because they can't do something other Americans take for granted: put up land as collateral. Even making improvements to the land, such as building new structures on it, requires a maddening series of applications, reviews, and permits. To complicate matters even further, longstanding federal law encourages tribal governments to charter corporations and run their own businesses--in essence, to set up a command-and-control economy of tribally owned and operated enterprises, rather than creating a pro-business environment in which entrepreneurs can flourish. At Pine Ridge, the tribe at various times has tried to run a moccasin factory, a meat-processing plant, and a fishhook-snelling operation, among other projects. All have flopped, as government-run ventures are wont to do. At bottom, reservations such as Pine Ridge are socialist enclaves in the heart of a capitalist country.

Indian reservations are sometimes described as sovereign nations, and they are said to deal with the federal government on a "nation-to-nation" basis. Much of this is illusory: Reservations aren't separate countries, their residents are U.S. citizens, and the BIA is contained within the Department of the Interior rather than the Department of State. Yet the notion of sovereignty is a real one, stretching back to the days of the 19th-century treaties, when tribes ceded territory in exchange for a measure of control over reservation land and the promise of material assistance. The tribes are exempt from many state rules and regulations and have considerable leeway to enact their own laws. They have their own courts and police forces. They can also determine their own membership policies. These legal distinctions explain why some tribes sell tax-free cigarettes, as well as the rise of reservation casinos in states that restrict gambling.

The federal government once gave individual Indians clear title to specific tracts of reservation land, but ended the practice in 1934 when it placed the bulk of reservation land into trust. The result was to turn people on the reservations into wards of the state. The federal government now pumps some $40 million into Pine Ridge every year, and most of the few jobs that exist are on the public payroll. A private-sector economy has not thrived in the area since the days of fur trading and buffalo hunts. "When you drive around Indian country, you can just tell which pieces of land are privately owned and which ones are held in trust," says Terry L. Anderson of the Political Economy Research Center (PERC), in Bozeman, Mont. "The private lands are the ones that you can see being put to productive use."

Without clear land-ownership rights, reservation Indians find it almost impossible to secure loans and start businesses. Another financial activity that most Americans take for granted--getting a mortgage for a house--is therefore also beyond the reach of many Indians. That's one reason there are so many trailer homes in Indian country. Banks are willing to lend the money for them, because repossession is possible if it becomes necessary. As Pete Homer of the National Indian Business Association explains, "Most Indians just can't use their land to get a business going."

A responsive tribal government could address some of these problems by adopting a uniform commercial code to enforce contracts and provide rules for business transactions. Every state has these codes, which are the guidelines that make investors willing to put their capital to work across state lines. Yet only one of South Dakota's nine reservations has a commercial code that tracks state law, and it isn't Pine Ridge. "I don't understand why the tribes don't want commercial codes," says Tom Leckey, deputy secretary of state. "It would really help their economies. We've tried to convince them of this."

The tribe itself is a major obstacle. A 1997 report by the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development highlighted the problem: "Businesses that get interested in Pine Ridge eventually discover that the person they were dealing with is only one player in a large web of rules and political gamesmanship. At any time during the process of permitting a business, officials may delay the process." Just about anybody involved in business development on the reservation can share a stgory or tow about some project that nearly got underway, only to be cancelled after tribal elections, which are often petty spectacles that reveal ancient rivalries (between, say, the family lines of Crazy Horse and Red Cloud) and pit full-blooded Indians against those of a mixed racial background. The president and council members serve two-year terms, and each election cycle sees most of them swept out of office. Even if a few of them wanted to pass a uniform commercial code for the reservation, they don't have enough time to lay the groundwork for doing it. "There's no stability," says St. Pierre. "We have a political revolution every two years." Sometimes it's more often than that. In 2000, a group of protesters occupied the Pine Ridge government building and didn't leave for 18 months--people who don't work, after all, have a lot of time on their hands.

The Pine Ridge judiciary is another aspect of the same problem, because there is no separation of powers. "The legislative, executive, and judicial [branches] are very interrelated and thus virtually one," complained William V. Fischer, president of the American State Bank of Pierre, S.D., in Senate testimony last June. Judges are appointed by the tribal council and may be recalled at will. Appeals of their decisions don't go to an independent review board, but to the tribal council itself. Imagine the Supreme Court ruling that the new federal campaign-finance law is unconstitutional--only to have the decision appealed to the law's authors in Congress. This is the situation on Pine Ridge and many other reservations. In fact, experts in reservation economies say reforming this system is one of the most important things tgribes can do to spur business development, becuase investors see themselves exposed to terrific political risks if they have to engage the tribal court system. A study of 67 tribes by Stephen Cornell of the University of Arizona and Joseph P. Kalt of Harvard claims that "simply having an independent judicial system reduces unemployment, on average, by 5 percent."

It would also improve the performance of the businesses already operating on reservations. "We can't collect on bad checks," says Patty Pourier, co-owner of a Texaco gas station and convenience store in Pine Ridge. "If someone bounces a check at one of our stores in Hot Springs or in Chadron (Neb.), we go to the county court and collect on it. That never happens on the reservation. It would if we had an independent business court."

Pourier and her husband, Bat, who is a member of the Oglala Sioux tribe, are the biggest private-sector employers on the reservation, because of their single store in Pine Ridge. It opened its doors in 1990 and began to thrive. Rather than becoming a cause for celebration, Big Bat's, as the store is called, became a target of resentment. "Around here, making a profit is a new idea," says Mrs. Pourier. "The politicians have a warped sense of what a profit really is. Some of them think that all revenue is profit." When Big Bat's burned down last year, the Pouriers replaced it with a larger store. One might think that the local politicians would have lined up for the ribbon-cutting ceremony at the grand reopening, but instead they greeted the Pouriers with a plan to quintuple their rent. The proposed rate increase was based on nothing but the arbitrary judgment that the Pouriers could afford to cough up more dough for the tribe. With the help of the Chamber of Commerce led by St. Pierre, they were able to defeat the proposal--but this attempt to squelch homegrown capitalism shows the true, discouraging face of the reservation government when it comes to entrepreneurship.

THE RESERVATION IS THE PROBLEM
Because stores are so rare in Pine Ridge, an estimated 90 percent of the reservation's income winds up being spent off the reservation--and about half of it leaves within 72 hours of showing up. Tribal members have to pour an inordinate amount of time and resources into traveling long distances off the reservation for basic necessities that their local economy ought to provide.

Some Indians actually believe that they aren't supposed to get businesses going at all. "There's a persistent question about whether it's culturally appropriate to start a business, and lots of people ask, 'Isn't that a white-man thing?'" says Monica Drapeaux of the Lakota Fund, a non-profit lender in Kyle, S.D. This resonates with the popular myth--peddled by academics, Hollywood, and many tribal activists--that traditional Indian societies aren't compatible with capitalism. The free market, in this view, is a Western imposition upon the collective, sharing folkways of indigenous North Americans.

This is utter nonsense. While it may be true that Indians did not develop an intricate set of rules governing property rights, they engaged in plenty of commerce, even before the coming of the white man. Ancient archeological sites have borne proof of extensive trading networkds that spanned the continent. Meriwether Lewis--of Lewis & Clark fame--described the Chinooks as "great hagglers in trade." The fur-trading empires of John Jacob Astor and the Hudson Bay Company would not have been possible without substantial Indian participation.

What the Lakota must overcome now, however, is a culture that doesn't know work. "Kids grow up around here not even thinking about where they'll start their first job--their parents and grandparents haven't held regular jobs and it doesn't even occur to them that they should think about it," says Drapeaux. The most basic elements of employment--showing up on time, dressing appropriately, scheduling time off in advance--are alien concepts to many Lakota, simply because job scarcity has left huge numbers of them inexperienced at something other South Dakotans, with their 4 percent unemployment rate, take for granted. Chronic alcoholism compounds the problem. "If somebody came here and wanted to open a factory with 50 workers, we wouldn't be able to supply enough people," says Elsie Meeks, a Lakota who lives in Pine Ridge and specializes in reservation development nationwide.

Cornell and Kalt are probably the most respected experts on reservation economies, and they agree that tribal sovereignty is the key to success. "We cannot find a single case of successful economic development and declining dependence where federal decision makers have exercised de facto control over key development decisions," they write. Devolving power away from the federal government and toward the tribes--as units of local government--should appeal to conservatives, who have often been hostile to the concept of Indian sovereignty. But Cornell and Kalt don't go far enough. The tribes themselves must devolve power away from their own governments and toward the people these governments are supposed to represent. The most important thing they can do is demand that the land now held in trust be returned to the people. It should be given back--not to the tribe or its governing council, but to the individuals who make up the tribe. This would mark the end of reservations as we know them, but the time has come for them to go the way of the buffalo: Indians, too, deserve the chance to live an American dream of material prosperity.

Ian Frazier has noted that there were probably never more than 70,000 members of the western Sioux tribes during the Indian wars, but that from this small group emerged a disproportionate number of genuine heroes--warriors like Crazy Horse, Red Cloud, and Sitting Bull, who fought a valiant but losing campaign against white encroachment, and helped give their people a proud history that all Americans may respect and honor. The next wave of Lakota heroes won't be so famous, but theirs is a struggle that must be won--a struggle for individual economic rights and against collectivism; a war to end the reservation system as we know it.

The odds are long, but the Lakota may yet prevail. When I visited Pine Ridge in December, I stopped by the site of the Wounded Knee massacre. There isn't much to see--some barren land, a cemetery on a hill, and a hand-painted billboard describing what happened. For a while, I just looked around. Nobody else was there. Then a car pulled up from the south, and an old Indian man got out. He had one of those bulging noses that comes from too much drinking. We talked about Wounded Knee, and he pointed out a few local features. As our conversation drew to a close, he changed the subject. "There aren't too many jobs around here," he said. I was afraid he was going to ask for a handout. Instead, he offered to sell me a small drum and a dreamcatcher. I had been trying to find something for my kids, but hadn't seen anything appealing. In fact, I hadn't seen much of anything at all--there just aren't that many stores in Pine Ridge. So we began a negotiation, settled on a price, and shook hands. Then he drove off. Alone again on the rez, I was left with a single thought: It should be this easy for them.
Some thoughts on the National Review article:

1. The inability of individual Indians to use land as collateral to start a business, and the terrible effects this handicap has on their ability to take part in modern capitalist America, echoes what the Peruvian economist Hernando De Soto wrote about the Third World in The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, and reinforces the picture of reservations as outposts of the Third World languishing in the middle of a prosperous American society.

2. The year the individually-owned plots of land were taken away from the Indians and placed in collective owenership jumped out at me: 1934. The Roosevelt Administration strikes again.

Unlike a lot of libertarians, I am willing to grant Roosevelt honorable and benevolent motives in taking the actions he took during the New Deal. But I shudder to think what would have happened to America if he hadn't been at least partially thwarted by the Republicans and, later, by his own illness and death.

3. Note that when this article was written in December of 2002, it was more or less assumed that the Supreme Court was going to overturn McCain-Feingold.

4. Hearing about the lack of opportunity on the reservation is one thing, but sometimes a single concrete example can set it all in the starkest relief. A Texaco station and convenience store is the largest private-sector employer in a community of 41,000? Good Lord.

5. "There's a persistent question about whether it's culturally appropriate to start a business, and lots of people ask, 'Isn't that a white-man thing?'" Sadly, this situation sounds almost identical to the plight of black kids who aim to do well in school and are slammed down by their own peers for "trying to 'act white.'" Same goes for the Indian kids who can barely comprehend what it takes to hold down a job because none of the people they know well has ever been employed.

This sort of thing is of particular interest to me because I live in a rural area plagued by high levels of poverty, unemployment, crime, gang activity, teen pregnancy, school failure -- problems most people associate with urban rather than rural areas.

6. "This would mark the end of reservations as we know them, but the time has come for them to go the way of the buffalo: Indians, too, deserve the chance to live an American dream of material prosperity." An American dream, includes Indians too: What a great idea.

 
Is this headline a pun? Box office blow for Alexander.

Hmmm. You'd think someone on the BBC's website crew would have been cognizant of the potential snigger factor in any headline for a story about Oliver Stone's movie. Or maybe someone was quite cognizant of it. You can see how this sort of thing could liven up a headline writer's work day: Alexander sustains critical blow . . . Alexander receives popular blow . . .

 
Commentators discussing Dan Rather's meltdown have sometimes described it in terms of Rather gradually becoming the man he detested, Richard Nixon.

Now comes the publication of an interview in which Rather says he holds conversations with the ghost of Ed Murrow.

Flashback: Nixon during Watergate, talking to portraits of former presidents . . .

 
Defining torture down. Re: the leaked International Committee of the Red Cross report on treatment at Guantanamo that the ICRC calls "tantamount to torture."

There's an insidious side effect of disingenuous outfits like the ICRC making bogus charges such as this one: the cheapening effect. They've cried wolf so often, using the hot-button word "torture" to describe things that aren't torture, that they've trivialized the concept. If and when these same organizations try to publicize instances of real torture, how many of us will still be listening?

 
Here's a surprising point about the situation in Ukraine that doesn't seem to be getting much media attention.
During the campaign, Mr Yanukovich has appealed to the Russian-speaking population of east Ukraine by proposing to make Russian the second official language and to introduce dual Ukrainian-Russian nationality. This has helped to create an impression that, as president, he would be even more Moscow-friendly than Mr Kuchma has been. But Mr Tihipko insists that Mr Yanukovich's foreign policy would be "pragmatic". Meanwhile, Mr Yushchenko's opponents characterise him as an extreme nationalist, intent on favouring the Ukrainian-speaking west of the country. Anti-Yushchenko propaganda also portrays him as an American stooge ("Bushchenko")--an odd slur, given his pledge to bring home Ukraine's peacekeeping contingent in Iraq.
Presumably the reasoning is that a generally West-friendly administration in a huge buffer state between Russia and the rest of Europe is a prize well worth the cost of losing a contingent from Iraq.

From "Special Report: Ukraine, Belarus and Russia: On the border and on the brink," in the October 30th issue of The Economist.

Monday, November 22, 2004
 
What recent U.S. government official spoke these words?
The sheer pre-eminence of American power could, in itself, be the ordering and taming principle of a disorderly and dangerous world.
Some rabid neo-con, right? Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney?

Nope.
Many believe this could be the UN's last chance of reforming itself for a very long time. But the question goes far beyond the customary meaning of "reform". The principle at stake is whether the world accepts that its armed actions should be governed by commonly agreed rules of international law. Strobe Talbott, a deputy secretary of state under Bill Clinton, cynically notes the alternative: "The sheer pre-eminence of American power could, in itself, be the ordering and taming principle of a disorderly and dangerous world."
Gee, do the Europeans know about this?

 
If you have a friend who doesn't acknowledge the contempt the liberal elite feels for ordinary Americans, show your friend this cartoon from The Village Voice. Liberals usually try dressing up their hatred of America in diplomatic language, but this is liberal hatred in its raw, authentic form.

Two guys are talking; in the last panel we find out they're standing in an unemployment line. The first guy is wearing a NASCAR cap and a T-shirt that says "Pro Wrestling Roolz!" The second guy is wearing a cowboy hat and a T-shirt that says "One Nation Under GOD."

NASCAR Guy: Yee-haw! Bush beat Lurch! I mean Kerry. Hyuk-hyuk!

Cowboy: Tough luck, Mister Liberal 'leetist!

NASCAR Guy: What's he got that we don't 'cept a high school diploma anyways?

Cowboy: An' I love them "Kerry is French" jokes - they jus' get funnier an' funnier!

NASCAR Guy: Bush done right not t'ask fer no permission slip in order to deliver some payback to Saddam fer 9/11!

Cowboy: F#@% yeah! Screw the Yewww-Ennn!

NASCAR Guy: Shee-yit, America shore is Number One, ain't we?

Cowboy: Yessir, that's why I dudn't bother t'travel anywheres else!

NASCAR Guy: U-S-A! U-S-A!

Next panel, NASCAR Guy: Too bad 'bout yer boy losin' his legs over there in Eee-rack.

Cowboy: Well, thank goodness 'cause a' that war we's all lots more safer from Ay-rab terrorists her in Shitkick County. Gots t'support "Endurin' Freedom" - even all them frat boy pranks in that Abu Grabby over there!

NASCAR Guy: Th' 'publicans watch out fer all us normal folk who doesn't want no homos gettin' married 'n' such. It's like I's sayin' t'my fifth wife as we's drinkin' whiskey an' drivin' over t'the hospital after I done smacked her one ... It's all about moral values! Urp!

Next panel, NASCAR Guy: Shore wish I had me some health 'surance, tho.

Cowboy: Shoot, money won't be no problem once we get us some more tax relief!

NASCAR Guy: Yee-haw! I could use me 'nother $30 check!


The strip is called "Sutton Impact" and the cartoonist is Ward "Fair and Balanced" Sutton; this particular installment is titled "Gap-Toothed, Missing Link Troglodytes Delighted by Presidential Election Outcome."

For the life of me, I can't figure out why the Democrats have such a hard time winning over the majority of Americans. (Heh!)

 
Let's see whether this gets as much attention as Abu Ghraib:
UN: 150 Sex Abuse Charges in Congo Peacekeeping

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United Nations is investigating about 150 allegations of sexual abuse by U.N. civilian staff and soldiers in the Congo, some of them recorded on videotape, a senior U.N. official said on Monday.

The accusations include pedophilia, rape and prostitution, said Jane Holl Lute, an assistant secretary-general in the peacekeeping department.

. . . The revelations of peacekeeping abuses is usually kept quiet at the United Nations until reporters or individual countries disclose the news, as happened in Cambodia in the early 1990s and later in Somalia, Bosnia and Ethiopia.
Bets, anyone?

 
The Oil-Trust juggernaut is unstoppable. Now it's reached Canada. Continuing on from my previous post, we leapfrog from Kuwait to western Canada to find the same idea under consideration:
Alberta is set to be a very wealthy province for the forseeable future, so the enviable question facing the incoming government is how best to spend all the loot.

. . . Klein was at turns bored and grumpy through much of the 28-day campaign, and didn't reveal how he might revamp health care or how much would be put aside for the Heritage Fund or what he sees as the province's priorities.

Will Alberta create its own Harvard or Johns Hopkins? Should taxpayers expect annual rebates from energy royalties, as Alaskans do?
Actually, I'm against government control of natural resources in places such as the province of Alberta, the state of Alaska, and the nation of Norway. It's their citizens' business if that's the way they want to do it, of course, but if I were a citizen in any of those areas, I'd vote against it.

I'm in favor of it in places like Kuwait and Iraq, however, as an interim stage to real, Western-style freedom and individualism.

Sunday, November 21, 2004
 
To quote the late philosopher Steve Allen: This Could Be the Start of Something Big.
Kuwaitis to Get an Oil Boom Bonus

Kuwait's ruler has ordered that each Kuwaiti citizen receive a one-time bonus of 200 dinar ($680), the Cabinet said Sunday. The reward comes in response to record oil revenues flowing into the Gulf emirate.

. . . The money will be distributed to some 900,000 Kuwaiti citizens, accounting for less than half of the country's 2.4 million population. The rest are foreign workers from more than 100 countries.

Oil is the mainstay of this small oil-rich state with a generous welfare system.
The article says only that the payment will be given to each citizen, so presumably that means each man, woman, and child.

This sort of thing really does seem to be an idea whose time has come. As I so often find myself asking about something in the news: Why isn't this getting more attention? I haven't even seen it mentioned in the blogosphere, which I would have expected to show plenty of interest.

Let's hope the Kuwaitis' example will be an inspiration to the new Iraqi government due to assume power in January. The formation of a dividend-paying Iraqi Oil Trust would do an extraordinary amount to promote a peaceful civil society in Iraq.
 
Think Globally, Act Locally. Tell me what the following two passages have in common.

First from The Weekly Standard:
The myth of Arafat has it that he was unable to control the forces he had unleashed. But in a pattern that was forever to bedevil the "peace process," Arafat would publicly distance himself from terrorism, while claiming that Israeli policies made it impossible for him to control extremist tendencies. In fact, had he tried to control those tendencies, he would have succeeded or he would have been murdered. In either case, indefinite coexistence with "rival" factions would have been impossible. The very fact of his political longevity gives the lie to Arafat's contrived image of noble weakness. He survived in a political landscape of thugs and murderers because they all knew that he was one of them, and that he was the boss. A weak man would not have survived.

Yet in order to succeed, he had to contrive every appearance of weakness. There, he enjoyed both talent and technique: The Soviets who trained him as a terrorist also trained him as a propagandist. He moved fast to use the channels they opened up for him among the trade unions, universities, and political parties of Europe. Under his direction, the PLO deployed a massive "grass-roots" propaganda operation there, culminating in the hero's welcome he received when--preposterously comparing himself to George Washington and Abraham Lincoln--he addressed the United Nations General Assembly in 1974.

His greatest propaganda victory was on Europe's university campuses, where Fatah replaced the Viet Cong as the most popular liberation movement. The effect on the left was amazing. In just one generation, they went from championing the socialist utopia of Israel's kibbutzim to regarding Israel as an archetype of imperial colonialism and capitalist oppression. Against nearly insurmountable obstacles of plain fact, Arafat succeeded in creating the image that Israel was the racist aggressor. This image, the dominant view in Europe today, has always been a fantasy. And the consequences were to prove historic: By embracing Arafat as the hero of a liberation movement, the Europeans legitimized his methods. Arafat tapped into latent anti-Semitism, which permitted the Europeans to view anti-Israeli terrorism as somehow different from terrorism generally. But the terrorists, as we know, make no such distinctions.

It is crucial to grasp that for all the suffering Arafat brought to Israel, his "leadership" brought even greater suffering to the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians. Making Israel pay in blood for every extension of freedom to the Palestinians, Arafat stuck doggedly to the Fanon formula. But he never succeeded in his aim of leading a war of liberation. His strategy of unleashing the power of the people by goading Israel into reprisals against civilians indeed caused civilian casualties--but that's all it produced. In the meantime, any Palestinians who still sought peaceful coexistence with Israel were either sidelined or murdered.
Now this from The Modesto Bee:
ATWATER -- A local man is suing the city's police department because he said he was mistreated when he was detained by officers two months ago.

Ty Storey, 41, filed a complaint against the department in Merced County Superior Court this month seeking $17,586.41 for distress and emotional damages from the September incident.

His lawsuit focuses on two issues: two Atwater officers speaking to him in a tone that he regarded as rude and racist, and one of them handcuffing him and putting him in a patrol car.

"An officer of the Atwater police force punished Ty Storey, a weak and lowly man, for nothing more than conducting himself in a dignified and noble fashion," Storey wrote in his complaint.

Police reports indicate Storey was combative and insulting to officers' requests as they looked into a report of a stolen vehicle at a home where Storey was clearing debris.

Atwater Police Chief Richard Hawthorne said he could not comment on Storey's lawsuit.

Storey included a seven-page, single-spaced narrative of his detainment in the complaint, alternating between firstand third-person accounts.

. . . Storey said the officers were harsh in calling for him. He said the officers spoke to him in a demeaning manner, and that he would not respond to them.

Sarginson noted that Storey, an African-American, said, "I will do nothing until you talk to me in a respectful tone, you racist."

Martin reported that Storey became combative.

"The subject started to get very animated and continued his racial accusations," Martin wrote.

. . . Sarginson handcuffed Storey and put him in the car, where Storey complained that the handcuffs hurt him, and that the car was too hot. In his account, Storey said the "torture" made him think of Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ."
Now, I wasn't there, so for all I know Ty Storey was telling the truth and nothing but the truth when he described what happened in his encounter with the police.

I can't help but be suspicious, though, when Storey's complaint makes him a victimized protagonist fighting back heroically against The Man, the white, racist oppressors who live to grind down noble rebels like himself. If Storey had written his complaint in a factual, sober way, it would have sounded more plausible. But his romanticized self-image and over-the-top narrative automatically make me question his credibility.

The mindset is depressingly familiar. It's the mindset promoted relentlessly by the Left for at least half a century. The language and conceptual apparatus deployed by Frantz Fanon and his fellow leftists in the anti-colonial movements of the Third World end up being used by a ticked-off guy clearing debris off a roof in Atwater, California. Arafat's "contrived image of noble weakness" is on the macro level what Storey's self-image of "a weak and lowly man . . . conducting himself in a dignified and noble fashion" is on the micro level. Call it the trickle-down theory of the noble savage.

And just as the supposed oppressors -- Israeli soldiers and civilians or small-town California cops -- have immediate and obvious suffering inflicted on them in the form of bloodshed or lawsuits or U.N. resolutions, so the holders of this mindset -- Palestinians or African-Americans -- inflict even more widespread and lasting damage on themselves.

 
I get so tired of typing this question, but I have to ask it yet again: Why aren't we hearing more about this?

From LGF:
Here is a direct link to the unedited Kevin Sites video at Reuters TV, since it has scrolled off their front page.

. . . Notice that after the shooting, another wounded Iraqi starts talking and showing his hands to the Marines. Although the group of Marines is clearly cautious with the guy and have their guns at the ready, the man was not shot--because he was obviously surrendering.
Why is this not front-page news? (Rhetorical question. I know the answer only too well . . .)
 
Pre-announced voting fraud. Oh yeah, and the end of life as we know it.

Novelist Nicole Krauss:
I'm voting for Kerry. I've just discovered that, through some unsurprising accident of the Board of Elections, I'm actually registered to vote in two different counties. So I'm considering voting for him twice. I really think it's not alarmist to say that if Bush is reelected to another four years, it may be the end of life as we know it. Certainly it will be the end of life for many species, including huge numbers of the species Homo sapiens. Nothing has ever caused me such sustained anger, fear, and sadness as the current administration, and the future they're driving us all toward.
Thank you for the sharing, Nicole.

Has anybody checked to see whether Nicole followed through on her threat to vote twice? And if she did, will she suffer any legal consequences?

It might help Nicole if she got together and vented her feelings with Dr. Helen Caldicott, who believes this is the most serious election in the history of the human race and has never been as devastated in her life as she's been since Chimpie McHitler got back into the White House.
 
In the words of Wile E. Coyote: "Genius! Sheer, unadulterated genius!"
A folk-singing icon of the 1960s who performed at Woodstock took centre stage at Gazebo Park on Saturday and wondered where the rage has gone.

Country Joe McDonald stood in the Gazebo near Whyte Avenue, strummed his flat-top guitar and sang an antiwar protest song.

. . . When McDonald sang the song again on Saturday, older members of the crowd remembered the lyrics and sang along.

Most younger members, like 22-year-old Amber Larson couldn't. She'd never heard it before, just as she had never heard of the famed Berkeley band, Country Joe and the Fish.

Larson admitted she hadn't even seen the movie Woodstock as she lit a sprig of sage. "I'm doing this for clarification," she explained. "I want to clear the energy auras."
It must be a comfort to folks on the Left to know that the future of their movement is in appropriate hands.

Update. The article has been moved off the website, so here it is. It's from the Edmonton Journal:
Sparsely attended peace rally hearkins back to Vietnam era

Woodstock performer Joe McDonald leads crowd in singing 1960s antiwar songs

Jim Farrell
The Edmonton Journal

November 14, 2004

EDMONTON--A folk-singing icon of the 1960s who performed at Woodstock took centre stage at Gazebo Park on Saturday and wondered where the rage has gone.

Country Joe McDonald stood in the Gazebo near Whyte Avenue, strummed his flat-top guitar and sand an antiwar protest song.

McDonald brought hundreds of thousands of young people to their feet in 1969 to jeer the Vietnam War at the Woodstock festival.

On this sunny afternoon, his presence attracted about 120 people to decry the American assault on Fallujah and the ongoing Iraq war.

Like Jerry Hill, the majority of crowd members were middle-aged. Many were admitted old hippies.

"Do we need a draft again to inspire political protest?" asked Hill, a recently retired investment broker. "There certainly is a great deal of apathy among the younger people."

Most of the younger set admitted they'd never heard of McDonald or his infamous "Fish Cheer."

Thin, clean-shaven, balding and slightly stooped, the 62-year-old McDonald says he's still a socialist but confesses he's now part of the middle class.

Some organizers of the 1 p.m. free concert and subsequent protest parade excused the sparse attendance. Perhaps it was the lack of advertising and advance publicity. Edmonton's Muslim community hadn't shown up.

Organizers had tried to get people out. Groups involved in the protest included the Edmonton Coalition Against War and Racism, Marxist organizations, non-Muslim supporters of the Palestinian cause, members of the Unitarian Church and the occasional Vietnam war draft evader and army deserter.

McDonald's sound system was handled by Mike Tulley, an American army draftee who arrived in Canada in April 1971 after fleeing Fort Lewis, Wash. "The Vietnam war was raging. I didn't want to go," Tulley said.

McDonald had warned about the fate that awaited draftees like Tulley when he took the stage at Woodstock to sing Feel Like I'm Fixing to Die Rag.

"One, two, three, what are we fighting for,

"Don't ask me, I don't give a damn.

"Next stop is Vietnam."

When McDonald sand the song again on Saturday, older members of the crowd remembered the lyrics and sang along.

Most younger members, like 22-year-old Amber Larson couldn't. She'd never heard it before, just as she had never heard of the famed Berkeley band, Country Joe and the Fish.

Larson admitted she hadn't even seen the movie Woodstock as she lit a sprig of sage. "I'm doing this for clarification," she explained. "I want to clear the energy auras."

After several speeches condemning genocide, the bombing of cities, international oil cartels and American imperialism as well as a half-dozen songs, the crowd paraded out of the park.

As they moved down 83rd Avenue and onto Whyte Avenue to tie up Saturday afternoon traffic, a march organizer chanted the familiar leftist mantra into a bullhorn: "The people, united, will never be defeated. ..."
I'm not familiar with the Edmonton Journal or its political leanings, but I have to say I'm surprised to find such a dryly humorous article about the anti-war Left in a Canadian newspaper.

 
I know this will come as a shock to you, but Islamofascism seems to be thriving in Europe. Specifically, in this case, Norway:
Australia so far has not seen the sort of violence and anti-Semitism associated with the rise of radical Islam in places such as Europe, where just last week Norwegian Jews were forbidden from observing the anniversary of Kristallnacht for fear of enraging fundamentalist Muslim immigrants, or Indonesia and Thailand, where Buddhists and Christians have recently been beheaded in the name of religion.
More kaffir heads will roll in Asia. And there are Kristallnachts yet to come in Europe's future.

 
Scrag of sarcasm.
Nobel Peace Prize nominee Dr Helen Caldicott fears US President George Bush's re-election will lead to Armageddon and she isn't sure if mankind would survive another four years.

"This is the most serious election that has ever occurred in the history of the human race, without a scrag of doubt," she told smh.com.

. . . "I don't think I've ever felt so personally, politically devastated in my life and that includes when [former president Ronald] Reagan won a seond term of office - which was pretty devastating for me as I was so heavily involved in the anti-nuclear movement in those days.

. . . "They [the Bush administration] have been able to con the American people with their extremely brilliant propaganda and brainwashing, with the help of the media ... they consistently lie. On the whole the American people don't really understand the dynamics of the right at all. They don't know that Bush et al want to go into Iran next and that they want to dominate the world militarily and that they want to put weapons in space.

"I don't think they [the American public] understand. It is a mandate for Bush to do absolutely anything he wants. I know people don't like me using this word but they're fascists."
Going into Iran! Dominating the world militarily! Putting weapons in space!

Wow! Sounds good to me. Where do I sign up?

 
HEY! YOU LEAVE MY BLOG OUT OF THIS! From commenter "moulty" at BillMaher.com, quoted in Best of the Web:
Watching Bush's acceptance speech on wednesday, with the Cheney's on stage as well....who would not have liked to see a bomb go off under the stage and wipe out the whole despicable slimy lot of them? And hopefully the shrapnel would have gone to the second deck and blown Mary Matalin's head off as well.

Be honest. Who would not like to see Karen Hughes run over by an 18 wheel truck? Who wouldn't like to see her carcass scattered all over highway 99?
They say there's no such thing as bad publicity, but really, I do have to draw the line somewhere. Flattering as it is to be mentioned by Bush Derangement Syndrome victims in their psychopathic ramblings at BillMaher.com, I must point out to "moulty" that having Karen Hughes or anyone else scattered all over my blog would completely ruin the graphic design, which the nice people at Blogger put lots of time and effort into developing. So please go scatter the products of your revenge fantasies elsewhere. How about Kos or Atrios? I'm sure they'd appreciate having any number of Bush administration officials scattered all over their blogs.

 
Interesting, watching the world's media watching Arafat's widow and nephew for any news on the cause of his death.

On the one hand, the ghoulish freak show that's erupted since the first signs of Arafat's demise in late October has possessed the furtive fascination of a car wreck; you hate yourself for wanting to look, yet you can't tear your eyes away. (Appropriate that it all took place right around Halloween.)

On the other hand, it's ridiculous to think that the twisted liars in Arafat's family would even contemplate telling the truth about his medical records, considering what he most likely died from.

Can you imagine the reaction in the Arab world to hearing the truth about their hero?

Talk about inflaming the Arab Street.

 
The number of people sending messages of appreciation to Tony Blair has gone above 60,000.

As of yesterday, the count at ThankYouTony.com stood at 60,303.

Why not go there now and add yours?

 
Trace evidence of globalization.

Stamp on bottle of Mott's Apple Juice from Concentrate: "CONC. FROM USA, ARGENTINA TURKEY/POLAND [and the rest is smeared beyond legibility]."

Stamp on bottle of Hansen's Apple Juice from Concentrate: "CONC OF USA AND/OR CHINA."

The global economy in a bottle.

 
Law of Unintended Consequences. Hope the large number of American companies moving customer-service call centers to India doesn't have a deliterious effect on Indian-American relations. Large numbers of Indians spending their workdays listening to American after American complaining to them can't possibly improve foreigners' image of Americans.
 
More blackouts in this area lately. The electricity conked out for about two hours November 14 and for about an hour and a half November 21. Don't know the cause of the first outage; PG&E said the second was caused by a car smashing into a power pole.

No direct connection to malevolent human interference, unless the car was deliberately smashed into the pole. But it does demonstrate how vulnerable the power grid still is.

 
The Group of Eight includes the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Canada, and Russia.

According to The Economist, "Being a member shows that, economically speaking, your country matters."

So, why isn't Australia in the G8?

 
Regarding the Kevin Sites video of the marine shooting the insurgent in Fallujah:

Are any reporters embedded with the French troops fighting in the Ivory Coast?

If not, why not?

Wednesday, November 17, 2004
 
More and more magazines have been coming out with Spanish-language editions. Well, maybe not in Nebraska, but here in California, definitely -- and the trend appears to be accelerating.

Would it be prohibitively expensive to produce a Spanish-language edition of National Review or The Weekly Standard?

How about a Spanish-language version of Fox News?

Or a Spanish-language radio network featuring conservative talk radio shows -- does something like this already exist?

Anybody out there at the American Enterprise Institute or the RNC looking into this stuff?

Any one of these developments, let alone a combination of several, could pay big dividends in the years to come.

 
Got a question. So liberal groups such as the ACLU and People for the American Way think that Alberto Gonzales should be disqualified for the job of Attorney General because he is too close to the White House and specifically to the President.

My question: Do liberals believe Robert Kennedy should have been prevented from accepting the job when his own brother, President John Kennedy, nominated him to be Attorney General?

 
Jury duty completed. Getting back into my normal routine.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
 
How to Win Friends and Influence People. Got C-SPAN2's weekend "Book TV" programming on this morning. Earlier I watched a taped lecture by David Mindich, who is on the faculty of St. Michael's College and apparently has a connection to the New York Times, on his new book Tuned Out: Why Americans Under 40 Don't Follow the News. The lecture was given at the Overseas Press Club, which I'm not familiar with; most though not all of the audience appeared to be elderly.

Next there began live coverage of the Miami Book Fair International. Although this was apparently not billed as a political book fair, most of the scheduled speakers have something to do with politics. First up was Paul Krugman; he was followed by a couple of historians whom I didn't pay attention to; and then, in a segment that ended a couple of minutes ago, came Graydon Carter and Maureen Dowd.

Anyone who wants to understand why liberals keep losing elections should watch a few of these speakers. It's amazing. Mindich, Krugman, Carter, and Dowd have put on a great show displaying all the parochialism, the inability to think in anything other than stereotypes, the arrogance and elitism, the feelings of superiority and entitlement, the utter bewilderment and lack of comprehension of their opponents, the actual paranoia about conservative plots and the utter hatred of Red State America, and of course the general all-purpose spite and bitterness we've seen so much of in the eleven days since the election and which has done so much to endear Democrats to the American people. Snide remarks about pickup trucks and Fox News are flying fast and furious. Maureen Dowd looks so depressed I imagine her supervisors at the Times must be checking out pamphlets on ECT. If the lefties remain in this condition for a few more years, Rove will get his Republican realignment for sure.

At least some of these lectures will probably remain on C-SPAN's website for a few days or weeks. You really should check it out. It's fascinating to watch a political movement disintegrate before your very eyes.

 
On October 20 I noted that John Bercow blasted his own Tory Party while asking Geoff Hoon a question in the House of Commons, and I wondered whether this was evidence of eroding authority on the part of Tory leader Michael Howard and/or evidence of silent pro-war sentiment on the Tory benches.

Apparently that's not the only ruckus Bercow has been raising lately.
Consequently, morale on the Conservative benches is plummeting again, while anxiety about Mr Howard's leadership style is mounting. This week, John Bercow, who was Mr Howard's spokesman on international development (until he and two other modernising frontbenchers resigned in September after a shadow cabinet reshuffle), went public with his misgivings. He praised Mr Howard's "phenomenal energy", while attacking his leader for opportunism over Iraq, university tuition fees and the gambling bill. He also questioned whether his party had found anything distinctive or relevant to say about reforming public services when Tony Blair was already committed to making them more market-oriented and consumer-friendly.

Some of Mr Bercow's colleagues suspect he may be on a journey that eventually takes him out of the party altogether. But it is not hard to find others who share his concerns, while feeling that it is better to keep quiet about them. The most frequent criticism of Mr Howard is that he and Lord Saatchi, the advertising genius who is the party's co-chairman and the leader's most trusted adviser, mistake frenetic activity for progress. Frontbench spokesmen are judged on the number of headlines they get rather than the development of coherent and attractive ideas. For Mr Howard and Lord Saatchi, nothing will ever again be as good and fine as the glory days of Margaret Thatcher; hence their reluctance even to consider remaking Conservatism for a different age.
From columnist Bagehot in last week's (November 6th) Economist.

 
On my side panel I've got a list of posts that are mostly my own writing, rather than links or excerpts. On the list is a post, published on July 17, 2004, I've titled "Whatever happened to the Iraqi Oil Trust?" It's a question I've been thinking about for well over a year.

So I'm very glad to see that other people are now asking it too, and asking it publicly. This is one of the most important ideas around; let's hope it is finally an idea whose time has come.

Tuesday, November 09, 2004
 
Still on jury duty, still working overtime on the weekends, still way behind on blogging and blog-reading.

Just so you know.

 
I'm so far behind in my blog-reading lately that it's taken me until now to realize that Bob at In Notts Forest has updated his blog. Good for him! As I wrote in this post, I was hoping he wouldn't shut his blog down completely, even though that's what he was planning to do and even though he's being deployed to Afghanistan.

The update is one of Bob's best posts, and you should definitely go read it right now.

Monday, November 08, 2004
 
A friend of mine had a bruising experience while being interviewed for a BBC Radio program a few weeks back.

Well, now the program has aired, and as a result he's had a second bruising experience.

I'm going to be posting on this in the next few days. It's too complicated to tackle tonight; I just learned a few minutes ago from my friend about the second nasty surprise.

Suffice it to say that, although my friend trusted the BBC when agreeing to get involved with the radio program, the BBC has behaved in exactly the way you'd expect the BBC to behave.

Never trust the BBC.

 
This just in . . . Generalissimo Yasser Arafat is still seriously dead. Spend a few days exiled from the blogosphere and you miss the eruption of an interesting new rumor. David Frum reports on speculation that Arafat is dying of AIDS. Apparently there have been rumors for years that he's gay or bisexual. (Arafat?!?) Israel Insider has more.

Update 11/09/04. Israel Insider link defective before, fixed now.

LGF has an update on the long-drawn-out deathbed scene.
"He is dead," one Palestinian source said. "He died after bleeding in the brain began last night. His bodyguards started hugging and kissing and telling each other to be strong."
Not that there's anything wrong with that!

 
Two unusual things happened at my polling place Tuesday. First, it was more crowded than I remember it ever being before. I actually had to wait a couple of minutes for an empty booth. That might not sound important, but normally I'm able to go to an empty booth immediately, with no waiting. Evidently my neighborhood was participating in the generally increased voter turnout across the country.

Second, for the first time in all my years of voting, I saw someone raise an objection to her treatment as a voter. Prior to this, everywhere I've voted, everything has gone completely smoothly as far as I could see.

This particular incident involved a middle-aged black woman who was arguing with a poll worker when I entered the room. The woman was saying she had received an absentee ballot but had not requested one. She wanted to vote using the same method the rest of us were using, which was a touch screen. The poll worker said that she would be given a paper ballot to fill out, which would then be put into a pink envelope and counted later. (The poll worker never used the term "provisional ballot," but it was pretty clear that's what she was talking about.) The black woman, sounding extremely suspicious of what was going on, said she didn't want a paper ballot; why couldn't she use the machines like everyone else? The poll worker said that this same problem with the absentee ballot had occurred with several other people and the thing to do was to fill out the paper ballot, and that the paper ballot was exactly the same as using the touch screen (another poll worker chimed in supportively in the background). The black woman said the paper ballot was "not the same -- you can just throw it away." This continued for another half minute or so, and finally the black woman decided not to vote -- I believe her exact words were "I think I'll just skip it" -- and left. I don't know if there was an aftermath among the poll workers because I was getting myself signed in and getting my instructions on which person to give my paper stub to.

I'm not sure what to make of this incident. I'm assuming that there was no intentional fraud involved on either side, but of course that's only an assumption; I have no way of knowing for sure. The poll workers appeared to be more or less the same smiling, polite bunch of nice little old ladies who always seem to be running my polling place. It's hard to picture them ripping anybody off. I suspect the black woman was one of several victims of an innocent mistake in receiving an absentee ballot she didn't request, and that her reaction was a result of her being primed for suspicion by all the lurid stories about "suppressing the black vote." I doubt our local nice-little-old-lady poll workers could intimidate many people.

Tuesday, November 02, 2004
 
Driving from jury duty to my polling place this evening, I was conscious of being heir to something extraordinary, something worth defending. I am an ordinary citizen but I was being trusted with taking part in life-and-death decisions today, first in the jury box and then in the voting booth.

As I drove, I thought, with a mixture of hope and determination: Someday people in the Arab Middle East will know this feeling.

Monday, November 01, 2004
 
The best-laid plans of mice and men . . . Posting has been light for the past week or so largely because I've been doing my duty as a good Anglospheric citizen and serving on a jury. (Am I correct in thinking that trial by jury is unique to the English common-law countries?)

Between jury duty itself and putting in overtime on the weekend to keep things from unraveling at work, my normal schedule has been disrupted, to put it mildly.

The defendant is charged with a serious violent felony, so the trial is probably going to last another two weeks or so. Blogging, and blog-reading, are going to be pushed farther down my list of priorities temporarily.

How's that for a plot twist? I've been somewhat obsessed by politics for the past few years, even starting my own blog a year and a half ago. I expected to be fully consumed by the election by now. I even seriously considered taking time off of work to volunteer for the Bush-Cheney get-out-the-vote drive. (Good thing I didn't, as it turns out.) And now I find that not only do I have little time for blogging, but I'm cut off from the internet for nearly the entire day, and indeed I'm unable even to give the election much thought -- for one thing the trial itself is extremely absorbing, for another thing even if the trial were boring I'd still owe it to the defendant and everyone else involved to keep my mind on the proceedings.

Who'd-a thunk it?

I am still obsessed with the election in what little time I have left over for myself. And I'm no less committed to a Bush win. But, of necessity, more immediate matters of life and death are also absorbing my attention. C'est la vie. (Er, pardon my French . . .)

 
I wonder if one reason Bush isn't farther ahead in the polls is that so many of his voters might be avoiding anything related to the media.

It's safe to say that large numbers of people are refusing to cooperate with pollsters. A number of sources indicate this, but it's seldom taken into account when folks try to figure out how seriously to take polls.

Who are these refusniks who won't participate? That's the $64,000 question.

I'd be willing to bet that they are disproportionately pro-Bush. Why?

Imagine you're at home and you get a phone call and the person on the other end begins with something like, "Hi, I'm calling on behalf of the CBS News/New York Times opinion poll and I wonder if you'd be willing to answer a few questions about your voting intentions . . ."

CBS News? New York Times? Who is more likely to feel trusting and cooperative when hearing those names, a liberal or a conservative? Who is more likely to think his or her answers will only be taken out of context and twisted beyond recognition, a liberal or a conservative? Who is more likely to respond with a polite refusal to continue with the interview?

Same thing goes for NBC/Newsweek or ABC/Washington Post. These are not organizations a Bush voter is likely to want to get involved with, even over the phone.

This might not be a major factor in polling outcomes, but surely it must count for something.

 
My God, can this race get any more bizarre? The Argus Leader is reporting that Tom Daschle has brought a lawsuit tonight in federal court against John Thune, claiming that Thune is intimidating American Indian voters.

For crying out loud, it isn't even election day yet and the onslaught has already begun. Is Daschle that convinced he might lose? If he felt secure of winning, presumably he wouldn't pull a stunt like this.

Update. More here.

 
In a deep blue funk in a deep blue state? If you, like me, live in a state which is almost certain to give its electoral votes to John Kerry; and if you, unlike me, are considering not voting because of said blueness; then, my fellow Blue Staters, let me give you a good reason to get out there tomorrow and vote anyway.

As was painfully apparent in November 2000, while the key to winning the White House is the number of electoral votes a candidate wins, the key to solid legitimacy (at least if the candidate is a Republican) has two parts: the electoral vote and the popular vote.

Even if your presidential vote is near-certain to be wasted in terms of the electoral college, it still carries as much weight as anyone else's when it comes to the nationwide popular vote!

Let's say we have a situation tomorrow very similar to 2000, in that Bush just barely wins the electoral vote. It's still crucial that he win the popular vote as well -- and that's where you get to make the difference, no matter what state you live in.

Cast that vote tomorrow and think of it as instantly adding to the popular-vote total.

And an additional message specifically to my fellow Californians: If you need additional incentive, remember that the propositions will have as much effect on your life in the years to come as the outcome of the presidential race. So get out there and vote, even if it's only to affect the outcome of the props.

 
Anyone else notice that the picture of Glenn Reynolds the Guardian is using as part of his new column makes him look like a serial killer? He'd have been better off letting them use his driver's license photo. It couldn't possibly be worse than this.

Who took the picture? Hard to believe Glenn supplied it himself. There are plenty of pictures of Glenn on the web that show him as an above-average-looking guy. So what's with the mug shot being used in the column? Did someone in the employ of the Guardian take it?

Just for the record, I believe that the Guardian intentionally chose the ugliest picture of Glenn they could find (or devise) because he is an American, because he is considered a conservative blogger, and because he has said he's voting for Bush.

If this sounds like a conspiracy theory, that's because, well, it is.

 
Okay, I thought of another one. Another indicator of differences between European and American worldviews. When Gerhard Schroeder first became Chancellor in Germany a few years ago, he made a speech that was shown on C-SPAN with a translator's voice overlaid. In the speech, he said that people who hold more than one job are cheaters, stealing jobs from other people (or words to that effect -- as I said, it's been several years). Since I had never heard anything but admiration expressed for people who hold more than one job, Schroeder's words were first startling, then mystifying. Moonlight in America, and you practically achieve instant folk-hero status. Moonlight in Europe, and you're criticized? I don't get it.

Powered by Blogger