Last updated:
2:40 PM, 2 March 2015



Jim Miller on Politics

  Email:
jimxc1 at gmail.com



What's he reading? Francis Parkman.

News Compilers
(Why These?)

A&L Daily
Drudge
egopnews.com
*The Grid
Hot Air
Jewish World Review
Lexis-Nexis
Lucianne
Mediaite
memeorandum
Monsters and Critics
*newser
Orbusmax
Rantburg
Real Clear Politics
SciTech Daily
Yahoo


Big Media
(Why These?)

Atlantic Monthly
BBC
CNN
Chosen Ilbo
*Daily Mail (UK)
*Deutsche Welle
Fox News
Globe and Mail (CA)
Guardian (UK)
Investor's Business Daily
Le Figaro (FR)
Le Monde (FR)
The Local (Sweden)
National Review
New York Times
The New Yorker
Politico
Seattle PI
Seattle Times
Slate
Slashdot
The Spectator (UK)
Der Spiegel
Telegraph (UK)
Times (UK)
El Universal
U. S. News
USA Today
Wall Street Journal
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times


References:

Adherents
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Census Quick Facts
Dave Leip's Election Atlas
FactCheck
Federal Statistics
How Stuff Works
NationMaster
Refdesk
Snopes
StateMaster
Tax Facts
Unionstats
Wikipedia


Smart Media
(Why These?)

ABC News Note
*The American
The American Spectator
Michael Barone
City Journal
Commentary
Front Page Magazine
Michael Fumento
The Hill
Charles Krauthammer
Media Research
Michael Medved
New York Sun
Number Watch
PJ Media
Public Interest
Roll Call
Spinsanity
Townhall
The Weekly Standard


Blogs
(Why These?)

My Group Blog:
Sound Politics

Northwest:


The American Empire
AndrewsDad
Chief Brief
Clear Fog Blog
Coffeemonkey's weblog
Croker Sack
"DANEgerus"
Economic Freedom
Federal Way Conservative
Freedom Foundation
Hairy Thoughts
Huckleberry Online
Andy MacDonald
NW Republican
Orcinus
Public Interest Transportation Forum
<pudge/*>
Northwest Progressive Institute
*Progressive Majority
Matt Rosenberg
Seattle Blogger
Seattle Bubble
Washington Policy Center
West Sound Politics
Zero Base Thinking


Other US:


Ace of Spades HQ
Alien Corn
Ann Althouse
American Thinker
The Anchoress
Armies of Liberation
Art Contrarian
"Baldilocks"
Balloon Juice
Baseball Crank
La Shawn Barber
Beldar
Bleat
Big Government
Bookworm Room
Broadband Politics
Stuart Buck
Keith Burgess-Jackson
*Bush Center
Chef Mojo
Chicago Boyz
Classical Values
*College Insurrection
Confederate Yankee
Jules Crittenden
Daily Pundit
Discriminations
Gregory Djerejian
Daniel W. Drezner
Econlog
Econopundit
Election Law
John Ellis
Engage
Dean Esmay
Gary Farber
Fausta
FiveThirtyEight
Flares into Darkness
Flopping Aces
The Long War Journal
Gateway Pundit
Grasping Reality With Both Hands
Keith Hennessey
Hugh Hewitt
Siflay Hraka
Instapundit
Iowahawk
Joanne Jacobs
Jeff Jarvis
The Jawa Report
Brothers Judd
JustOneMinute
Kausfiles
Kesher Talk
Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion
Little Green Footballs
Megan McArdle
Michelle Malkin
Greg Mankiw
Marginal Revolution
Mazurland
Minding the Campus
The ModerateVoice
*The Monkey Cage Mudville Gazette
"neo-neocon"
Betsy Newmark
Newsbusters
No Watermelons Allowed
Ambra Nykola
*The Optimistic Conservative
The Ornery American
OxBlog
Parapundit
"Patterico"
Daniel Pipes
Polipundit
Political Arithmetik
Political Calculations
Pollster.com
Power and Control
Power Line
Protein Wisdom
QandO
Radio Equalizer
RedState
Riehl World View
Right Wing News
Rightwing Nuthouse
Dr. Sanity
Scrappleface
Screw Loose Change
Linda Seebach
Sense of Events
Joshua Sharf
Rand Simberg
Smart Politics
The Spirit of Enterprise
Stability For Our Time
*Strange Maps
The Strata-Sphere
Andrew Sullivan
Don Surber
Sweetness & Light
Taking Hayek Seriously
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf
USS Neverdock
VDH's Private Papers
Verum Serum
Villainous Company
Volokh Conspiracy
Washington Monthly
Wizbang
Dr. Weevil
Matt Welch
Winds of Change
Meryl Yourish
zombietime


Canadians:


BlazingCatFur
Colby Cosh
Five Feet of Fury
Kate McMillan
Damian Penny
Bruce Rolston


Latin America:


Babalú
Caracas Chronicles
The Devil's Excrement
Venezuela News and Views


Overseas:


"Franco Aleman"
Bruce Bawer
Biased BBC
Tim Blair
*Andrew Bolt
Peter Briffa
Brussels Journal
*Bunyipitude
Butterflies and Wheels
Crooked Timber
Davids Medienkritik
Egyptian Sand Monkey
EU Referendum
Greenie Watch
Guido Fawkes
Harry's Place
Mick Hartley
Oliver Kamm
JG, Caesarea
*Le Monde Watch
¡No-Pasarán!
Fredrik Norman
Melanie Phillips
John Ray
samizdata
Shark Blog
Natalie Solent
Somtow's World
Bjørn Stærk
Laban Tall
*David Thompson
Michael Yon
This is Zimbabwe

Science Blogs:
The Blackboard
Cliff Mass Weather
Climate Audit
Climate Depot
Climate Science
*Judith Curry
Future Pundit
Gene Expression
The Loom
In The Pipeline
Roger Pielke Jr.
Real Climate
A Voyage To Arcturus
Watts Up With That?

Media Blogs:
Andrew Malcolm
Dori Monson
David Postman
Rhetorical Ammo
Tierney Lab
*White House Dossier

R-Rated:
Horse's A**
Huffington Post

*new



Pseudo-Random Thoughts

President Obama Spoke Again On The Keystone XL Pipeline; As Usual, President Obama Didn't Tell The Truth:  I know.  The sky is blue, the Pope is Catholic; there are glaciers on Mt. Rainier, et cetera.  Nothing new here, you may be thinking.

But this time he earned another Four Pinocchios from Glenn Kessler, who seems a little peeved at our prevaricating president.
When Obama first started making the claim that the crude oil in the Keystone pipeline would bypass the United States, we wavered between Three and Four Pinocchios — and strongly suggested he take the time to review the State Department report.

Clearly, the report remains unread.

The president’s latest remarks pushes this assertion into the Four Pinocchios column.  If he disagrees with the State Department’s findings, he should begin to make the case why it is wrong, rather than assert the opposite, without any factual basis.  Moreover, by telling North Dakota listeners that the pipeline has no benefit for Americans, he is again being misleading, given that producers in the region have signed contracts to transport some of their production through the pipeline.
I can understand Kessler's feelings; years ago, I became peeved at Obama because he appeared to think that I would believe so many impossible things before — and after — breakfast.  (Perhaps, unlike the White Queen, I just haven't had enough practice.)  He was treating me — and you — as fools.

What's the best thing we can say about Obama's habit of making false statements about the pipeline?  That he has a reckless disregard for the truth on this issue, that, at best, he has not taken an hour or so to find out the facts.

You can decide for yourself how probable that best explanation is.

(Here's the State Department report in case you, unlike President Obama, want to read it.  It's 150 pages long, but you don't have to read the whole thing.)
- 2:40 PM, 2 March 2015   [link]


You Can Take The Man Out Of Chicago, But You Can't Take Chicago Out Of The Man:  Which explains why President Obama has treated ambassadorships as just another patronage job.
Career diplomats are finding that they can't advance to top State Department posts such as ambassadorships because President Obama has stuffed political appointees into those jobs, the most ever in his second term.
Some of Obama's ambassadors have been not just rich donors, but unprepared rich donors, such as George J. Tsunis, who Obama nominated to represent us in Norway.

Tsunis did not do well when questioned by Arizona Senator John McCain.
To recap: Tsunis described Norway as having a president (“apparently under the impression that the country is a republic rather than a constitutional monarchy,” as the Local Norway's News notes dryly).   And he characterized the anti-immigration Progress Party as being among “fringe elements” who “spew their hatred” and have been denounced by the government.

That prompted McCain’s disbelieving answer: “The government has denounced them?  The coalition government — they're part of the coalition of the government.”
(Incidentally, that's the kind of questioning all our senators should do.)

Some ambassadors have been even worse.  Bundler Cynthia Stroum raised $500 thousand for Obama's 2008 campaign, was named ambassador to Luxembourg, and resigned after reports of her cruelty to staff. Not so incidentally, Stroum was working for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, at the time.

Career diplomats were resigning or asking for transfers to Iraq or Afghanistan, rather than work for Stroum.

As far as I know, the Obama campaign did not return her donations.

For the record:  Over the years, some political appointees have been fine ambassadors; a few have even been superb.  (For example, Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a very good ambassador to India.)  But the successes were men (and women) who were prepared for their jobs, and who saw them as difficult jobs, not as rewards for donations.

(Michelle Obama often speaks fondly of her father, Fraser Robinson, but she doesn't often mention that he had a patronage job with the city of Chicago, a job that depended on him getting out the vote in his precinct.)
- 8:44 AM, 2 March 2015   [link]


Terror Or Backlash?  Which should our law enforcement people worry about most?  According to United States Attorney Benjamin Wagner, an Obama appointee, it's backlash.

Here's what he said at President Obama's recent “Summit on Countering Violent Extremism”:
The U.S. Attorney explained that “the Muslim community can play an important role in helping law enforcement separate radical noise from radical action, and when it’s something to be worried about and when it’s not.   If the community can be successful in stepping in first, law enforcement will never have to be involved.”   But [Sacramento Bee reporter Steve] Magagnini pressed the point: “Are Californians in danger from the Islamic State and al-Qaida?”

“I would say it’s not a very high threat,” Wagner responded.  “It’s important that people be alert without being frightened.”  The U.S. Attorney and Obama appointee acknowledged that ISIS has been urging people to “take action in your own communities, attack police, government buildings.”  However, “there are limits to how much one person can do to arm people, mobilize and do damage without law enforcement intercepting it.”  Then the U.S. Attorney made clear his real priorities.

“What I’m more concerned about is some sort of backlash crime here – something gruesome will happen in Syria and someone will take revenge on the local community.”
(Emphasis added.)

Perhaps Wagner's stated priority can be explained by a meeting he had had earlier with local Muslim leaders in Sacramento, California.  He may just have been repeating what he had told them.  But I fear that he was being honest, that he is more worried about backlash attacks — which have been almost non-existent in the United States — than terror attacks, of which we have had too many.

He is an Obama appointee, so it would not be surprising if he held such beliefs, and not be terribly surprising if he acted on them, if he spent too much time looking for backlash attacks, and not enough time looking for terror attacks.

(Note, by the way, his reliance on surveillance to detect threats.  Presumably, he mostly means the kind of electronic surveillance that NSA does.  But that kind of surveillance, like any other kind, can be evaded by clever terrorists.)
- 7:06 AM, 2 March 2015   [link]


What Country Is Tupperware's Biggest Market?  I wouldn't have guessed it, on the first or second try.  (I might have got it by the tenth, if I had thought of going by population.)

It's Indonesia.
The party had the feel of 1960s America, almost.  A group of women, thrilled to get a break from the daily routine of hanging laundry and shuttling their children to and from school, sat in a circle, listening to a friend hawk plastic storage bowls in a dizzying array of pastels.

Some shushed babies on their laps; others occasionally leaned in for juicy pieces of news.

The women were, in fact, at a modern-day Tupperware party in the company’s biggest market.  The twist?  That market is halfway around the world from the product’s Massachusetts birthplace — in Indonesia.
Indonesia passed Germany, two years ago.

There's much more in the article, most of it quite interesting.

(Here's the company's site.)
- 4:46 PM, 1 March 2015   [link]


Two Thoughts from Will Rogers:
The great comedian Will Rogers gave voice to widespread doubts concerning American's diplomatic performance.  The United States has never lost a war or won a conference," he declared.  Rogers also claimed to be clairvoyant on the subject of future wars.  If you want to know when a war might be coming," he told audiences, "you just watch the United States and see when it starts cutting down on its defenses.   It's the surest barometer in the world." (p. 122)
If you are like me, you'll think that neither of those is completely true — but that there is some truth in both of them.

(His Wikipedia biography includes many of his better-known jokes, including this one: "Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.")
- 4:11 PM, 1 March 2015   [link]


The University of Westminster, "Campus Of Hate"  On Thursday, I speculated that "Jihadi John" (Mohammed Emwazi) has been radicalized at his alma mater, that he had become an Islamic extremist at the University of Westminster.  I didn't base that speculation on anything I knew about the university, just on a pattern often found.

Yesterday, the Daily Mail published an article that provides more direct evidence for my speculation.
Mohammed Emwazi might have been born in Kuwait. But his murderous alter ego was made in Britain.

With hindsight, the road to Raqqa — the Islamic State’s Syrian stronghold — was clearly signposted.

He grew up in the streets around Ladbroke Grove, in the inner suburbs of West London — an area that has become a breeding ground for Islamic militancy and home-grown terror suspects.

He was befriended by Cage, the so-called campaign and human rights group, whose leading light is someone who has expressed support for the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate and for the principle of death by stoning for adultery.

And, perhaps most significantly of all, he went to the University of Westminster, where, according to a report published yesterday, no fewer than 22 events have been held since March 2012, providing a platform for speakers with a history of extremist views or involvement with extremist organisations.
(Paul Bracchi is probably referring to a report, or perhaps an update of an earlier report, by Student Rights, a group opposed to extremism on British campuses.)

There's much more evidence about the Islamic extremism on the campus in the article.  If Bracchi is even roughly correct, a Muslim on that campus would have to struggle, hard, to avoid that extremism.

You can find the same climate of hate, in milder forms, at some American universities.

(If you prefer to see the same argument in a less tabloid presentation, you can read this Washington Post article.

The university put up an apparently official statement on their web site, saying they were sorry if one of their alumna was a murderous terrorist.  But the statement is not signed, which strikes me as extremely odd, and, possibly, cowardly.)
- 11:42 AM, 28 February 2015   [link]


Mark Hyman Brings A Little Diversity To Seattle-Area TV:   Some weeks ago, I tuned in to a local TV station, KOMO 4, early on a Saturday morning and was startled to hear an intelligent, conservative, commentary.  I have gotten so used to the bland uniformity of our local TV news — where it is nearly impossible to distinguish one news reader from another by what they say — that I didn't catch the man's name or web site, the first time I saw him.

(The stations would tell you that they are quite diverse, and they would be right if you judge diversity by skin color, ethnicity, hair styles, or other visible clues.  But they lack diversity of ideas; almost all our local news readers are not-very-well-informed "progressives", as they are usually called here.  (Reactionaries would be a more appropriate term, since they adhere to so many 19th century ideas.)  They almost certainly do not have much religious diversity either, as far as I can tell.)

A quick search of the station's web site did not turn up any clues, so I waited for another Saturday to learn who he was, and how this dissident commentary happened to be on a local station, how this diamond had appeared among all the usual mud and sand.

The man is Mark E. Hyman, and his commentary web site is Behind the Headlines.

If you live in this area, you can sometimes see his commentaries if you tune into KOMO 4, starting at about 5 minutes after 6 on a Saturday morning.  They are usually worth listening to, especially if you are a leftist, and thus likely to have little exposure to dissident ideas, dissident within our local newsrooms, that is.

But, since KOMO 4 refuses to link to him, or even introduce his commentaries, I would suggest that you go directly to his site instead, even if you live in this area.

Cross posted at Sound Politics.

(Some will naturally wonder why Hyman's commentaries appear here.  That's because KOMO was bought by a conservative broadcasting company, Sinclair.  So far the purchase seems to have little effect on KOMO's policies, other than those commentaries.  Which is unfortunate because most of our local TV news coverage is, frankly, pretty terrible.  Oh, the stations tell us the scores, show us the sports highlights, warn us of traffic problems, and give us weather forecasts, but their coverage is often terrible on more important subjects.  They will, for example, routinely fail to tell us totals or changes when discussing state budget fights, making me wish, at times, that the sports guys would cover politics, because at least they would give us the scores.

Some would claim that our local TV news simply reflects the area, that we have "progressive" news stations because the area is dominated by "progressives".  That would be true, if you were only speaking of Seattle itself, but Seattle has about one-third of the population of King County, and an even smaller part of the metropolitan area.  Many parts of that area — outside Seattle — are moderate politically; some are even conservative.  In 2012, for example, Mitt Romney received more than 40 percent of the vote in each of the three counties just outside King: Snohomish, Kitsap, and Pierce.  And, though I haven't bothered to calculate it, probably did at least that well in the portion of King outside Seattle.  It is, I think, foolish for our broadcasters to ignore a minority that large.)
- 3:51 PM, 27 February 2015   [link]


Pay For Performance?  That's what these bonuses to Lois Lerner look like to me.
Former IRS official Lois Lerner received $129,300 in bonuses between 2010 and 2013, records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show.

Over a three-year period, Lerner, the head of the tax-exempt division at the heart of the IRS targeting scandal, received a 25 percent retention bonus—averaging $43,000 a year—on top of her regular salary.
Though I suspect that the performance for which she was paid was her targeting of grass roots conservative groups.
- 9:25 AM, 27 February 2015   [link]


What Do Alaskans Do During Their Long Winters?   Knit.   During their rainy times, Oregonians brew beer.  Washingtonians, I am pleased to say, exercise (or at least prepare to exercise by buying equipment).

Those facts, and many more can be found in this semi-serious examination of what kinds of stores are especially popular in each of the 50 states.

(Semi-serious because there are obvious methodological problems.  For instance, the number of stores is only a rough indication of how many items of a particular kind are sold in a state.  You can probably think of other problems yourself, if you want to spend the time.  But the map is still fun to look at for a minute or two — and does tell us something about our states.)
- 9:07 AM, 27 February 2015   [link]


"Jihadi John" is Mohammed Emwazi.
LONDON — The world knows him as “Jihadi John,” the masked man with a British accent who has beheaded several hostages held by the Islamic State and who taunts audiences in videos circulated widely online.

But his real name, according to friends and others familiar with his case, is Mohammed Emwazi, a Briton from a well-to-do family who grew up in West London and graduated from college with a degree in computer programming.  He is believed to have traveled to Syria around 2012 and to have later joined the Islamic State, the group whose barbarity he has come to symbolize.
It would be interesting to know whether he was radicalized at the University of Westminster, where he earned his degree.  So many leaders of al Qaeda and ISIL appear to have become extremists while attending a university in the West that I hope someone will check into that possibility.

Obviously, he was not a desperate and impoverished man, when he chose to become an Islamic extremist.  It shouldn't be necessary to say that — except that the news that Islamic extremists are not necessarily desperate and poor hasn't reached everyone on the left, including some in our State Department.

(News from nowhere:  This article, and a derivative one from the BBC, read oddly, because they don't say how the news organizations learned his identity.  Both tell us that the American and British security services had figured out who he was by last September at the latest, but don't tell us why the Post decided to interview those who knew him in Britain.  Most likely there was a leak, perhaps deliberate, perhaps unintentional.)
- 3:29 PM, 26 February 2015   [link]


Who Pays Extra For Wi-Fi?  People who stay in luxury hotels.
Coffee shops, airports, public buildings and even budget hotels have all succumbed to pressure to offer Wi-Fi connections free.  One big hotel chain, Hyatt Hotels, began offering free Wi-Fi for all guests as of Valentine’s Day, calling it a “basic expectation” of travelers.

But most full-service and luxury hotels are resisting mightily, raising their fees, instituting upcharges for “high-speed” service and generally making Wi-Fi the hotel equivalent of airline baggage fees.

The add-on charges for in-room Internet service let hotels advertise a lower price and then boost per-night revenue by 5% to 10%.  (The cost can be just as much or more as getting Wi-Fi on an airplane.)
(Budget motels have been offering Wi-Fi at no extra charge for years.)

The mark-ups are extraordinary, with a few hotels charging as much as thirty dollars a day.  (The article doesn't give cost estimates for providing the service, but I doubt that the marginal cost of providing Wi-Fi could be much higher than a nickel or dime a day, per room.)

Presumably, the high-end hotels are getting away with these charges because most of their clients are not especially price sensitive.  But if you are price sensitive, beware.

(There are security considerations, too.  Everything else being equal, I would rather access the Internet from a private hotel room than a public coffee shop.)
- 7:40 AM, 26 February 2015   [link]


The Clintons And Foreign Money, Again:  Here's the Washington Post story on the latest Clinton scandal.
The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations.

The agreement, reached before Clinton’s nomination amid concerns that countries could use foundation donations to gain favor with a Clinton-led State Department, allowed governments that had previously donated money to continue making contributions at similar levels.
(How many millions?  The Post doesn't say.)

Now that she is no longer secretary of state, that agreement doesn't apply, and the foundation has been accepting all kinds of money from foreign nations.  You don't have to be a cynic to suspect that some of those nations do not have entirely pure motives.

Again?   Sure, though younger readers may not have heard about "Chinagate", as the scandal is usually called.
The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People's Republic of China to influence domestic American politics prior to and during the Clinton administration and also involved the fund-raising practices of the administration itself.

While questions regarding the U.S. Democratic Party's fund-raising activities first arose over a Los Angeles Times article published on September 21, 1996,[1]   China's alleged role in the affair first gained public attention when Bob Woodward and Brian Duffy of The Washington Post published a story stating that a United States Department of Justice investigation into the fund-raising activities had uncovered evidence that agents of China sought to direct contributions from foreign sources to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) before the 1996 presidential campaign.  The journalists wrote that intelligence information had shown the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C. was used for coordinating contributions to the DNC[2] in violation of United States law forbidding non-American citizens or non-permanent residents from giving monetary donations to United States politicians and political parties.  A Republican investigator of the controversy stated the Chinese plan targeted both presidential and congressional United States elections, while Democratic Senators said the evidence showed the Chinese targeted only congressional elections.  The Chinese government denied all accusations.
Most Republicans believe that the Chinese government traded millions in illegal campaign contributions for billions in American military technology, and influence on American foreign policy.  There is much evidence to support that unpleasant conclusion.

The Wikipedia article omits this famous quotation, from one of the intermediaries:
For all of his notoriety, history may remember Johnny Chung for having coined a phrase.   It was Chung who said, "The White House is like a subway: You have to put in coins to open the gates."  Chung ought to have known: He ponyed up hundreds of thousands of dollars to get into the White House some 50 times between February 1994 and February 1996 -- and he paid his fare, but not in coin.  Chung wrote 12 checks to the Democratic National Committee totaling $366,000 (the DNC has since returned the money); one check for $10,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; and five checks for (a total of) $10,000 to five other Democrats.
If either of the Clintons felt guilty about this exchange, it is not apparent from what they have said, publicly.  So it isn't surprising to see them doing the same thing, though more discreetly, through a charitable foundation.

There are other benefits to using a charitable foundation as an intermediary.  For example, John Hinderaker is probably right to suspect that the foundation has been used as a "slush fund" for the Clintons.

(Two technical points:  The Wikipedia article on Chinagate has varied considerably over the years because, I assume, of a struggle between pro-Clinton and anti-Clinton contributors.   At one point, the former had actually erased "Chinagate" from the article, making it harder to find.

This may seem odd, but Clinton operatives may be responsible for the Post article.   During some of the scandals while Clinton was president, they deliberately leaked damaging information that they knew was bound to come out, anyway.  They believed, correctly in my opinion, that they could limit the damage that way.)
- 6:38 AM, 26 February 2015   [link]


Archives

June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002, Part 1 and Part 2
November 2002, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
December 2002, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

January 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
February 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
March 2003, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3
April 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2003, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2004, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2004, Part 1, Part 2. Part 3, and Part 4
October 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2004, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2005, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2005, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2006, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2006, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2007, Part 1 and Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2007, Part 1 Part 2, and Part 3, and Part 4
June 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2007, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2007, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2007, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2008, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
May 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2008, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2009, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2009, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. and Part 4

January 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2010, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2010, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2010, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2011, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2012, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2012, Part 1 Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2012, Part 1, Part 2 Part 3, and Part 4
August 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3and Part 4
December 2012, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2013, , Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2013, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4
March 2014, Part 1. Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
April 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
May 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
June 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
July 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
August 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
September 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
October 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
November 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
December 2014, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

January 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
February 2015, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4
March 2015, Part 1.






Coming Soon
  • Plan 17 Conservatives
  • FDR and Waterboarding
  • How Long Do Wars Last?
  • Carbon, Carbon Dioxide, and Crescent Wrenches
  • De-Lawyering and Attorney General McKenna


Coming Eventually
  • JFK and Wiretaps
  • Green Republicans
  • The Rise and Fall and Rise of Black Voting
  • Abortion, Cleft Palates, and Europe
  • Kweisi Mfume's Children
  • Public Opinion During Other US Wars
  • Dual Loyalties
  • The Power Index
  • Baby Dancing
  • Jocks, but no Nerds
  • The Four Caliphs




Best Posts


Books


Strange Obama


The Unknown Bush


University Reform


Uncorrected Mistakes


Vote Fraud


The Gang of Four


Articles


Assignment Desk
(What's This?)


Columns


Common Mistakes
(What's This?)


Chomsky Cult Program


*new