Fred Coming?

Okay, this might not be reliable, but worth putting out nonetheless. Fred Thompson may be coming to Montana in advance of the Republican Caucus on Feb. 5th.


Update: Source may not be credible. Stay tuned.

Good Description of Ron Paul

No, I am not doing this just to generate hits. But Viceroy's Fuguestate has the best description of anyone about Ron Paul:

Have you joined the Ron Paul Revlovelution yet? I personally don't see what's so goddamned exciting about the guy. He's Ross Perot, Rosie O' Donnell and Pat Buchanon all rolled into one quivering mass.

Well done, and well said.

Republican Debate

Since there weren't any good games on TV, I ended up watching the Republican debate, and I must say that I was impressed with the format that Fox News came up with. No audience, the candidates being able to interact with each other, it was certainly more interesting than anything else I have seen. Good job Chris Wallace!
One of the things that would have made it better though, is if Chris would have jumped in at times and asked the questions that the other candidates wouldn't. For instance, for McCain, if you are going to get Osama bin Laden, why do you think that you would do better than what is presently being done? Are you saying that there is a deliberate indifference, or is this just a catchy idea that you came up with?
For Huckabee, your evasiveness on raising taxes is annoying. Either answer the darned question, or say that you refuse to on the grounds that you know the answer will kill you politically.
Giuliani: You talk fast, but do you really say anything intelligent? You say that you are the only one that has to deal with the results of an Islamofascism attack. True, but wasn't the 9-11 attacks the second such attack on the World Trade Center? What did you do to prevent the second after the first?
Romney: Do you really want to rely on the fact that your being a governor is a good basis for dealing with foreign policy? Do you remember Jimmy Carter?
Thompson: You have obviously written off New Hampshire, why aren't you in South Carolina then?

Sorry, just a little bit cranky, but I still like Thompson the best of all of them. And anybody other than Huckabee more than Hillary.

False Dichotomies

I have already explained below why Conrad is actually innocent. But that is not good enough for Mark T. of Piece of Mind or one of his commenters. Rebecca brings up the tired canard about John Kerry and the SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth, and makes their accusations the same as what Tester and the Democratic Party did to Burns.
Once again, it is just so wrong, but nonetheless, requires clarification. Although I have little hope that clarification will change their rigid mind set. So, with that understanding, let's take a look at the two, and see if they are comparable.

First, Conrad is tarred with the accusation that he profited from Abramoff. This has since been disproved by the dropping of the investigation. Burns did receive campaign contributions from Abramoff and his lobbying firm, but so did Sen. Harry Reid, in spite of his denials. Conrad hired a lawyer after the election when the investigation began, but he also turned over all of his records and computers to the Feds. As a direct result, they found - exactly nothing.

Now, let's look at Kerry. Democrats seem to feel he should have been given a pass because he was their war hero. But they forget that it was Kerry himself who made an issue of his being a war hero, when at the convention, he saluted and announced that he was "Reporting for Duty." Because Kerry made the assertion, it became fair game to be investigated. To cry foul because it was investigated is disingenuous. But there is another difference. Kerry could easily disprove the SwiftBoat vets if he wanted by simply releasing his records. Something that three and a half years later, he still hasn't done. I wonder why that is? Could it be that he has something to hide? He certainly has a financial interest in proving them wrong.

Selective moral outrage is never a pretty thing. But accusing others of it when they are not guilty has to be worse.

Levels of Proof

One of the many legal fictions in the justice system (which in itself is an oxymoron) is that people are presumed innocent. Sure, we all pay lip service when we are called for jury duty, but you know that everyone is already thinking "What did he do?" before the charges are even read. The unfortunate effect of this, is that the burden has shifted from the State proving a case, to the Defendant having to disprove it.
I bring this up, because so many on the Left have decided that Conrad is probably still guilty, even though the investigation into his ties with Abramoff has been dismissed. So, in the interests of educating the public, a short primer on the levels of proof required by our legal system.
Particularized Suspicion
This is more than a hunch, but enough for law enforcement to stop you and ask your identification, and what you are doing. The foot in the door by the State to begin the investigation.
Probable Cause
Slightly more proof is required in order to charge you with a crime. This is nothing more than "it could have happened." This gets you into court to answer the charges. But remember, you are still innocent until the case is presented to the fact finder.
Preponderance of the Evidence
To win a civil suit and get a court to order that you are entitled to money, this is the standard. Medical Malpractice, trespass, all sorts of torts are covered by this level of proof. It is nothing more than 50%+.
Clear and Convincing
If you are an unfit parent, the State has to present Clear and Convincing evidence to take your kids from you. So, take your money, just over half, take your kids takes quite a bit more.
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
The highest level of proof. Not beyond any doubt, but such that if it could reasonably have an alternative answer, the only result must be Not Guilty.

So, take your money - just over half, take your kids - quite a bit more, but to take your freedom, well, that is the highest level and for good reason.

The fact that the investigation was closed against Conrad means that he is still "innocent" in the eyes of the law. He may not be innocent to partisans who are more than willing to believe the worst of anyone who is not a Democrat, but he is still considered to be legally innocent.

There have been some false comparisons with OJ Simpson in Conrad's case. This just betrays their lack of understanding. OJ went to trial, where the only verdicts are Guilty or Not Guilty. That doesn't mean that OJ was innocent. Since Conrad hasn't been charged, the only determination is that he is innocent.

Did You Hear?

Colby Natale has decided that even though the investigation against Conrad Burns is dismissed that he feels: "it is also quite possible that he is guilty but there is insufficient evidence to prove it. That is the bitch about these things; you never can know for sure." He then goes on to close with:

While I am willing to admit I could be wrong about him, I flat out refuse to apologize for what I believe, and I don’t think any of us should (short of perhaps anyone who declared that an indictment was guaranteed).

So, in the spirit of guilty until proven innocent, let's play around with this one a little bit, shall we? For instance, did you know that Sen. Baucus is a founding member of NAMBLA? Now, it might not be true, but until he proves that he is not, I am just going to believe what I want to.
Or how about Gov. Schweizer? I heard someone say that he has been evading taxes even though he is rich, by using the same accountant who came up with the amount of money to be given back to taxpayers from the surplus. I have also heard from some people who should know, that this accountant is really in the Mafia, and is blackmailing the governor, and that he is using state funds to pay the blackmail.
Might not be true, but you never know until he disproves it.

Right, Colby?

Conrad Exonerated

Western Word is reporting that the AP says that the investigation of former Senator Conrad Burns and his relationship with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff has been dismissed. Not acquitted, because that would require a trial, but dismissed because there was a lack of evidence.
I apologize to Conrad for my succumbing to being manipulated by the politics of the damned thing that caused a good man to be slimed. I am sure that Matt, Shane, and others will be posting an apology as well soon.
If not, then may their victory be as hollow as their integrity.

Fred Surge?

According to NRO, Zogby is showing a sudden uptick in support for Thompson in the Iowa caucuses. I have liked Fred more than any of the others, except on occasion McCain, although I still have a tough time forgiving him for his assault on free speech with McCain-Feingold.
This new information seems to be in line with some anecdotal observations that my friends in Dextra are adding his widget to their sites, just as I did.

Fred's video to Iowa is here:

What's going on with those wacky Republicans?

According to the American Thinker, Rasmussen has self identified Republicans rising to 34.2% as compared to self identified Democrats who are at 36.3%. How can this be you ask? Surely these people recognize the ultimate tide has turned and the country is returning to a Left vision of how we are supposed to live our lives.
Hmm, maybe not, and if you couple this with the Lee newspaper survey that shows Montana is still a majority Republican state, you have to wonder. Could it be that Democrats overplayed their hand?

I have always used the line that Democrats promise that if they are elected, they will make you taller, smarter, better looking, and get rid of the crab grass in your lawn, while Republicans say that government doesn't work, and when elected they prove it. Gotta give cred points to the Republicans for being honest about it.

Be Very Afraid

When I read the article at the above link, I thought that it must be some sort of parody. Did I once again, accidentally stumble onto the Onion? But then I started looking into it, and H.R. 1955 actually does what the writer warns us of. Soon, it will not be hard to tie any objections or complaints of almost any American Institution into grounds for investigation. The legislation as proposed covers almost anything under the Act that "aims to identify and stigmatize persons and groups who hold thoughts the government decrees correlate with homegrown terrorism, for example, opposition to the Patriot Act or the suspension of the Great Writ of habeas corpus."
The Act calls for the creation of a commission to investigate all such connections to any supposedly "home grown terrorism." If you don't think that such a tool is not going to be used to persecute political enemies, you aren't paying attention, and can go back to your TV shows now.
How in the hell did this happen? The Act passed the House in October, and we are just finding out about it now?
And for the record, I love all things American, and everything that our beneficient government does, is just hunky dory with me.

The year in Review

Dave Berry, the syndicated columnist for the Miami Herald, has done another of his "Year in Review" pieces. As a public service, in case you can't get it in your own paper, it is presented here.

Political Predictions

Although totally meaningless, it is sometimes fun to make predictions and commit them for further review at a later date. A sort of time capsule that remains open for viewing at any time. As such, and with all of the gravitas of a fortune teller, here are my predictions for the coming primary season.

Democrats: Although the race in Iowa has supposedly tightened up, I still think that Hillary will either win or come in a close second to Edwards. The reason for this is that Edwards has been camping out the most in Iowa, and has considerable support from the party regulars that he will be able to use. But Hillary has the advantage of the Clinton machine. Don't underestimate their ability to both get out the vote, and then to put the votes in the right places. If I remember right, Iowa has a threshold level of 15% for a candidate to be viable. That means that all of the Dodd, Biden, Richards and other supporters can be knocked off of their first choice by flooding precincts that have close support with her own supporters, and then persuade them to go with her inevitability. I just don't think that Joe Trippi (Edwards' campaign manager) has the ability to efficiently move supporters to the necessary precincts like Hillary's machine can. If Edwards wins, I think that he will fall to third at best in New Hampshire after Hillary and Barak. After that, South Carolina will probably be the nail in the coffin for Edwards, as the state rejects their native son and Hillary will sweep that state, and then all of the rest.
Barak will be poised for his return in 2012.

Republicans: Huckabee has been the media darling for the last few weeks, but that has also brought increased scrutiny. With Romney attacking Huckabee, they may be tied into a death spiral that will knock both down, although not enough to have a replacement winner of either McCain or Thompson. But, since the primary season has become so compressed, both Thompson and McCain will probably emerge as the new leaders after New Hampshire with McCain probably being the ultimate winner, but I am still hoping that "No fire in his belly" Thompson could pull off an upset in several Southern states, and actually make the race interesting.

Well, let's see what happens. Wish the Republic well. We will need it.

How to get Rich

Someone once said that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Evidence of this is shown by the buzz generated by Jonah Goldberg's new book "Liberal Fascism." Dave has a post on this already at his site. In the comments, Wulfgar, in his usual inarticulate manner, cites to a site that supposedly has a review of the book, which is interesting, since it is not due for release until January 8th. Tracking the site that he mentioned, you find that he refers to a posting by Dr. Helen, in which she and her husband Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit have a podcast interview with the author. As usual, Wulfgar fails to actually think before he denounces, nor does he actually bother to read that to which he links. Typical.
In any event, the buzz generated has created an attempt to Googlebomb the book. You can't pay for that kind of publicity. Jonah is going to be rich!
But I think that the reason this book has generated so much publicity is that it touches on commonly and wrongly held assumptions. For instance, if you were to use the classical definition for liberalism, you would find that liberals are people who believe in

the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, free markets, and individual freedom from restraint as exemplified in the writings of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill,[3], Montesquieu, Voltaire [4], Thomas Paine and others.

Now compare this list with the objectives of people who call themselves "liberals" today. You can't be trusted to smoke, let your child ride a bike spend your money the way that you want. You should also succumb to what the government thinks best with regard to health care, schools, speed limits, and just about any other item that a special interest group is able to get the government to impose on you. Oh, and Free Markets? they simply don't or shouldn't be allowed to function because they are made up of those evil corporations.
Getting back to my point, I think that the reason that the Left is so upset with Goldberg's book, is that it strikes a chord that they recognize, and don't really like about themselves. Not that I think that todays Liberals are Nazis, but that the same techniques used by Mussolini who is associated with Hitler in the Axis Pact, are in play here. And even then, it's not that the particular policies are necessarily evil, but I do think that the Left fails to appreciate that even good intentions can have disastrous results, and if hijacked by people with evil intent, can become so destructive to the individual that they bear no relation to the original intent of being liberal.
But what do I know? Since I am not a member of the Left, I must be a fascist, right?

Notes From Paradise

I have returned, tanned, rested, and ready from a wonderful vacation in Mexico at the Iberostar Grand Paraiso. I thought that I would share some interesting observations from the trip that you might find amusing.

On the way down, we stopped for a transfer at Atlanta's airport, and due to my wife and my enjoyment of the Native American ceremonial herb, we had to stop in the smoking lounge where there were a large number of soldiers on their way to Iraq. While there we made the acquaintance of a few of these fine young men and women, and were talking to them about going to Iraq. Most were positive and upbeat, saying that their only regret is that so few people understand what is really happening in Iraq. Then there was one young soldier who was definitely scared about going back. All perfectly normal reactions, in that the majority believe in what they are doing, and there are those who are sure that their number is going to come up this time, and there is nothing that they can do about it. I hope that the young man has a good sergeant that will straighten him out and help keep his head on a swivel.

After we arrived at the hotel, we were greeted by a valet with iced towels to refresh ourselves and then champagne while we checked in. After getting our room, we were walking down corridors of polished marble, with paintings overhead that rivaled the Sistine Chapel. I immediately turned to my wife and told her "We don't belong here." But we quickly got over it. It is a fantastic hotel, with excellent service, fine food and spirits, and a wonderfully relaxing atmosphere.

Our first full day there was raining, so that afternoon, I had the chance to watch Special Report with Brit Hume, which I normally don't get to see because it is on when I am working. My wife (The Good Democrat) watched patiently with me, and afterwards she started to gag about Fox news because she knows that I am not allowed to watch her Keith Olbermann show with any heavy objects at hand in order to save the TV from destruction. So I asked her what specifically she did not like about Brit Hume, and she said that she didn't know any facts to disagree with but she told me that they were saying "blah, blah blah" and did not say that Bush was absolutely horrible like Keith would have done. Laughed my ass off. Talk about seeking reinforcement for your opinions.

Mexico in mid December is absolutely wonderful. One thing about the Mexicans, they are second only to the South Koreans for being the hardest working people that I have ever seen. The image of Mexicans being lazy is probably predicated on the siesta, which when you have been in really hot climates for any length of time, you do appreciate a break from the heat. The phrase "Only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun" certainly comes to mind if you don't have a pool and someone to bring you a refreshing chilled drink.
One aspect of the immigration issue that will need to be addressed in the future, is that we will be needing their workers for tasks that the Baby Boom echo will be unable to fill. In exchange, I think that we will be sending them our retirees. Anybody got tips on American style nursing homes in Mexico stock?

I really didn't want to leave, but the realization that I couldn't afford to live there for the rest of my life quickly sank in. So now I have to work for another year to afford a few days in Paradise.

Radio Silence Reimposed

Just as some things are starting to get interesting, like Fred Thompson standing up to the moderator at the last debate, and all of the other candidates going "Me too," I am going on vacation. To Mexico, warm beaches, Don Julio, Cuban cigars, and Mayan ruins.
I thought about taking the lap top, where I could blog about the vacation and include photos. But that would just make people jealous, and besides, it's a vacation.

See you after Christmas.

Happy Hannuka, and whatever seasons greetings that you might enjoy, I wish you and yours the best of the season, and may peace and goodwill extend to all of humanity.

Rabid out.

Iran's next Revolution?

Students in Tehran are protesting against the oppressive policies of their clerical government. One has to wonder if the Mullahs aren't at least a little bit concerned, since this is how they came to power in the '70s.
Of course, I have always argued that we should be supporting opposition groups in Iran that would change it from a theocratic megalomaniac state to one that is welcome to participate in the realm of civilized nations. I argue that the best way to do this is to fly over Iran every night and use B-2s to drop Victoria's Secret catalogs and credit card applications.
We can only hope.

NIE versus Reality

The recent release of the National Intelligence Estimate that says that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons has been widely trumpeted as proof that we don't have to worry about it anymore. Why am I still concerned then? Oh yeah, that's right, look at the history of the Intelligence Community.
First, they were completely surprised at how far along Saddam was in 1991, Then they missed the Pakistanis development until they actually tested their nuke. After that, there was "Slam Dunk" Tenet, and his wonderfully incorrect failure. At the start of the Iraq war, a nuclear weapons program was found, in Libya, that the IC had no inkling of.
But I am sure that they have this one right. Right? I mean how often can they be so darned wrong and still be taken seriously? Of course, as shown at the link above, it is possible that this is just political chicanery, designed to make Bush look bad. Not that that has ever happened before. Snark!
It is also reasonable to question why the basis for the change was based on some notes from a meeting. Color me skeptical. It couldn't be part of any organized disinformation campaign could it?

Harry Reid is an idiot

Arlen Specter went to the Senate floor today to call out Harry Reid for his intemperate remarks. Now Arlen is perhaps to cute by half, but his remarks certainly ding the present Majority leader. Link to the video is here.

When you contrast Reid with our own Mike Mansfield, you have to wonder about Reid's competence. Now it could be that Reid is just playing to his base and "standing up to the Republicans." But it just demonstrates his lack of effectiveness. This is either a lack of control on Reid's part, or a calculated undertaking that realizes he will get no assistance from the Republicans, so he might as well play to his base. Either way, it means that nothing will get done.

But maybe that isn't such a bad thing.

Edward's Mandatory Health Plan

Protein Wisdom put this up, and at first, I thought that I had been misdirected to the Onion. Using the IRS to make sure that everyone buys health care.

Brilliant!!

Who wants to question the real power behind the facade of our democratic republic. Not me. In fact, I try to make it a point to overpay my taxes every chance I get, so if I should receive a visit from the kindly gentlemen who want only to suck my life's blood, that I will in the end receive a refund.

Please don't audit me. I really don't need the hassles.

Class is not dead

The Missoulian letters to the editor was taken up almost exclusively by fans of Wofford who were writing to thank the Griz fans for their sportsmanship during last week's loss to the Terriers. Give them a read. They should make you proud that our fans can be fanatical without being a**holes.

Of course, this probably wouldn't be applicable to how the Bobcats are treated.