Bits and Pieces

In trying to keep this site active, I am going to start posting snippets of information from blogs, political commentary sites, and whatever else catches my eye. Here are a few posts from Thomas Sowell, an incredibly brilliant economist and political commentator:

When political commentators from the Fox News Channel had books whose sales would normally make the New York Times' non-fiction best-seller list, the New York Times changed the rules for putting books on that list. Thus best-selling political books by Mike Huckabee and Dick Morris appeared last Sunday on a more obscure list of miscellaneous personal advice and how-to books, such as "Weight Watchers New Complete Cookbook."

An e-mail from a perceptive reader points out that, although Congressional "earmarks" represent a very small part of federal spending, they can be used as bribes to buy the votes of members of Congress on bills involving the spending of vastly larger sums of the taxpayers' money.

When the Federal Reserve cites statistics to claim that there is not much evidence of inflation, we need to keep in mind that the statistics they rely on exclude food and energy prices. The cost of living is no sweat if you can do without electricity and food. (I'm sure Bernanke can.)

The Obama administration seems to be following what might be called "the Detroit pattern"-- increasing taxes, harassing businesses, and pandering to unions. In the short run, it got mayors re-elected. In the long-run, it reduced Detroit from a thriving city to an economic disaster area, whose population was cut in half, as its most productive citizens fled.

Intolerance may not promote progress but it can promote survival. An intolerant Islamic world may outlast the Western world that seems ready to tolerate anything, including the undermining of its own fundamental values and threats to its continued existence.

You can read the archives of articles by Thomas Sowell at: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp and: http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/

Another excellent writer - also an economist widely respected in conservative circles - is Walter Williams. He responds here to liberals talking about a "silver lining" to the devastation in Japan, claiming it will "stimulate their economy" to rebuild all that has been destroyed. These fools refuse to look at the fact that it requires diverting resources that could have been used to do something other than replace what was destroyed. This is called "The Broken Window Fallacy", written by the philosopher Frederic Bastiat. Williams says:

"After the 2001 terrorist attack, economist and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman wrote in his New York Times column "After the Horror," "Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could do some economic good." He explained that rebuilding the destruction would stimulate the economy through business investment and job creation.

Do a simple smell test on these examples of economic lunacy. Would the Japanese economy face even greater opportunities for economic growth had the earthquake and tsunami also struck Tokyo, Hiroshima, Yokohama and other major cities? Would the 9-11 terrorists have done us an even bigger economic favor had they destroyed buildings in other cities? The belief that society benefits from destruction is lunacy."

Read the whole article here: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williamns032311.php3

Caroline Glick is another terrific commentator who writes frequently about issues affecting Israel and the Middle East. Here is the beginning of an article on the current intervention in Libya by our military:

"The US's new war against Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi is the latest sign of its steady regional decline. In media interviews over the weekend, US military chief Adm. Michael Mullen was hard-pressed to explain either the goal of the military strikes in Libya or their strategic rationale.

Mullen's difficulty explaining the purpose of this new war was indicative of the increasing irrationality of US foreign policy.

Traditionally, states have crafted their foreign policy to expand their wealth and bolster their national security. In this context, US foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally been directed towards advancing three goals: Guaranteeing the free flow of inexpensive petroleum products from the Middle East to global market; strengthening regimes and governments that are in a position to advance this core US goal at the expense of US enemies; and fighting against regional forces like the pan-Arabists and the jihadists that advance a political program inherently hostile to US power.

Other competing interests have periodically interfered with US Middle East policy. And these have to greater or lesser degrees impaired the US's ability to formulate and implement rational policies in the region.

These competing interests have included the desire to placate somewhat friendly Arab regimes that are stressed by or dominated by anti-US forces; a desire to foster good relations with Europe; and a desire to win the support of the US media.

Under the Obama administration, these competing interests have not merely influenced US policy in the Middle East. They have dominated it. Core American interests have been thrown to the wayside."

http://jewishworldreview.com/0311/glick032211.php3

Allow me to suggest making JWR (Jewish World Review) an every day stop. Excellent articles there not just on politics, but world news, humor, medical and financial columns too. If you go there and like it, consider a small donation to them, or - as I do - a small monthly amount can be donated as well. Three dollars a month (or a $36 donation) will get you a limited edition JWR bar-mitzvah yamulke :-)