From Old Europe to New Delhi

Indians are celebrating President Bush's re-election.

In this era of global change, one of the underlying dynamics is the shift of power away from Old Europe towards the Asian continent. C. Raja Mohan writes about some of the developments in this area and how India has become a quiet global partner of the US during the tenure of the Bush administration. A country with almost as many people as China, India is an emerging global power and will be critical in shaping the western end of the Pacific rim, where power will reside in the 21st century and perhaps beyond.

The Social Security Crisis

Without reform, it will destroy itself.

The Wall Street Journal tells us about the crisis in Social Security and how demographics will doom the current system. People in my generation will be lucky to get anything at all from this government dinosaur. My advice to you is to start saving now, and as much as you can, because you'll not get much, if anything, from the government later. And really, why should we be impressed by a wimpy 2 percent return anyway?

Here's One Use Of U.S. Power Jacques Can't Stop

"American influence" is the great white whale of the 21st century.

Daniel Henninger gives us some examples from around the world that show how American technology in the form of the Internet, blogs and text-messaging cell phones are producing a wave of free speech in places where it had been a rarity before. Now people are using this American technology to influence events in their own countries in ways which were just not possible even ten years ago. Today, if nations that are authoritarian want to keep up with the technology Americans are inventing, they must also import the freedom of speech that goes along with it or be left behind.

Where Are They Now?

Four years after leaving the White House, Hillary Clinton plots her return.

And in a related story, Peggy Noonan looks at Hillary Clinton's future run for the White House. Hillary is indeed more pragmatic and realistic than much of the Democratic base of moonbat leftists. Hillary is herself a dedicated leftist, but she is smart enough to know that if she is perceived as a member of the black-helicopter crowd, she has no chance of winning in 2008. Thus she is re-positioning herself as a "tough moderate" so she can run to the center four years from

It's Policy, Not Poetry

Democrats puzzle over how to "manipulate symbols." Why not start by taking a stand for Christmas?

Peggy Noonan writes about the Democrat's perception regarding the "manipulation of symbols" they believe to be the core of Republican success in this, and past, elections. It is a tribute, of course, to how dense they have become that they even think this possible. And it also points out yet again, just how stupid they think the American people in fly-over-country are that they can be, and should be, manipulated thus. But the fact is that Republicans won in this election because everyone who voted for them understands just what the party stands for. There is no deep, dark secret plan. Quite the contrary; Republicans have certain well known ideas and principles and they want others to understand and agree with them. There is no mystery about these positions and anyone to follows politics knows what Republicans say about them.

But Democrats have become so deluded in their paranoid fantasy that they think there is some "secret code" being used by the President in his speeches which will call up the Black Helicopters in the very next moment to take away all those who live in the blue states. If you visit the web sites where Democrats hang out, you will find all manner of loony moonbat conspiracy theories to explain Republican victory in the recent election. The "manipulation of symbols" view is a variant of the "we need new advertising slogans" theory being put forward in some Democratic circles as a way to deal with their loss. In this view, it is only packaging that counts and Democratic ideas and philosophy play no part in their defeat. If only their commercials and brochures were made correctly, with the correct version of their "message" they then would find the electoral victory they seek. But Americans can and do see the difference between packaging and principle. And no matter how good the packaging may be, if the product is a dud, it will not sell.

How Daschle Got Blogged

And how online journalism is transforming politics.

John Fund brings us this interesting look at the further development of blogging and how it is influencing election and political coverage by The Elite Media Monoculture. In this case, he examines how the bloggers helped to shape the news coverage in South Dakota and thus the defeat of Senator Tom Daschle. Local papers such as The Sioux Falls Argus Leader were doing what they have become used to doing; bringing their readers the predictable leftist slant on the news whilst leaving out parts of the debate which would be inconvenient to the liberal mindset. Bloggers in South Dakota responded by putting together their own sites which brought alternative news and opinions to the voters, allowing them to see both sides of the debate for the first time in a national election. The old media responded with the usual defensive evasions which have become standard as a way to write off the new media competition, but to no avail. The new media is here to stay boys; better get used to it.

Heritage Foundation Report

Clinton years gutted the military

There has been quite a kerfuffle over the recent remarks by Donald Rumsfeld regarding the level of military hardware we have for Iraq. The Elite Media Monoculture provided a loaded question to a soldier designed to make the Secretary of Defense look bad, and thus to make President Bush look bad. These facts are well known. But the question of how well we are funding our military and how well supplied they are is still legitimate. And to understand where we are in that regard, we must also understand where we have been. And where we were in the 90's was with a liberal Democratic administration which was dedicated to gutting our military to fund social re-distribution schemes. It will take years to undo the damage done by President Clinton and his lovely wife Bruno. In the meantime, Americans everywhere are paying for Democratic arrogance. Some with their lives. Read the Heritage Foundation Report and see for yourself.

Cracked Icons

Why the Left has lost credibility.

Victor Davis Hanson gives us a laundry list of all the leftist hypocrisy with which we have become familiar. The left's stock in trade has been their holier-than-thou posturing along with their ideology of socialist utopianism. But in recent years the thin varnish of moralizing has developed quite a few cracks. And in this essay VDH shows us a few examples of just how that moralizing actually works out in practice if you are in a position to profit from the suffering of others while gathering more and more power and money to yourself.

Dems to Hollywood: The End

Scot Lehigh argues in this Boston Globe story, that the Democrats are too involved with the Hollywood elites to relate with the people in the red states. That conclusion is true as far as it goes, but the problem for Lehigh is the same one Democrats have been having since the election. As this article makes clear, they think that somehow, against all evidence to the contrary, they can win the next time by simply re-packaging the same old product. For them it is all about marketing and good advertising, as if how an argument is presented is more important than what is actually being said. And the product that the Democrats keep trying to sell us in ever changing packages is the same old big government socialism to which they have been tied for the last 60 years. But the shine has long worn off of that ideology. The world has moved on while the Democrats cling to the ideas of the past. When will they see the light?

The Education of Dan Rather

From the golden age of network TV to the end of its hegemony.

Peggy Noonan looks back on the career of disgraced CBS anchor Dan Rather and asks where he went so wrong. Perhaps Mr. Rather can consider the question during his upcoming retirement.

Kofi Annan Must Go

It's time for the secretary-general to resign.

Senator Norm Coleman calls for the resignation of Kofi Annan from the UN. Personally, I would like to see the whole corrupt seething mess of anti-Americanism kicked out of the country for good. It does not serve American interests for us to continue funding an organization which now exists only for the purpose of advancing the plans of tyrants and dictators while spending hard-earned US taxpayer dollars for every anti-American cause one can imagine. There is no moral reason whatsoever for us to support such an organization. It is time for them to go. Perhaps they will welcome them in Belgium.

Look Who Isn't Talking

A filmmaker is murdered, and Hollywood loudmouths say nothing.

One of the reasons that I, and many other people, don't go to the theatre to see most of today's films is because of the overwhelming kulturesmog of political correctness which has infected Hollywood over the years. While some decent films still get made, they tend to be the exception rather that the rule. Bridget Johnson takes a look at politically correct Hollywood in the context of the recent murder of Theo van Gogh and asks why we get only a deafening silence? And it is political correctness which is the explanation. But things may be changing. As audiences stay away from theatres in droves and box office numbers are down, a new generation of filmmakers who are less in thrall to the whims of the Angry Left and their culture of conformity is gaining ground. If a new Hollywood gets a chance, it will produce films which provide an alternative for audiences who have become tired of the same old "evil Republicans, evil Military, good liberal" propaganda with which we have all become so familiar. Imagine hearing stories which actually take ideas seriously and have some respect for the concepts of good and evil that most of us recognize. Why, they might even start selling tickets again.

Bush the Insurgent

A president who won't kowtow to DC's establishment.

Fred Barnes describes how George W. Bush remains an outsider in Washinton, even though he holds the most powerful office in the land. And that is just the way the President likes it. The establishment is in a tizzy of course, because the President won't even make an effort to reward their self-aggrandizement and wounded egos. They must feel superior and important and if the most important and powerful person in Washinton doesn't water them with attention, they quickly begin to wilt. Looks like a dry four years looming ahead.

The Re-Emergence of Big Band Jazz?

Duke Ellington would be delighted.

Nat Hentoff writes about one of my favorite kinds of music; Jazz. It's a form of music which is still around today, although listened to far less than in the old days. Still, it's nice to know that there are still dedicated musicians who love the form and are keeping it alive and kicking.

The Grassroots Can Save Democrats

Howard Dean paved the way to future victories.

Here is an article from Joe Trippi in which he suggests ways to get the Democratic party out of its death spiral and back in the game. Unfortunately for him, he gets everything wrong in this essay. If the Democrats follow his lead they will continue to lose elections just as they have been. Personally, I would not mind the Dems being a minority party for the next fifty years or so, and I suspect that they will be regardless of Mr. Trippi's advice. But it is worth noting just how wrong Mr. Trippi is and that most of the hard left would probably agree with his views.

Democrats can't keep ignoring their base. Running to the middle and then asking our base to make sure to vote isn't a plan.

I see no evidence that the Democrats did this. On the contrary, they pulled so far to the left that we have never seen such a virulent and hate-filled campaign. When you have rock-star film propagandist Michael Moore sitting in the box next to Jimmy Peanut Carter, you are not playing to the middle of America. And we all know that the hard left is the base of the Democratic party.

Democrats must reconnect with the energy of our grass roots. One of the failures of the DLC was that its ideas never helped us build a grass-roots donor base. As a result, Democrats held a lead over Republicans in only one fundraising category before this election cycle: contributions over one million dollars. That shows how far the party had strayed from grassroots fundraising before the Dean campaign. We must build a base of at least seven million small donors by 2006.

I don't think money is really the issue here. The Democrats may not have as many small donors as the Republicans, but they have plenty of cash and this year they spent plenty. Democratic 527's alone outspent Republicans by a substantial amount. And big labor, big Hollywood and big media are all in the pocket of the Democrats, so they are certainly not starving. The problem for the Democrats is not how much money they have, but rather how they spend it and on what. In other words, you have to know why you want to spend money. Hating George Bush is not enough. We all know that the hard left hates George Bush. Spending more money on telling us about it does not get you more votes.

In a world in which companies like Wal-Mart pay substandard wages with no real benefits, our party has got to find innovative ways to support organized labor's growth.

The real problem for the Democrats is found here. They just don't get the concept of capitalism, which is America's economic system. Until they do, they will be out of touch with a majority of the country, including lots of middle American Democrats who work for a living and actually like places like Wal-Mart. We just don't think that businesses and corporations are our enemies. And some of us actually like them because they provide jobs and cool products that we want.

The Democratic Party has to be the vehicle that empowers the American people to change our failed political system. We all know the damn thing is broken. Democrats should lead the way by placing stricter money restrictions on candidates than the toothless Federal Election Commission does. A party funded by contributions from the people can do this.

Alert to Democrats. Didn't Mr. Trippi just complain about the lack of small donors? Yet here he seems oblivious to the fact that lots of millionaires are giving their cash to the Democrats. And let's get over the idea that "our political system is broken" can we? The Democrats only say this when they are losing. If they had won the election, do we really think that Mr. Trippi would say this? Of course he wouldn't. It is the Republicans who are the party of the small donor, because they connect with the regular folks; the ones in those red fly-over states that Democrats think are so stupid.

Finally, what is the purpose the party strives for today? What are our goals for the nation? You couldn't tell from the election. ... But the time has come to develop bold ideas and challenge people to sacrifice for the common good.

Well here we have the heart of the problem. We do know what the Democrats stand for and that is exactly why they are losing and will continue to lose and rightly so. The Democrats basic philosophy of government is the failed idea of big government socialism. No matter how they try to dress it up as something else, the tattered remnants of that old 19th century idea still show through. That is the meaning of Mr. Trippi's call for "sacrifice." What he means is that he and his party want even more of our money, time and energy to advance their goal of power and to provide free handouts to whoever they decide is most deserving of them. Note that those who actually do the producing are automatically not deserving in the world of Mr. Joe Trippi and his party. Those who do the producing are expected to produce almost automatically, as though they had no choice in the matter.

This is the heart of the Democrat's problem. They view us, the regular people, as cash cows whom they can milk whenever they please for whatever cause they deem noble whether we like it or not. And until they discover that we are not cows, but individual who have a right to life, liberty and our own property, and that money spent by us on government is a favor from us and not a right, they will remain a party lost in the wilderness. And they will deserve it.

High Bias

It's time to bring some intellectual diversity to America's colleges and universities.

John Fund asks why there is so little intellectual diversity on campus and what we can do about it. There are several interesting solutions floating around including The Academic Bill of Rights as well as different voucher plans which would bring back market forces to the university and force it to respond better to the needs of the students and parents who pay the bills. Certainly there is little doubt that a school which offers only one side of a debate is not doing the job of properly educating its students. And one might also ad that a school which is obsessed with the liberal view of politics is a place where really interesting ideas are going to be few and far between.