Great article by Thomas Sowell about "tax cuts for the rich"

Atrios has a post today about the resistance to putting up a Lincoln statue in Richmond. He treats it with the predictable accusations of racism. These people know nothing about the South. The South is the least racist place I’ve lived. These Yanks will never understand that. When I lived in South Georgia, blacks and whites got along fine. There was no resentment, and even though I attended a predominantly black high school, there were never racial problems. The Washington DC schools, however, are another story.

Why, though, would Richmond want a statue of the man who is responsible for many of their ancestors dying young? Why would Richmond want to honor a man who bears responsibility for the City’s devastation? Even if you admire Lincoln, surely you can understand this. Not, however, if you’re convinced that the South is racist, against any evidence.

Somebody named Martin Peretz writes an article in the New Republic about French anti-Semitism:

So what dream do the Palestinians propose to their own people and the world? Nothing--save their purported innocence against the all-powerful Jews. What hero of the struggle have the Palestinians produced to inspire those whose aid they covet? No Gandhi, certainly. No Mandela. And no Weizmann or Ben-Gurion either. Their present hero is Saddam Hussein. Do they envision a classless society? No. A transparent society, a democratic society, an accountable society? No, no, and no again. Will they transform and free the lives of women, of despised tribes, of gay people, of skeptics? Not a chance. By what vision then will they judge themselves? Nobody says because nobody knows.

Nobody says because it’s not your business, you jerk. This guy thinks Palestinians must hold their culture accountable to the world. They do not. The simply have the right to be left alone. Here’s more:

Which is why I believe that the many in France and the others in Europe (and the puny few in the United States, such as the Episcopal bishops of Massachusetts) who are entranced by the Palestinian cause, who are called and call themselves peace workers, are drawn to the empty idea of Palestine simply because they despise Jews. C'est ça. This, at least, explains their fervor. Nothing else can explain it, and nothing does.

I can think of something else that explains it; the state of Israel’s shameful treatment of the Palestinian people. But no, we must all be anti-Semites. Why else would we do it?

My opinion is that anti-Semites, people who hate Jews, are rare. People who dislike Israel, however, are another matter. Old Marty seems to think the two are the same. They are not. That would be as absurd as claiming that criticism of Saudi Arabia is akin to Islamophobia

I got mentioned today in the Rittenhouse Review for correctly identifying "lester", the nut from worldnetdaily who asks Ari wierd questions. Not that any of the Rittenhouse readers has any idea who the hell I am. Oh well.

Read this response to the State of the Union and then read this one.

STATE OF THE UNION

Bush’s speech was bad, but the Democratic response was even worse. And somebody over at the White House needs to tell bush that it’s nu-CLE-ar, not nu-CU-lar.

The State of the Union speech is a great demonstration of how little Congress understands economics. Their attitude is, the more applause the better. Applause, applause, applause. They don’t understand the concept of scarcity, that something is more valuable if there’s less of it. If they would hold the applause until just the right moment, it would have a much bigger effect. But no, they just can’t wait. Bush got, like, thirty standing ovations. These people are so self-congratulatory it’s sickening.

HOW TO BECOME A NEOCON IN 10 EASY STEPS

Hey Kids! Do you want to become a neocon? Here’s how:

1) Maintain that every group that opposes oppression with military means are terrorists. No exceptions.
2) Insist that 9/11 had nothing to do with the government’s activities in the Middle East. They hate us for our values.
3) If anybody criticizes Israel for any reason, insist that they are anti-Semitic.
4) If anybody disagrees with your war plans, say they are anti-American.
5) No matter what happens with the inspections, they are a sham.
6) Read only frontpage magazine, NRO, Weekly Standard, and the like. Never answer an antiwar argument from another conservative or a libertarian. If you must mention them, simply call them anti-American. None of your readers will bother to check for themselves.
7) Insist that those who oppose the war are “objectively” pro-Saddam.
8) Tell everybody that Saddam associates with Al Qaeda. If anybody asks for evidence, tell them you don’t need no stinkin’ evidence.
9) Internalize the idea that the only way to accomplish things on an international scale is through war. Hey, war is good for the economy!
10) Most of all, make sure you or your children never have to actually fight in any of the wars you endorse. This rule is the most important

And there you have it. Go have fun!

Joseph Farah of worldnutdaily has written a column today about why Christians support Israel. Here are his reasons:

· The strong evangelical church in America can read the Bible and see that the Jews' only historic home is in Israel.
· Most Christians understand that Jesus was a Jew who lived in a Jewish state, albeit one under the colonial rule of the Roman Empire.

· They understand that God chose to reveal Himself to the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.

· They don't see a nation of Palestine mentioned in the Old Testament or New – with good reason: It never existed before or since, except in the imaginations of people like Yasser Arafat.

· They believe God made certain promises to the nation of Israel and that today's Jewish state is a manifestation of those promises.

· They understand that their Holy Scriptures indicate God will bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse it. They don't want to be on the wrong side of that spiritual equation.

· They understand their own salvation, in the person of Jesus, chose to come through the House of David and minister principally to the Jews.

· They grasp that the Jews alone – with the help of God, of course – have made the deserts bloom in that Holy land, just as the prophets predicted.

· They comprehend that the Jews alone formed a free society in the Middle East.

· They can see that Israel has been an ally to the United States and a friend to the free world throughout its 50-year history of rebirth.

So based on this drivel, we're supposed to give Israel billions of dollars every year from the pockets of ordinary Americans, including you and me. Check out the third one from the bottom. I've heard this stupid argument before. Apparently he thinks the Arabs were eating sand before Israel formed and showed those savages how to plant seeds.

That Rod Dreher guy over at NRO has posted again about the Scott Ritter thing. He says,

The New York Times still hasn't reported that former UN weapons inspector and present anti-war activist Scott Ritter was busted in a juvenile sex sting. Wonder why that is? Blogger Anne Wilson doesn't buy CNN's excuse for being late to report the story (the network said it had to do its own reporting first). She wonders how reticent these oh-so-responsible news organizations would have been to report the salacious but newsworthy arrest if Scott Ritter had been a well-known priest instead of a leading voice criticizing President Bush's war policy. Good point.

If Scott Ritter had been a well-known priest, this story still would not have received coverage. Priests who get arrested for fondling boys get coverage. This was an internet sex sting where Ritter was charged with something about soliciting a minor. The cop at the other end pretended to be a 14 year-old girl. That's not really newsworthy, especially since Ritter has been out of the spotlight the last couple of months. And I'm sure the New York Times recognizes this for what it is: a pathetic attempt to discredit Ritter. Good for them for not reporting it.

UPDATE: I also just read one of NRO's columns by some guy who made the argument that it's inappropriate to call a sports team the "Buccaneers". He likened it to a future team calling themselves "The Terrorists", since buccaneers caused a lot of mayhem back in the day. I'm not sure what this author thinks "Raiders" refers to.

I am so tired of hearing about how Saddam “gassed his own people”. He didn’t gas his own people, he gassed Kurds in northern Iraq; an area he does not control. It’s not even know whether he was actually the one who dropped the poison. Some claim it was actually Iran. Either way, that’s no reason to go to war. Egypt gassed its own people. So did Yemen. Oh yeah, and wasn’t poison gas involved in that little Waco incident?