The Wizard predicts (once again) that our nearly unilateral and virtually complete withdrawal from Iraq is inevitable. In the words of Senator Joe Biden, speaking yesterday to our Ambassador to Iraq, "We ain't staying. We're not staying. We're not staying. Not much time."
I continue to believe this withdrawal is a horrific mistake. It's needless. It's stupid. It's terribly short sighted. It is a betrayal of our allies and a gift to al Qaeda.
Kill 3,000 Americans in the heart of New York City and receive an entire country as your reward.
It took a series of incredibly short sighted and poorly thought out moves by President Bush and the neo-cons to start this tragedy.
And it's taking another series of incredibly short sighted and poorly thought out moves by the Democrats to complete this tragedy.
But only some sort of massive change in the American public opinion polls could possibly stave off the inevitable.
We will have finally taught our enemies that we can easily be beaten in any war. Time and manipulation of American public opinion trumps military might.
And we have certainly taught any potential ally that we cannot be trusted. The word of our President means less than nothing.
Harsh? I think not.
Just ask the brave Iraqi's who actually were stupid enough to believe the United States would protect them and shepherd them into an era of democracy and stability. That is if you are able find any alive after our troops are gone.
After all, would be President Barack Obama has made the position of his vision of the United States perfectly clear, "...genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."
TECHNORATI TAGS: BARACK OBAMA WAR IN IRAQ WAR ON TERROR AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH JOE LIEBERMAN POLITICS JOHN MCCAIN DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS LEADERSHIP TRUST HONOR
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Friday, July 20, 2007
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Looking Forward.... Looking Back
A block from my office here in rural Mississippi is a wonderful little local restaurant where, as the old song goes; "everybody knows your name." Real home cooking and great conversation. It's open for breakfast, lunch and dinner and I've been known to eat all three meals there.
There are a few of us who occasionally discuss politics. Frankly it's a lot like the blogosphere where folks from the left, the center and the right gather and discuss sports one day, movies the next and politics the next. One of our group is running for sheriff and that occupies a lot of our time.
But, from time to time, we get back to the discussion of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I've noticed one commonality at the restaurant, here in the blogosphere and on the U.S. Senate floor the other night. The folks who think we should stay in Iraq are looking forward in time. The folks who think we should leave are focused on today and Bush's sins in the past.
I don't mean to oversimplify and I certainly don't want to put words in any one's mouth. But as I listened over coffee, as I listened overnight to our Senators debate and as I read on-line the general argument for leaving is that Iraq is a mess (very true), that we are "losing American blood and treasure" on a daily basis (also very true) and that the Iraqi's are not pulling their share of the weight (also very true).
Those who think we need to stay in Iraq tend to look past the problems we face today and concentrate on the future. Their argument for staying is that, if we leave, Iraq will fall into the hands of al Qaeda or Islamic fundamentalists (true), thousands or tens of thousands will die and/or be tortured or displaced (extremely likely), the middle east will be destabilized (also possible, although less likely), our enemies will be emboldened (that's a guarantee) and terrorists will have an important and resources rich country from which to operate (that, of course, is a given).
When a conservative or a "stay the course" person is faced with the very real situation on the ground today, their answer is that it's the "price we must pay." The goal is worthy of our sacrifice.
When a liberal or a "bring the troops home" person is faced with the question of Iraq's future, they tend to look inward or backward.
"At least no more Americans will die."
"Our boys will be home safe."
"Are your children serving in Iraq?"
"It's Iraq's problem. Who cares what they do?"
"Bush made this mess. He should have never invaded a sovereign country."
Now I have to agree that Bush should NEVER have invaded Iraq. And I agree that Bush has made this mess.
But the question now is how do we clean up Bush's mess? Unfortunately, Harry Reid and the Democrats leading the movement to exit Iraq are all looking backward. They admit they have made absolutely no plans, no contingencies for any of the scenarios predicted by those who believe we must stay. They haven't discussed exit strategies with the military. They haven't discussed exit strategies with he Iraqi government. And they haven't discussed exit strategies with any of our allies. Of course, constitutionally, that's not their job.
The current "bring the troops home now" crowd has no plan beyond an April 30th deadline. There is no strategy. There are no contingencies.
I'm ready and willing to join the "bring the troops home now" crowd as soon as they start looking forward and plan for the future of Iraq and the middle east.
Please take a few minutes and listen to Guy Raz's excellent report on NPR this morning: US exit from Iraq full of unknowns Don't just read the abbreviated copy. Listen to the complete report. It's only 5 or 6 minutes long.
EDITED FOR SPELLING, GRAMMER AND CONTENT 7/20/2007 12:27 pm CDT
TECHNORATI TAGS: HARRY REID WAR IN IRAQ WAR ON TERROR AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH JOE LIEBERMAN POLITICS JOHN MCCAIN DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS LEADERSHIP SENATE NPR
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
There are a few of us who occasionally discuss politics. Frankly it's a lot like the blogosphere where folks from the left, the center and the right gather and discuss sports one day, movies the next and politics the next. One of our group is running for sheriff and that occupies a lot of our time.
But, from time to time, we get back to the discussion of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I've noticed one commonality at the restaurant, here in the blogosphere and on the U.S. Senate floor the other night. The folks who think we should stay in Iraq are looking forward in time. The folks who think we should leave are focused on today and Bush's sins in the past.
I don't mean to oversimplify and I certainly don't want to put words in any one's mouth. But as I listened over coffee, as I listened overnight to our Senators debate and as I read on-line the general argument for leaving is that Iraq is a mess (very true), that we are "losing American blood and treasure" on a daily basis (also very true) and that the Iraqi's are not pulling their share of the weight (also very true).
Those who think we need to stay in Iraq tend to look past the problems we face today and concentrate on the future. Their argument for staying is that, if we leave, Iraq will fall into the hands of al Qaeda or Islamic fundamentalists (true), thousands or tens of thousands will die and/or be tortured or displaced (extremely likely), the middle east will be destabilized (also possible, although less likely), our enemies will be emboldened (that's a guarantee) and terrorists will have an important and resources rich country from which to operate (that, of course, is a given).
When a conservative or a "stay the course" person is faced with the very real situation on the ground today, their answer is that it's the "price we must pay." The goal is worthy of our sacrifice.
When a liberal or a "bring the troops home" person is faced with the question of Iraq's future, they tend to look inward or backward.
"At least no more Americans will die."
"Our boys will be home safe."
"Are your children serving in Iraq?"
"It's Iraq's problem. Who cares what they do?"
"Bush made this mess. He should have never invaded a sovereign country."
"The Iraqi's are incapable of self government, let alone democracy."
"Bush lied to get us into war."Now I have to agree that Bush should NEVER have invaded Iraq. And I agree that Bush has made this mess.
But the question now is how do we clean up Bush's mess? Unfortunately, Harry Reid and the Democrats leading the movement to exit Iraq are all looking backward. They admit they have made absolutely no plans, no contingencies for any of the scenarios predicted by those who believe we must stay. They haven't discussed exit strategies with the military. They haven't discussed exit strategies with he Iraqi government. And they haven't discussed exit strategies with any of our allies. Of course, constitutionally, that's not their job.
The current "bring the troops home now" crowd has no plan beyond an April 30th deadline. There is no strategy. There are no contingencies.
I'm ready and willing to join the "bring the troops home now" crowd as soon as they start looking forward and plan for the future of Iraq and the middle east.
Please take a few minutes and listen to Guy Raz's excellent report on NPR this morning: US exit from Iraq full of unknowns Don't just read the abbreviated copy. Listen to the complete report. It's only 5 or 6 minutes long.
EDITED FOR SPELLING, GRAMMER AND CONTENT 7/20/2007 12:27 pm CDT
TECHNORATI TAGS: HARRY REID WAR IN IRAQ WAR ON TERROR AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH JOE LIEBERMAN POLITICS JOHN MCCAIN DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS LEADERSHIP SENATE NPR
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Up All Night
Reuters reports:
"With cots, pillows and pleas for change, the Democratic-led U.S. Senate began a rare around-the-clock session on Tuesday to push President George W. Bush and fellow Republicans to end the Iraq war."
This is likely to keep me up all night, too. The alternative is nightmares.
Rarely (thank God) has the majority in the United States Senate been so wrong on such a critical issue. And even more rarely have we had a leader so shallow and so ignorant as Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Still, we face a determined majority in the Democrat Party who, for political reasons, seek to ignore reality, ignore the world, ignore our enemies and ignore our military leaders and pull our troops from Iraq.
History will no doubt tell us that there was virtually no practical reason for abandoning Iraq. Compared to every war in the entire history of the United States (and of the entire world) casualties are infinitesimal. Not to minimize the value of any life, we must realize the loss of life will be significantly higher if we abandon Iraq.
Of course, Harry Reid will point out that even though tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands lives will be lost, those lives will be Iraqi lives. No more of the valuable Americans will be lost (for a while). And, of course, it's all George Bush's fault anyway.
That last part will be true. This is Bush's folly. Bush should never have invaded Iraq. But he did. And the solution to this mess isn't to abandon our very real responsibility to the Iraqi people. And it certainly isn't to surrender an entire country to Islamic extremists.
So tonight I'll pray for the bravery of the Republicans. You know those guys... the ones who afraid to show up for a debate at the NAACP convention.
But, in the game of politics, they will be bolstered by Bush's rising poll numbers and the real intelligence of real leaders like John McCain and Joe Lieberman. And somehow forty four (44) or so of them along with the principled Joe Lieberman will stand up against Reid and his politically popular opposition to the current occupation of Iraq.
But, make no mistake. Reid might lose tonight's battle. But soon enough Bush will be gone. And Clinton or Obama or Edwards will be the President. And we will pull out our troops. And al Qaeda will have the victory they have long sought. And 4,000 American lives will have been wasted.
And our enemies will learn that time is the one enemy that America can never defeat.
TECHNORATI TAGS: HARRY REID WAR IN IRAQ WAR ON TERROR AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH JOE LIEBERMAN POLITICS JOHN MCCAIN DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS LEADERSHIP SENATE DEBATE
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
"With cots, pillows and pleas for change, the Democratic-led U.S. Senate began a rare around-the-clock session on Tuesday to push President George W. Bush and fellow Republicans to end the Iraq war."
This is likely to keep me up all night, too. The alternative is nightmares.
Rarely (thank God) has the majority in the United States Senate been so wrong on such a critical issue. And even more rarely have we had a leader so shallow and so ignorant as Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Still, we face a determined majority in the Democrat Party who, for political reasons, seek to ignore reality, ignore the world, ignore our enemies and ignore our military leaders and pull our troops from Iraq.
History will no doubt tell us that there was virtually no practical reason for abandoning Iraq. Compared to every war in the entire history of the United States (and of the entire world) casualties are infinitesimal. Not to minimize the value of any life, we must realize the loss of life will be significantly higher if we abandon Iraq.
Of course, Harry Reid will point out that even though tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands lives will be lost, those lives will be Iraqi lives. No more of the valuable Americans will be lost (for a while). And, of course, it's all George Bush's fault anyway.
That last part will be true. This is Bush's folly. Bush should never have invaded Iraq. But he did. And the solution to this mess isn't to abandon our very real responsibility to the Iraqi people. And it certainly isn't to surrender an entire country to Islamic extremists.
So tonight I'll pray for the bravery of the Republicans. You know those guys... the ones who afraid to show up for a debate at the NAACP convention.
But, in the game of politics, they will be bolstered by Bush's rising poll numbers and the real intelligence of real leaders like John McCain and Joe Lieberman. And somehow forty four (44) or so of them along with the principled Joe Lieberman will stand up against Reid and his politically popular opposition to the current occupation of Iraq.
But, make no mistake. Reid might lose tonight's battle. But soon enough Bush will be gone. And Clinton or Obama or Edwards will be the President. And we will pull out our troops. And al Qaeda will have the victory they have long sought. And 4,000 American lives will have been wasted.
And our enemies will learn that time is the one enemy that America can never defeat.
TECHNORATI TAGS: HARRY REID WAR IN IRAQ WAR ON TERROR AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH JOE LIEBERMAN POLITICS JOHN MCCAIN DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS LEADERSHIP SENATE DEBATE
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Friday, July 13, 2007
A Tip of the Wizard's Pointy Cap to Tom Tancredo
Tom Tancredo, the Republican Candidate for President did the right thing. He did the obvious thing. But, curiously enough, he was the lone Republican to have the intelligence, the honor and moral courage to appear before the NAACP National Convention in Detroit yesterday.
Tom Tancredo stood alone surrounded by nine (9) empty podiums. That image says more about the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party than any issue or policy or statement the party or candidates might make.
Nine people who claim to want to be President of the United States, arguably the world's greatest democracy couldn't muster the decency to face the flagship organization of a group of citizens that represents almost one fifth of the voting electorate.
Scheduling conflicts was the reason most cited. Lack of courage and moral conflicts were the real reasons.
Of course the eight leading Democrat candidates all showed up and they all wowed the crowd with their charisma, targeted speeches and their genuine concern for the issues facing black America.
Tom Tancredo also got the lavish praise he so rightly deserved. Not because he walks lock step on the issues, but because he cared enough to come to the convention and share his vision and his causes with the politically active and concerned citizens in attendance.
Will blacks give the Democrat nominee for President 91% of their votes? Probably. Would an appearance by Fred Thompson or Rudolph Guilani or Mitt Romney have changed that outcome? Perhaps not. We will, sadly, never know.
But their callous absence assures the vast majority of blacks will give their candidacy little or no serious consideration. And that's because these guys are just not serious candidates.
Tom Tancredo is the real hero in this year's Republican Party.
TECHNORATI TAGS: NAACP 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN TOM TRANCREDO REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT DETROIT MITT ROMNEY FRED THOMPSON RUDOLPH GUILANI
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Tom Tancredo stood alone surrounded by nine (9) empty podiums. That image says more about the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party than any issue or policy or statement the party or candidates might make.
Nine people who claim to want to be President of the United States, arguably the world's greatest democracy couldn't muster the decency to face the flagship organization of a group of citizens that represents almost one fifth of the voting electorate.
Scheduling conflicts was the reason most cited. Lack of courage and moral conflicts were the real reasons.
Of course the eight leading Democrat candidates all showed up and they all wowed the crowd with their charisma, targeted speeches and their genuine concern for the issues facing black America.
Tom Tancredo also got the lavish praise he so rightly deserved. Not because he walks lock step on the issues, but because he cared enough to come to the convention and share his vision and his causes with the politically active and concerned citizens in attendance.
Will blacks give the Democrat nominee for President 91% of their votes? Probably. Would an appearance by Fred Thompson or Rudolph Guilani or Mitt Romney have changed that outcome? Perhaps not. We will, sadly, never know.
But their callous absence assures the vast majority of blacks will give their candidacy little or no serious consideration. And that's because these guys are just not serious candidates.
Tom Tancredo is the real hero in this year's Republican Party.
TECHNORATI TAGS: NAACP 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN TOM TRANCREDO REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT DETROIT MITT ROMNEY FRED THOMPSON RUDOLPH GUILANI
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Independent Artists To Go Down With The Ship
"Right now, independent artists make up less than 10 percent of what's played on broadcast radio, but on Internet radio, we make up about 37 percent."
"The reality is if our representatives in Congress allow these new royalty rates to go into effect -- and it's within Congress' power to decide -- it'll make it far harder for independent artists like us to make it."
"Worse for those of us who are also music fans, online radio will start to sound a whole lot more like broadcast radio. Millions of people whose musical tastes aren't served by broadcast radio will be left without an alternative."
Kenneth Rainey, a member of Tangleweed, an acoustic Americana band, writing on the op-ed page of today's Chicago Tribune
TECHNORATI TAGS: KENNETH RAINEY SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO CHICAGO TRIBUNE RAIN RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO CENSORSHIP FREE SPEECH
Monday, July 09, 2007
Imagine If Every Independent Blog Were Censored
Imagine if only the big corporations were allowed to post their thoughts on line. If you were one of the very lucky few who where hired by The Washington Post or MSNBC your opinions might be on-line (edited by your bosses, of course). But if you were just a private citizen then you would be eliminated from the blogosphere.
That is EXACTLY the situation facing Internet Radio tonight. Today there are, worldwide, about 10,000 independent broadcasters. While you might be able to hear some of them next week if you live in Europe or Asia, they will be unavailable in the United States. And 95% of them will be gone period.
Now, even the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) can't pass a CENSORSHIP law (as much as they obviously want to), so they are eliminating all competition by demanding gigantic royalties exclusively of Internet Radio. Nobody else has to pay to play. Just the little guys.
They (the RIAA) claim they just want the poor performers to get a fair shake.
But the reality is that the performers will never see a dime. See Kurt Hanson's analysis in today's Radio and Internet News (RAIN).
Are you going to sit there and watch 10,000 voices be silenced? Or will you follow this link and call your Senators and Congress persons every day. EVERY DAY. Save Net Radio
P.S. A tip 'o the Wizard's pointy cap to Senator John Kerry who just added his name to the sponsorship of the Internet Radio Equality Act. When your calling Senators, call John Kerry and thank him. I just did.
That is EXACTLY the situation facing Internet Radio tonight. Today there are, worldwide, about 10,000 independent broadcasters. While you might be able to hear some of them next week if you live in Europe or Asia, they will be unavailable in the United States. And 95% of them will be gone period.
Think this can only happen in China? Or Iran? Think again. This is happening today, in the United States!
It doesn't matter if they broadcast classical music, political talk shows, or the ambient sounds of wind and surf, the RIAA wants them off the air and off the air they will be.Now, even the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) can't pass a CENSORSHIP law (as much as they obviously want to), so they are eliminating all competition by demanding gigantic royalties exclusively of Internet Radio. Nobody else has to pay to play. Just the little guys.
They (the RIAA) claim they just want the poor performers to get a fair shake.
But the reality is that the performers will never see a dime. See Kurt Hanson's analysis in today's Radio and Internet News (RAIN).Are you going to sit there and watch 10,000 voices be silenced? Or will you follow this link and call your Senators and Congress persons every day. EVERY DAY. Save Net Radio
P.S. A tip 'o the Wizard's pointy cap to Senator John Kerry who just added his name to the sponsorship of the Internet Radio Equality Act. When your calling Senators, call John Kerry and thank him. I just did.
TECHNORATI TAGS: DAY OF SILENCE SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO KURT HANSON RAIN RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO JOHN KERRY FREE SPEECH
Sunday, July 08, 2007
A Question About the Future of Talk Radio
A reader and contributor here at the WIZARD, fkap posted a question this morning about TALK RADIO on the Internet and I thought I would enlarge my answer and post it here for all to read. When the RIAA and it's royalty collection arm, SOUND EXCHANGE, kills 99% of Internet Radio later this week, Talk Radio will be an indirect casualty. Here's what's happening:
AM and FM Radio PAYS NO ROYALTIES AT ALL TO THE RIAA or to the LABELS or to the ARTISTS. Satellite Radio does pay royalties, but they pay a whole lot less.
THE RIAA IS ONLY DEMANDING THE GIGANTIC INCREASE IN ROYALTIES FROM INTERNET RADIO!! They are not requesting a penny from AM and FM radio. THE ENTIRE GOAL OF THE RIAA IS TO KILL THE INDEPENDENT BROADCASTER who play independent artists and new, emerging talent.
| vigilante asked I'm curious, Wizard: just how much public affairs (news & Opinion) can one find on Internet Radio? Where can you find it? How much bandwidth does it suck up? And, is it free? |
| I replied vigilante, There is a lot of talk and political radio and that arena of Internet Broadcasting is the fastest growing segment. Here's the good news: In theory talk radio is unaffected by the recent Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) rulings PROVIDED they carefully avoid the use of any music what-so-ever (not even the bumper music leading in and out of segments!!!!) Just one note of music, one time, and they fall into the nightmare of the RIAA royalty battle we now face. But even talk radio will be dealt a severe blow next Saturday. Although carefully programmed talk and religious radio (remember they couldn't use any music) can be broadcast for only the cost of bandwidth and computer server support, the network that hosts several hundred of the political, religious and talk stations will go into bankruptcy under the weight of a ten million dollar retroactive bill from SOUND EXCHANGE. A huge chunk of the real independent talk radio will die, leaving mainly the big network talk you already hear on AM/FM. In other words Rush Limbaugh will survive but the dozens of independent "vigilante's" will go silent because the infrastructure that allowed them to broadcast for a few hundred dollars a year will be gone. Be sure to go to http://www.savenetradio.org/ You can get the full background on the crisis and learn how you can help. The only solution today is to put massive pressure on Congress. Here is a listing of 320 talk stations you can listen to for free (today and for another 6 sixs). Some are weird (UFO's etc) some are religious and some a excellent liberal/progressive outlets. http://www.live365.com/cgi-bin/directory.cgi?genre=talk You can start your own station on LIVE365. The first week is free (HA!!) and then the whole thing will likely be dead... It's not really that funny, but the irony is thick...... |
Remember these three key facts:
- Internet Radio ALREADY PAYS THE HIGHEST ROYALTIES IN THE WORLD TO THE RIAA, MAJOR LABELS and ARTISTS
The RIAA clearly isn't interested in seeing artists get paid. If they were they wouldn't kill the one medium paying them handsomely already.
TECHNORATI TAGS: TALK RADIO SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO KURT HANSON RIAA RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO LIVE 365 FREE SPEECH
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Live Earth 7-7-07
Just a personal note to express my support of the LIVE EARTH Concerts being held around the world today. If you haven't already checked out their website go to http://liveearth.msn.com/. It's loaded with performances, news, live feeds, and tips for improving the ecology.
I HATE THE FACT this has become some sort of bizarre political football. Yesterday as I drove to work I had to listen to G. Gordon Liddy lecture me on all of Al Gore's failings and the myths of Global Warming. I like Liddy, but this is just plain stupid!! He's no scientist, he's a talk radio host and political operative. This shouldn't be a left versus right issue.
There are, in fact, genuine political and economic issues that deserve discussion. There are real costs and real dangers in implementing any massive societal changes. But there are also small changes we can all make in our lifestyles that will only help the environment.
So enjoy the concerts. And do what you can to make the world a better, cleaner, safer place to live.
TECHNORATI TAGS: LIVE EARTH LIVEEARTH G. GORDON LIDDY AL GORE GLOBAL WARMING ENVIRONMENT
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
I HATE THE FACT this has become some sort of bizarre political football. Yesterday as I drove to work I had to listen to G. Gordon Liddy lecture me on all of Al Gore's failings and the myths of Global Warming. I like Liddy, but this is just plain stupid!! He's no scientist, he's a talk radio host and political operative. This shouldn't be a left versus right issue.
There are, in fact, genuine political and economic issues that deserve discussion. There are real costs and real dangers in implementing any massive societal changes. But there are also small changes we can all make in our lifestyles that will only help the environment.
So enjoy the concerts. And do what you can to make the world a better, cleaner, safer place to live.
TECHNORATI TAGS: LIVE EARTH LIVEEARTH G. GORDON LIDDY AL GORE GLOBAL WARMING ENVIRONMENT
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Save Internet Radio, It's the Patriotic Thing To Do
Peter Rothberg wrote a great patriotic piece for the Fourth of July in the blog he writes for "The Nation" Magazine. The article is titled "Five for the Fouth" Here is a short, but important, excerpt:
"As my boss and Nation editor and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel wrote,... The Nation's 'definition of patriotism is fighting to make sure your country lives up to its highest ideals.' In that spirit, here are five measures worth supporting on this Fourth of July. All would help us form a more perfect union.
"Internet radio has become a tremendously popular source of news and views plus music. In just the last year the online radio audience increased from 45 million to 72 million listeners each month. The founding fathers couldn't have anticipated the wonders of the electronic world. But I think it's safe to say that the democratic free-for-all of Internet radio would have met with their approval as a crucial part of the fourth estate that Jefferson held was critical to a functioning democracy. "Unfortunately, the future of Internet radio is in doubt as royalty rates for webcasters have been drastically increased by a recent ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board. The only hope is that sufficient grassroots pressure can be applied in support of the Internet Radio Equality Act... "Please implore your senators and reps to co-sponsor and vote in favor of the Internet Radio Equality Act (HR 2060) and ask your friends to join the coalition to save Internet radio." |
Read the entire blog post at The Nation.
TECHNORATI TAGS: THE NATION SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO KURT HANSON RAIN RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO LIVE 365 FREE SPEECH
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
The 4th of July
I hope you all enjoy the many blessings we have received from those who conceived, built and protected this great country.
And take a few moments to remember and thank those who protect it today.
Those fighting hard to protect our country include our political opponents. Please remember to thank them, too.
TECHNORATI TAGS: FREEDOM THE 4th OF JULY FREE SPEECH POLITICS
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Who Gets It?
Well, the main stream media and the blogosphere are both about to burst into flames. Scooter Libby never wanted this type of notoriety. And he deserves so very much better.
Libby is a man whose main crime was getting caught like a deer in the headlights of an "out of control" special prosecutor. Yes, he did fail to remember certain absolutely meaningless facts before a grand jury. And technically he did lie. But so did Bill Clinton.
Yes. Please remember Clinton's crime was lying to a grand jury. There is absolutely no debate on the left or the right that Clinton lied under oath. However Clinton lied about sex which certainly seems to be OK with virtually everyone in the main stream media and the left leaning glitterati.
In fairness the real question was did Clinton's lie rise to the level demanding Impeachment. And, of course, it did not.
So what about Libby? Libby lied about three conversations with reporters, none of which had any impact at all on the revelation of facts concerning CIA agent Valerie Plame. Had Libby merely lied about having sex with Plame, it can be safely assumed all lies would be forgiven.
But here's the crux of Libby's false testimony (courtesy of The Stromata Blog):
I've read today several dozen blogs by all my favorite writers and several new discoveries. Opinions range demands for Bush's impeachment or resignation over on the left to demands from a full pardon for Libby over on the right.
I'll recommend you read Vigilante's very short entry at The Vigil, but be certain to read every comment that follows the essay. Vigilante's discussion group is one of the best and brightest on the far "Impeach Bush Now" left.
Then I'll recommend you read Mary's interesting comparison of Bush's commutation of the Libby jail sentence to the left's demand for full amnesty for all illegal immigrants over at FREEDOM EDEN. It is thought provoking.
But I fully agree with Bruce over at the Gay Patriot and recommend you read his essay, Another Bush Half-Measure. Bruce and I are on the same page.
Then read The Gay Patriot's co-blogger Daniel and his half dissenting essay, On the Libby Decision & the Left’s Silly Mantras. Daniel is one of the few writers who actually agrees with the President and supports his decision.
Who is right? You already know where I stand.
TECHNORATI TAGS: FREEDOM EDEN THE GAY PATRIOT THE VIGIL LEWIS LIBBY SCOOTER LIBBY PRESIDENT BUSH LYING UNDER PATH
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Libby is a man whose main crime was getting caught like a deer in the headlights of an "out of control" special prosecutor. Yes, he did fail to remember certain absolutely meaningless facts before a grand jury. And technically he did lie. But so did Bill Clinton.
Yes. Please remember Clinton's crime was lying to a grand jury. There is absolutely no debate on the left or the right that Clinton lied under oath. However Clinton lied about sex which certainly seems to be OK with virtually everyone in the main stream media and the left leaning glitterati.
In fairness the real question was did Clinton's lie rise to the level demanding Impeachment. And, of course, it did not.
So what about Libby? Libby lied about three conversations with reporters, none of which had any impact at all on the revelation of facts concerning CIA agent Valerie Plame. Had Libby merely lied about having sex with Plame, it can be safely assumed all lies would be forgiven.
But here's the crux of Libby's false testimony (courtesy of The Stromata Blog):
Let’s stipulate arguendo that the jury correctly found that Mr. Libby lied to the FBI and the grand jury. Having done so, let’s review facts that ought to be familiar. None of them is contested, but all tend to get lost in the hyperventilating whirlwind. Mr. Libby was charged with falsely describing conversations with three reporters: Tim Russert, Matt Cooper and Judith Miller. He was not accused of illegally exposing the identity of a covert CIA agent. According to the prosecution’s version of reality –
In other words, contrary to what leftists incessantly proclaim, there is no evidence that Mr. Libby undertook to “punish” Joseph Wilson. How would it have helped the grand jury to have heard from Scooter Libby’s lips that he (i) didn’t talk about Mrs. Wilson with Tim Russert, (ii) heard about her role from Matt Cooper and (iii) discussed the matter casually with Judith Miller? Those admissions clearly wouldn’t have led to an indictment for disclosure of classified information or violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. We know that because Mr. Armitage was never charged with either. Nor is there any way – at least none that Mr. Fitzgerald has ever disclosed – in which learning those facts would have led to some fruitful line of inquiry. On the reading most hostile to Lewis Libby, he did not commit a substantive crime or obstruct a criminal investigation. He was caught in a perjury trap. If Mr. Fitzgerald had asked, “What color tie did you wear when you spoke to Tim Russert?”, Mr. Libby had answered “Red” and the prosecution had thereafter proven that the tie was blue, the grounds for the indictment would have been just as strong. |
I've read today several dozen blogs by all my favorite writers and several new discoveries. Opinions range demands for Bush's impeachment or resignation over on the left to demands from a full pardon for Libby over on the right.
I'll recommend you read Vigilante's very short entry at The Vigil, but be certain to read every comment that follows the essay. Vigilante's discussion group is one of the best and brightest on the far "Impeach Bush Now" left.
Then I'll recommend you read Mary's interesting comparison of Bush's commutation of the Libby jail sentence to the left's demand for full amnesty for all illegal immigrants over at FREEDOM EDEN. It is thought provoking.
But I fully agree with Bruce over at the Gay Patriot and recommend you read his essay, Another Bush Half-Measure. Bruce and I are on the same page.
Then read The Gay Patriot's co-blogger Daniel and his half dissenting essay, On the Libby Decision & the Left’s Silly Mantras. Daniel is one of the few writers who actually agrees with the President and supports his decision.
Who is right? You already know where I stand.
TECHNORATI TAGS: FREEDOM EDEN THE GAY PATRIOT THE VIGIL LEWIS LIBBY SCOOTER LIBBY PRESIDENT BUSH LYING UNDER PATH
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Monday, July 02, 2007
Appalachian Trail
The Wizard family and friends have been hiking the Appalachian Trail this past week, mostly free from cell phones, Internet connections and most relatively modern annoyance's. As we reveled in the midst of nature's supreme magnificence only a few conversations or thoughts turned to current events, the Internet or politics.
Still a couple of current events did break through into our sanctuary. Perhaps the most interesting and potentially the most important was "twittering," but I'll have much more on that later.
Of course we became aware of the potential terrorist activities in Great Britain. As we were hiking only miles from Washington, D.C., we were more than a little angry that such madness could even exist in such a beautiful and perfect world.
Two very small items are worthy of very brief note tonight, our first night in range of Internet connectivity.
First I note that President Bush continues.....
......to act timidly and without conviction. He most assuredly deserves the meager 30 something percentage approval rating he receives in the polls. President Bush manages to constantly infuriate the left and disappoint the right with his every move.
His latest poorly reasoned act was to commute the sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. A bold President, acting on principle, would have pardoned Libby. Bush certainly should have done that! Libby's conviction was a gross miscarriage of justice.
But Bush, with a limp wristed stroke of his pen has failed to do the right thing. In one single act he has given the left more ammunition to condemn his administration and disappointed the right (and every reasonably fair minded American, left or right).
God save us from any future "special prosecutors."
Second, I want to defend Ann Coulter and Bill Maher.....
..... and roundly condemn both Chris Matthews and, especially, Elizabeth Edwards. The ambush attack on Coulter last week must have made for great television. And, the press reports, it electrified the Edward's campaign and brought in huge donations.
It is just tragic that Coulter has the power to simply terrify the left.
If only I could just get my fellow liberals (and the so called "progressives") to take on real issues and real decision makers. But, alas, no. Coulter is the target of choice.
But, even more tragic, Coulter was right again, as usual.
Coulter had not attacked John Edwards earlier in the week on Good Morning America as Elizabeth contended in fully orchestrated ambush phone call during the Matthew's show.
Instead, Coulter's target on GMA was never Edwards, but Bill Maher. Coulter was being criticized for her coments about Edwards as a convention several months ago. Those comments, by the way, were also widely misquoted. Here is exactly what Coulter said on GMA:
"But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack — so I've learned my lesson: If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."
Well, dammit, that is the sad truth, Maher can say, with full intent, that it is a shame the Vice President wasn't killed in a terrorist attack and nobody blinks an eye! Maher isn't mentioned by the media and he isn't censored by his network and he isn't ambushed by Mrs. Cheney when he appears on HARDBALL with Chris Matthews.
But Coulter, who has worked her way all the way up to Public Enemy Number One, gets lambasted for a joke parodying Maher's very real comments.
I certainly believe that both Chris Matthews and Elizabeth Edwards knew full well they were misquoting Coulter and wrongly accusing her.
By the way, the Edwards campaign continues to use a doctored and truncated version of Coulter's GMA appearance to perpetuate the myth of Coulter's comments.
Everyone on the left knows for a fact that Coulter did nothing more or less than Bill Maher. Anyone who has said one word or written one sentence condemning Coulter without issuing an equal and exact condemnation of Maher is a hypocrite or damned liar.
I don't want or expect Maher to change a thing. His humor is great and his comment were valid.
But those of us on the left need to do one of two things: either ignore Ann Coulter or start to actually listen to what she says and quote her correctly.
Here is one of my earlier essays again defending both Maher and Coulter.
TECHNORATI TAGS: FREE SPEECH ANN COULTER BILL MAHER LEWIS LIBBY SCOOTER LIBBY PRESIDENT BUSH ELIZABETH EDWARDS
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Still a couple of current events did break through into our sanctuary. Perhaps the most interesting and potentially the most important was "twittering," but I'll have much more on that later.
Of course we became aware of the potential terrorist activities in Great Britain. As we were hiking only miles from Washington, D.C., we were more than a little angry that such madness could even exist in such a beautiful and perfect world.
Two very small items are worthy of very brief note tonight, our first night in range of Internet connectivity.
First I note that President Bush continues.....
......to act timidly and without conviction. He most assuredly deserves the meager 30 something percentage approval rating he receives in the polls. President Bush manages to constantly infuriate the left and disappoint the right with his every move.
His latest poorly reasoned act was to commute the sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. A bold President, acting on principle, would have pardoned Libby. Bush certainly should have done that! Libby's conviction was a gross miscarriage of justice.
But Bush, with a limp wristed stroke of his pen has failed to do the right thing. In one single act he has given the left more ammunition to condemn his administration and disappointed the right (and every reasonably fair minded American, left or right).
God save us from any future "special prosecutors."
Second, I want to defend Ann Coulter and Bill Maher.....
..... and roundly condemn both Chris Matthews and, especially, Elizabeth Edwards. The ambush attack on Coulter last week must have made for great television. And, the press reports, it electrified the Edward's campaign and brought in huge donations.
It is just tragic that Coulter has the power to simply terrify the left.
If only I could just get my fellow liberals (and the so called "progressives") to take on real issues and real decision makers. But, alas, no. Coulter is the target of choice.
But, even more tragic, Coulter was right again, as usual.
Coulter had not attacked John Edwards earlier in the week on Good Morning America as Elizabeth contended in fully orchestrated ambush phone call during the Matthew's show.
Instead, Coulter's target on GMA was never Edwards, but Bill Maher. Coulter was being criticized for her coments about Edwards as a convention several months ago. Those comments, by the way, were also widely misquoted. Here is exactly what Coulter said on GMA:
"But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack — so I've learned my lesson: If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."
Well, dammit, that is the sad truth, Maher can say, with full intent, that it is a shame the Vice President wasn't killed in a terrorist attack and nobody blinks an eye! Maher isn't mentioned by the media and he isn't censored by his network and he isn't ambushed by Mrs. Cheney when he appears on HARDBALL with Chris Matthews.
But Coulter, who has worked her way all the way up to Public Enemy Number One, gets lambasted for a joke parodying Maher's very real comments.
I certainly believe that both Chris Matthews and Elizabeth Edwards knew full well they were misquoting Coulter and wrongly accusing her.
By the way, the Edwards campaign continues to use a doctored and truncated version of Coulter's GMA appearance to perpetuate the myth of Coulter's comments.
Everyone on the left knows for a fact that Coulter did nothing more or less than Bill Maher. Anyone who has said one word or written one sentence condemning Coulter without issuing an equal and exact condemnation of Maher is a hypocrite or damned liar.
I don't want or expect Maher to change a thing. His humor is great and his comment were valid.
But those of us on the left need to do one of two things: either ignore Ann Coulter or start to actually listen to what she says and quote her correctly.
Here is one of my earlier essays again defending both Maher and Coulter.
TECHNORATI TAGS: FREE SPEECH ANN COULTER BILL MAHER LEWIS LIBBY SCOOTER LIBBY PRESIDENT BUSH ELIZABETH EDWARDS
DIGG THIS
SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)