A Difficult Post

I am still fairly new at blogging. I have been, obviously, trying to gain some readership, but still do this, ultimately, for myself. I try to have fun, and I am always honest in what I post. What I write here is opinion, pure and simple, some people disagree - sometimes quite vehemently - with my opinions, and some concur. That 's pretty much a normal thing, too, isn't it?

One thing I'm not (although some of my commenters - vehemently - disagree) is an ideologue. I have some very conservative views on some subjects, and some views that are, most definitely, not. I'm also not a partisan in politics. I've criticized some of Bush's policies quite often. I criticize a lot of Democrats because I think they deserve it for a lot of various reasons.

Maybe I should clarify that. I am not a party partisan. I am, very much, an American partisan. I believe, for all it's faults, that this is a truly great country. I believe I was extremely lucky to have been born here. I also believe this is the best system of government the world has ever seen. Warts and all. A lot of what my less than polite commenters have accused me of is a failure to be able to distinguish between a defense of the man holding the office and a defense of the office itself.

That long intro aside, here's the point of the post. Today, a blogger, La Shawn Barber, who I have read for quite a long time, one I respect quite a lot and one I have linked before, asked if Bush should be impeached because he failed to secure the borders.

My answer is a most resounding "NO". Here's why. I absolutely detested Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton as  presidents. Not because of their party, because of their actions while in office. I voted to remove Carter from office (that worked) and to remove Clinton (that didn't). I thought Clinton was a dishonorable man because he did not resign when his crime (and it was a crime) was exposed. I thought Nixon did the honorable thing when he resigned rather than be impeached when his crime (and it was) was exposed.

But I never, for one second, thought EITHER man should have been impeached. Because, to me, America is more important than a politician. If we are going to go down the road of impeaching a president because he did not do exactly what we wanted on a single issue, we are going to fall. America will fall.

And the world will have lost it's best hope.

UPDATE: Thanks to Chez Diva for the link and for seeing where I'm coming from on this issue. Other people who are (more or less) taking at least somewhat the same position: Riehl World View and Pundit Guy.

Proof

Ronald Reagan was vilified (Oddly enough, by the current President's own father) as a practitioner of "voodoo economics" for daring to propose that tax cuts would spur the economy. Except that after the tax cuts kicked in, the economy boomed. And boomed for a long time, too. Sadly, Congress kept spending. Bush and then Clinton raised taxes to help cover the enormous spending. Clinton's tax increases were truly enormous and included a retroactive tax increase - the first one ever. Then Congress changed hands and it became difficult to spend wildly. Deficit reductions resulted. But, by the end of the Clinton years, a recession had started.

The current President undid a lot of the massive tax increases that happened in the Clinton years. And the economy boomed again. Then came 9/11. The economy was shaken, and it's taken some time to settle. We've been in a war for a while now and deficits have climbed. Because, sadly, Congress has kept spending. But still, the favorable tax climate has led to a lot of growth. Even though you can hardly hear it in the MSM, the economy has been doing rather well.

Now comes news that April of this year was the second highest total tax income month in US history. Want proof that cutting taxes actually raises tax revenue? Just look.

I live next to a state that keeps raising taxes. Every time they do so, their total tax revenues fall. They simply do not get it. People cross the border to this state to spend rather than pay the high taxes. They are scrambling to keep young people in their state because, right now, many young people are leaving. For states with less draconian taxation.

UPDATE: I see Daou Report has linked again. Please read the comment policy here. Personal slurs will be deleted.

UPDATE: I took a lot of grief here from the folks who traveled over when Daou linked. Look at this and tell me why I'm wrong again?

And More Good News

This is a good day for upbeat news from Iraq. Bill Crawford has the latest numbers from Brookings up - they show real progress is being made in Iraq. Why do I doubt this will show up in the MSM?

UPDATE: The Futurist has an analysis and a prediction - Outright victory in 2008. Let's try not to lose here at home then, shall we?

On A Roll

Wow, The Real Ugly American is getting some great stuff these days. He actually snagged an interview with Juan Williams from Fox News. Good for him! Rick's one of the first folks to notice the humble crabitat over here and has been quite kind.

Go read it. Williams is quite interesting. He's very articulate in describing what Fox News is - and what it isn't.

Others Noticed, Too

I posted yesterday that the Iranian President's letter sounded exactly like he was reading Daily Kos. I wasn't alone in noticing that. Rick Moran over at Rightwing Nuthouse has a really detailed piece on it including the observation that not too many on the left are talking about this letter. I guess it doesn't pay to advertise the similarities.

Heh, he also mentions in the comments the lovely effect he gets when Daou Report links to him. Been there, done that.

Taking Slacking To A New Low

So, you hang around college taking classes, decide you're enjoying yourself and decide to stay a while. A long while. Twelve years to be exact. But instead of graduating you withdraw your paperwork so you can stay one more year to study abroad.

"I realized that if I went one more year, I could study abroad," Lechner said. "That's one thing I haven't done."

Lechner's extended academic career has made him a celebrity of sorts. His never-ending student life has been featured in newspapers and on network television shows, not to mention campus publications across the nation.

By this spring he had completed 234 college credits, or about 100 more than needed to graduate, and was taking seven more.

Now I knew guys who had drawn out there normal four years to six or seven, but nobody was even close to this guy's league. He even qualified for a special "slacker tax" where people who stay too long get to pay double tuition. Funny thing is, even with all that seniority, he's not particularly popular.

Michelle Eigenberger, an editor at The Royal Purple, said Lechner may have achieved celebrity status, but most students are tired of it.

"It's getting old," she said. "For the sanity of the rest of the campus, we want him to get out of here."

He's got enough credits to graduate with a liberal studies degree in education, communications, theater, health and women's studies. Boy, has this guy got a rude awakening coming when he actually gets out in the real world. I suspect that degree will get him a fabulous position.

At Burger King.

Rich In Discontent

Robert J. Samuelson has an interesting piece in the Washington Post about rising affluence and rising discontent. It's quite thought-provoking.

You hear the refrain all the time: The economy looks good statistically (4.7 percent unemployment), but it doesn't feel good. Although the United States is the wealthiest nation in history, our quarrels and quibbles with our prosperity are unending. Why doesn't ever-greater wealth promote ever-greater happiness?

Blogosphere pundits have noted for some time that even though this economy is positively roaring along (much more than just low unemployment) but the economic news reporting has been uniformly negative. That media coverage has a lot to do with the negative views people have about the economy, I believe. Samuelson has some fascinating statistics:

Galbraith also underestimated the spontaneous demand for government services. Even without his preaching, people believed that their prosperity entitled them to public programs for common needs. In 1956, two years before he complained about neglected roads, Congress created the interstate highway system, the biggest road-building project in U.S. history. Social spending and regulation (for education, anti-poverty programs, health care, the environment) have consistently expanded. In 1954 defense accounted for 69.5 percent of federal spending and "human resources" (programs such as Social Security, Medicare, job training and food stamps) only 18.5 percent. In 2005 defense was 20 percent and human resources 64.2 percent.

That reversal is startling laid out like that. 64% of the federal budget goes for human services. Think about that. Democrats routinely charge that we do not spend enough on our own people. How much is enough? How much is too much? How much is wasted by badly run programs?

It's often said that only the rich are getting ahead; everyone else is standing still or falling behind. Well, there are many undeserving rich — overpaid chief executives, for instance. But over any meaningful period, most people's incomes are increasing. From 1995 to 2004, inflation-adjusted median family income — for families precisely in the middle — rose 14.3 percent, to $43,200, the Federal Reserve says. People feel "squeezed" because their rising incomes often don't satisfy their rising wants — for bigger homes, more health care, more education, faster Internet connections.

I think that pretty well nails what is wrong. Rising incomes don't match rising wants - not rising needs. The needs are already pretty well covered. Anyone who's been to a real third world country knows our "poor" in this country would be considered very wealthy indeed in those parts. Are there people in need in this country? Of course. Nothing is perfect. But we simply don't have the kind of devastating poverty that is all too common in many places. The overpaid CEO's are another sore point that make people feel like they are not getting ahead. If you're making the median income and hear that some guy in a big corporation is making 100 times or more what you're making, it makes your salary feel smaller. That would be human nature.

If This Is Right

This is a strategy for losing. Trying to pass a bunch of silly bills instead of dealing with the only real issues the country cares about, immigration and fiscal responsibility, is a stupendously bad idea. Quite frankly, if the Republicans lose in November this country is in for a devastatingly rough couple of years.

This is simple, folks. Build a freaking fence and things reverse. Hose around like this plan calls for and be ready to pack. You're losing people you simply cannot do without.

VERY Good News From Iraq

Gateway Pundit has the details of a new announcement carried in Iraqi media. This is absolutely huge.

Over 200 Iraqi tribal leaders will meet in Baghdad on Wednesday may 10th to sign an honor compact to denounce and reject terrorism and sectarian violence.

Tribal leaders announced they will meet in Khademiah Baghdad on Wednesday May 10th at a conference. This conference will result in an honor compact obliging Iraqi tribes to cooperate amongst each other and the authorities to protect their members from terrorist attacks, and to help with national unity and condemning sectarian violence.

The "Foundation for Humanitarian Dialogue" sponsored and organized the conference. Husien Ismail Alsadar who uses Khademiah as his center of activities and enjoys the backing and blessing of Al Sistani is the foundation’s president. Some Sheiks and tribal leaders said they hope that a committee can be formed to represent Iraqi tribes in the "National accord conference" on June 10th along with the honor compact signed by tribal leaders.

A foundation speaker said that the conference will be attended by heads of Tribes from all of Iraq, Arab Kurd and Turkmen tribes. The speaker added that the conference will also discus political, security, and social issues in the country. We hope to come up with ideas and plans to cooperate in stopping terrorist activities affecting the citizens. He pointed out that the honor compact to fight terrorism and denounce sectarian violence would be the main results of this conference.The Kurdish, Sunni and Shia tribal leaders joined for a prayer after the meeting.

He's got tons of links to all sorts of information. Al-Qaeda in Iraq is completely defeated right now. Sectarian violence should begin to end.

Wow. This is fabulous news.

Yet Another Sign

Of the sheer power of human stupidity. A 17 year old is in the hospital with a broken leg, while his 18 year old accomplice has been arrested. The offense? The younger boy asked the older one to use his car to hit him. So the 18 year old obliged.

Michael Morris, a junior at Chesterton High School, was in fair condition at Porter hospital, spokeswoman Robin Carlascio said.

His friend, Stephen D. Domonkos, 18, told police that Morris on Saturday night asked him to hit him with his car, something they had done before. He told police that Morris was "an adrenaline junkie."

Morris was quoted as saying, "I won't do this no more". Domonokos was driving at about 25 mph when he hit Morris.

The mind boggles. I'm filing this under Criminal Masterminds even though it's really in a class all by itself.

101st Blog Of The Day

As part of my ongoing project to visit one fellow member of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists each day, I visited Roger Houston. There's a nice bit of coverage on Ayaan Hirsi Ali's speech at Harvard's Kennedy School (which I linked to my earlier post).

More importantly, there was a link to an absolutely hysterical talking church signs post at Wuzzadem. A definite must read!

Deferred Discussion

Last night I posted about the story that Alphonso Jackson gave a speech in which he said he had not awarded a contract based on a contractors comment that he disliked President Bush. My take on it was that if the story was, in fact, accurate that both Jackson and the contractor were equally dumb. I also mentioned that if the story was made up out of the whole cloth, it was a different discussion. 

Time for that other discussion now.

Dustee Tucker, a spokeswoman for Jackson, told the Dallas Business Journal Tuesday that Jackson's comments at his April 28 speech were purely "anecdotal."

"He was merely trying to explain to the audience how people in D.C., will say critical things about the secretary, will unfairly characterize the president and then turn around and ask you for money," Tucker said. "He did not actually meet with someone and turn down a contract. He's not part of the contracting process."

Which sounds about right since nobody has come forward and said they were the contractor that didn't like Bush. Which I would think somebody would absolutely love to do. So now, it would appear that Jackson made a ham-handed attempt to present a cautionary tale. Was it smart? Probably not. Will he lose his job? He very well might. Which is actually not a good thing for minority business: 

In 2005, 16% of HUD contracts, or about $167 million worth of work, went to black-owned businesses. Hispanic-owned businesses received 7%, or $71 million. That combined 23% is up from 6% in 2000, the year before Jackson was named deputy secretary of the agency.

Despite getting just 8% and 11% of the African-American vote nationally in his two presidential wins, Jackson said President Bush is committed to creating prosperity for minority business owners.

Sometimes partisan politics has a way of hurting the very people the partisans say they want to help. Real shocker there.

Must Be The Day For It

Hindrocket over at Powerline has some free advice for the President which sounds very much like what we here in the crabitat have been saying for a while now.

Give a major speech in prime time. Say that you still think that a long-term solution to the immigration issue should include a guest worker program. Acknowledge, however, that many Americans disagree and there is currently no consensus on a long-range policy. Say that, more fundamentally, you're now convinced that our first priority has to be getting control over our borders. Until we control our borders, and know who is coming and going, any immigration policy we may announce will be meaningless anyway.

So, discussion about long-term approaches to immigration will continue. But in the meantime, your priority will be securing the borders and enforcing the laws currently on the books. Which means that the crackdown on employers of illegals will be expanded. Announce some specific measures to begin securing the Mexican border, preferably including some kind of fence

Which is what we have said many times. He also hits this point:

You need to couple this tax cut with spending cuts. Tax cuts unaccompanied by spending restraint are rightly viewed with cynicism by both conservatives and liberals. Focus on earmarks; even the liberals don't try to defend them. Threaten to veto any spending bill that contains a single earmark. Then do it. If that creates a temporary problem with the appropriations process, talk about the need for a line-item veto. Not only will an all-out attack on earmarks warm the hearts of the Republican faithful, it will be broadly supported across the political spectrum.

Those two actions would immediately turn things around for Bush.

It’s Always Amusing

When the press notices something we've been saying here in the Blue Crab Boulevard crabitat for quite some time now. We can almost feel our lips moving when we read a story like this.

For the past year, Democrats have been jockeying for the high ground on congressional ethics, hoping a largely Republican lobbying scandal would help propel them into the majority come November's elections.

But the issue is proving to be a two-edged sword, as Democrats themselves have come under scrutiny for allegations of bribery and conflicts of interest.

Where have we heard that phrase before? It's so hard to remember. There's a lot of other things as well. The article hits every issue we've covered here. The ending is particularly interesting:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, said Republicans have "a governing philosophy" to cozy up to lobbyists that has led them to favor industries such as oil and pharmaceuticals, producing higher prices for gasoline and prescriptions. "That is a fundamental difference," he said.

Panetta said such line-drawing is lost on voters. The best Democrats can hope for is a repeat of 1994, he said, when voters — angered over misbehavior by members of both parties in a House bank scandal — turned 38 incumbents out of office. "It hurt the party in power the most," Panetta said.

Panetta is pointing out something else we've said here - a "throw the bums out" strategy can backfire and catch some of your own. It may well hurt Republicans more, but it likely won't be a cost-free move, either.

Alaa Update

Sandmonkey has updates to the situation, including an online petition you can sign. This is REAL easy folks, give name and an email and click a button. It's very, very simple.

Please support freedom.