The Political-Environmental Complex

Not quite as catchy as the military-industrial complex, but no less real:

Some of the biggest immediate beneficiaries of the green revolution, ironically, may have been politicians themselves. Executives of the top 50 recipients of the government’s green-energy aid have donated more than $2 million to federal campaigns since Obama took office. Some of the biggest recipients of green stimulus money—including NRG Energy and Consolidated Edison—made six-figure donations to candidates and interest groups. The industry as a whole has ponied up more than $5 million from its executives and political action committees, a notable increase from a formerly quiet sector. Democrats have been the main beneficiaries of clean-energy money. But Republicans have tapped their allies in the fossil-fuel industries—Exxon Mobil and Koch Industries have been the biggest donors, and overwhelmingly to Republicans—for more than $20 million in donations since Obama took office.

The clean-energy agenda quickly took on the trappings of the money-for-access game endemic to Washington. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, a chief backer of Obama’s agenda, hosted a roundtable in Washington in June 2009 with a dozen major clean-energy executives eager to build projects in his home state of Nevada. Within a year, at least eight executives from those companies donated to Reid’s reelection campaign. Reid’s office declined to comment.

Read the rest.  You know things are getting tough for Obama and the Democrats when even Eleanor Clift writes an unflattering article about them.

Morning Report, September 24th: Finding the Right College, Recession and Racial Integration, The Missing Index, Faith at Harvard, Terrorism Central, Suing the Truth-Exposers, Mamas and (Bad) Papas, Palinasia, Hollywood Morality and Cracking the Nut of Iran

One Christian’s perspective on the day’s news:

1.  For those who are guiding children toward college, or interested in the best way to do so, Thomas Sowell has a nice article with some direction on how to find the right college.  The rankings one finds in a place like US News and World Report are not meaningless, but they have very little to do with the quality of the experience the student will have.  I should add, however, that college is largely what one makes of it.  Approached rightly, I believe that almost any student can be happy at almost any institution, if s/he develops the right relationships, maintains the right attitudes and pursues the right things.  For all the focus on finding the right college, there should be more attention to how one makes the college the right college through the actions one takes once there.

2.  RECESSION AND RACIAL INTEGRATION.  Along these same lines, Christianity Today has an interesting account of how the financial pressures of the recession have led black and white churches to integrate and worship together.  Ours is a God who makes good things out of evil, or what the world calls evil.

3.  THE MISSING INDEX.  With the emergence of the Baucus plan, we’re no longer dealing with multiple possible bills and all the confusion that brings.  The Baucus plan represents the Democratic game plan right now.  So it’s gaining more and more scrutiny.  Dick Morris, who is apparently no fan, details (some of) the costs of the Baucus plan for non-rich Americans.  He claims that the uninsured will only receive subsidies for insurance coverage after they have paid 20% of their income.  Of course, Dick Morris could be mistaken, so I will wait for confirmation on that.

What is interesting to me, however, is the 35% tax on “gold-plated” health insurance policies ($8000 for individuals), which is intended to help pay for the subsidies that will be given to the poor.  So  imagine that an individual receives an insurance policy worth $10K.  The insurance provider will then be taxed $3500.  The profit margin in the health insurance business is exceedingly small.  A study in 2003 showed that 70% of insurance providers either had a negative profit margin or one underneath 5%.  Average returns recently have been about 3%, making health insurance less profitable (by margin) than 85 other industries.  So there’s no way the insurer can simply eat the 35% increase in cost.  Naturally, then, the provider will pass that cost along.  Those who paid $10K for their own insurance will now pay $13.5K; those who receive insurance through their employers may find their plans dropped (sending them into the government plan, if there is one) or lowered in quality in order to fall beneath the trigger point.

The Democrats (and of course the Republicans, though they’re not the ones in charge right now, so the Democrats get to enjoy the burden of leadership here) do not want to tax everyone.  So this is a way of taxing individuals indirectly, by taxing those who provide them services with very little profit, knowing full well the cost will be passed along.  But it won’t seem like a tax, since the cost is coming from those evil insurance providers (further cultivating animosity between patients and insurance providers…sending more into the arms of the government?).

But what’s interesting to me is that the “trigger” of $8K for individuals (something like $21K for families) is not indexed to inflation (not to mention, as Morris notes, medical inflation, which has been twice the ordinary inflation rate).  Indexing to inflation would be an obvious thing to do, so someone must have decided not to do so.  According to estimates, 10% of Americans presently have health insurance policies that fall into this category.  Many of them are not rich; many belong to unions that have used their bargaining power for Cadillac insurance plans.  Bear in mind that the reformed system would not “begin” until 2013, by which time 15% or 20% of Americans may reach that trigger.

There are two reasons why Democrats may not want to index the trigger to inflation.  First, of course, is if they intend to spread the burden beyond the 10% over time.  You pass the bill when only 10% would qualify, minimizing the push-back from voters, but by the time the plan is enacted its costs fall on more.  The other reason is if the politicians want the power, as they currently enjoy with the Alternative Minimum Tax, that comes with annually patching the problem.

But who knows?  The Baucus plan may change in dramatic ways.  Pelosi is trying to liberalize it.

4.  OBAMA TIRED OF PAYING FOR YOUR OIL.  Barack Obama wants to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, at least if he can get everyone around the world to do it in conjunction (so there are no competitive disadvantages posed to any one country’s businesses), which seems reasonable to me.  Also, this piece at The New Republic makes the strong point that “the one way” Barack Obama can bring his term back to success is by improving the economy and in particular unemployment.  I have not bought into the argument many have made that Obama’s administration is in mortal peril.  But I think this is roughly correct; the complicating factor is, the economy will eventually turn around, and will almost certainly do so before 2012.  Assessing the extent to which Obama deserves credit for that will prove a complicated matter.

Another move from the Obama White House that deserves notice: they’ve decided that Bush was right about the power of the executive to detain terrorists as combatants indefinitely without trial, based on the war powers already given the President by Congress.  This doesn’t bother me, but we should learn a lesson: some things are easy to castigate when the other party is in power, but look different once you’re in the Oval Office and you’re responsible for keeping America safe from homicidal maniacs.

5.  LIFE OF FAITH AT HARVARD.  Today I met with some great young men from Harvard’s Ichthus journal, and the Evangelical Portal will be developing a relationship with them (and hopefully with some of its sister journals at other schools).  I’m quite impressed with the quality of their material — even at their blog.  Here is a very nice reflection on the “abundant life” found in Christ:

It was Nietzsche who said it first, but it’s a common thought—Christianity is nihilistic. People may not express themselves in so many words, but who hasn’t heard the argument that Christians are prudish, repressed, reactionary, life-denying—life-hating? That Christians want to stamp out natural loves and pleasures? That Christians are so fixated on their pie-in-the-sky, ethereal heaven that they completely lose sight of life on earth?

Read the rest here.

6.  TERRORISM CENTRAL.  A lot of terrorism-related news all at once.  The terror arrests in Queens and Denver — leading to warnings on rail safety.  A new video from Ayman al-Zawahiri.  The terror probe expandsWarnings also for stadiums, hotels and transit, and travel to Germany.  All coincidence that these things are coming together?  Apparently the video of bin Laden’s lieutenant, which was probably intended to be released on 9/11, may have been delayed for a few weeks by jamming the web sites that distribute these things.  Was that to throw off an intended attack?  To prevent it long enough to give us time to make the arrests?  And was the message a sort of “trigger” intended to rouse a sleeper cell to action?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Just the discovery of what appears to be an active al Qaeda cell within the United States is disturbing enough:

The terror probe that burst into the spotlight in New York last week may have led authorities to the first active al Qaeda cell uncovered inside the U.S. since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to officials familiar with the matter.Current and former U.S. officials say the allegations in the case embody their worst fears — that a legal U.S. resident could quietly leave the country, receive explosives training from al Qaeda in a lawless region of Pakistan, then return to U.S. soil.

7.  TURNING YOUR BACK ON MADNESS.  Congratulations to the UN delegates who walked out on Ahmadinejad.  And I’ve got to say that I’m enjoying this new tone from Obama:

UNITED NATIONS – President Barack Obama challenged world leaders Wednesday to shoulder more of the globe’s critical burdens, promising a newly cooperative partner in America but sternly warning they can no longer castigate the U.S. as a go-it-alone bully while still demanding it cure all ills.

“Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world’s problems alone,” said Obama in put-up-or-shut-up comments before a packed U.N. General Assembly hall. “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”

In his first appearance before the group, Obama promised the U.S. would reach out in “a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect,” but he also wagged a rhetorical finger at leaders who spend much of their time at international gatherings excoriating the U.S. He said “an almost reflexive anti-Americanism” that swept the globe under the administration of his predecessor, George W. Bush, is not “an excuse for collective inaction.”

“Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions,” he said.

You mean, the US isn’t responsible for all the evils in the world?  And you mean that other countries would rather sit back and let us address the world’s gravest problems, and then criticize us for doing it wrong?  Hmm.

8.  SUING WHISTLE-BLOWERS.  ACORN sues the filmmakers James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles for the recorded conversation in the Baltimore ACORN office.  It may be the case that Maryland law allows ACORN to sue them, while other state laws do not.  Which is not to say that ACORN will win the case; that seems unlikely.  They may be testing the waters to see whether Andrew Breitbart, whose media organization has rather sheltered and cultivated the filmmakers, will offer to settle out of court.  One has to suppose that ACORN would not want this to go to court, since the discovery process could be incredibly damaging to them.  Or it may be more of a PR move intended to portray themselves as victims, and later, when the lights of public attention have faded, ACORN will withdraw the suit.  You can read the story of the background of the video here.  Conservatives have long felt that ACORN, and in particular its electoral arms, are more extensions of the Democratic party than independent entities, and have shielded illegal activities under the banner of noble intentions and community service.

I’m not a fan of this kind of journalism, whether it’s done on the Right or the Left, and whether it’s high-end material like Michael Moore or low-end material like O’Keefe and Giles.  We need more media products that examine issues from every angle, not polemicizing from one angle, mocking the opposition, showing them in the worst possible light, or in their worst moment.

9.  MAKING THE BAND.  Children wearing different colored bands that denote the different kinds of sexual favors they must bestow if their bands are snapped?  Apparently.  Read about the callous disregard of the store owner who sells these items.

10.  THE BAD PAPA OF THE MAMAS AND THE PAPAS.  Mackenzie Phillips, daughter of John Phillips, musician for the Mamas and the Papas, tells about how her father raped her when she was 19, on the night before her wedding.  He taught her to roll a joint at 10, and introduced her to heroin at a very young age.  They carried on an incestuous affair for 10 years.  But, she says: “My father was not a bad man. He was kind of a testament to what drugs and alcohol – in huge quantities – can do to a person’s priorities. Their motives.  I don’t hate him. I understand that he was a very tortured man, and he sort of passed that torture down to me.”  Ugh.  Those 60′s peace musicians were so enlightened, weren’t they?

11.  A NEW LEAF?  Not a link here, but just a note: I greatly appreciated the different tone Obama seemed to offer on the talk shows on Sunday.  I thought he was much more conciliatory, much more willing (following his own advice) to avoid attacking the motives of those who disagreed with him.  That’s what I was hoping to see in the speech he gave before Congress.

12.  COMPETING POLLS.  Some time ago I noted that a majority of physicians seemed to be in favor of health care reform along the lines proposed by Obama and Democrats.  Now another poll appears that suggests the opposite.  Hmm.

13.  SCHOOL PROPAGANDA?  Does this high school quiz seem propagandistic to you?  Before you decide, read the full story here.  It does seem to encourage students to assume that President Obama is telling the unvarnished truth, and doesn’t encourage a critical attitude or assessment.  But I don’t recall many instances in my own education (granted, I did independent study during my high school years because of my gymnastics career) when I was encouraged to view a President’s claims with skepticism.  It doesn’t sound as though the teacher, however, allowed a critical discussion, so that seems wrong to me, if the account is correct.  On the other hand, I have no idea what to make of this video.  The commenters take it too far when they warn of moving toward fascistic indoctrination.  But it is worrisome.  If it doesn’t bother you, ask yourself whether you’d mind if such a song were sung to President Bush in his first year, or after 9/11?

One of my fundamental precepts, however, is that people are more or less the same (profound, I know), and that includes Democrats and Republicans.  Not necessarily the same in their principles, but in their neuroses, their weaknesses, their faults.  There was a tendency after 9/11 to glorify Bush as the leader chosen by God for such a time as this.  Yet I don’t recall quite the same tendency to leader-worship as one finds with Obama.  In some ways that’s understandable; Obama is the first African-American President, so he accomplished something historic simply by being elected.  He speaks in the loftiest of rhetoric, at least on occasion, and inspires many people.  In office, however, Obama should be held to the same critical standard as all politicians, and we should expect him to stumble in much the same way other politicians do.

14.  PALINASIA.  Sarah Palin gave her speech in Asia, and reviews varied from those who thought it was “brilliant” to those who walked out (American delegates who were presumably against her to start with).  And again it always fascinates me to read the comments from the enlightened on websites like Swampland.  My favorite is cfukara, who suggests that Palin only got her degree by giving sexual favors to her professors.  Granted, Palin does not have the preferred ideology of the intellectual elite, and she performed poorly in some early interviews on national policy issues, but she’s accomplished, with no help from her husband or a big-name patron, a great deal more than 99% of the population.  She may not be a genius, and I think she’s wrong on certain issues, but she’s clearly an intelligent woman, competent, courageous, ambitious, and hard-working.  The loathing on the Left for Palin continues to amaze.  My suggestion: like Bush Derangement Syndrome, and the Obama version, let’s call this Palinasia.  And speaking of Palin, this Democratic operative has an interested prediction, if current trajectories hold, for Palin “with her arms raised in triumph on Election Day 2010.”

15.  LANDSCAPE ASSESSOR.  Information on the political landscape, from Byron York:

It’s also far smaller than the massive 19-point lead Democrats held over Republicans in June 2008. So in less than a year and a half, the Democratic margin has fallen from 19 points to 3. (The last time the Democratic lead was so slim was five years ago, in October 2004. The last time Republicans held the lead in the Congressional question was October 2002.)

16.  WONDERFUL HOLLYWOOD.  Yet another television show (“Cougar Town“) with no moral compass.

17.  COLUMN OF THE DAY.  Thomas Friedman on the hopes of cracking Iran with threats of biting sanctions and military action.

Daily Report, September 18th: Old Testament Wisdom, Run for the Border, Machiavelli in Massachusetts, Worst Dad of the Year Award, Thanking Mahmoud, and Spying on the Spies

1.  THE FIRST TESTAMENT.  If you’re interested in better understanding the Old Testament, that strange collection of books and poems and prophecies, filled with stories of wily characters like Jacob, swift-running old men like Elijah and whip-smart women like Esther, then you should be interested in John Goldingay’s three-volume series, a “truly magnum magnum opus.”  The final volume is soon to be released; you can find excerpts here (some good stuff there), and a collection of the rave reviews.  I particularly like the latter link; editors and publishers send books out to be reviewed by famous people, and those famous people supply “blurbs” with words of praise.  But only very small snippets of the reviews can be included in the blurbs, so in this case (the second link above) the editor shares at greater length the glowing reviews for this extraordinary work.  Here is one selection:

In the First Testament and in twenty-first century Western spirituality, the image of life as a journey is prominent, but the image has quite different significance in the two contexts. Western spirituality emphasizes that each of us is on our individual journey. Further, the journey is largely one we are undertaking inside our heads (our hearts or spirits, we may prefer to say). The emphasis of First Testament spirituality (taken up by the New Testament) is that Yhwh has laid out a moral path or track before Israel within whose parameters we are all to walk. This walk does involve the mind or heart or spirit, but it more obviously involves the feet (and hands and mouth), because a walk is something visible and outward. Letting our thinking develop in ways that are authentic to us is not enough, though it is also not enough to be outwardly walking Yhwh’s way but inwardly or privately worshiping other gods or plotting trouble for people. The question is whether we are letting our lives develop in ways that correspond to where Yhwh points. What counts is not the distinctive journey that I make as an individual, finding out who I am and making my distinctive personal contribution to the achievement of Yhwh’s purpose; indeed, looking for my own way is likely to mean finding it is the way to death rather than the way to life (Prov 14:12; 16:2, 9, 25; 21:2; Is 66:3; Jer 21:8). What counts is whether I am walking in Yhwh’s way with other people who are also committed to that way. We walk after or follow Yhwh like an army following its king as it advances to battle and/or follows the standards with the divine symbols that symbolize the divine presence.

You can see the first (“Israel’s Gospel”) and second (“Israel’s Faith”) volumes at Amazon.  The third volume is scheduled for November, and it is subtitled “Israel’s Life.”

2.  RUN FOR THE BORDER.  While President Obama says that the reformed health care insurance should not cover those who are here illegally, he also told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute that this is all the more reason to legalize them (video here).  Also, the new health insurance regime will cover all of those who are here legally, whether or not they are citizens.  I agree with the first point; we do need to find some way to bring those who are here illegally into the system so that they can both contribute to and receive from our social programs.  As mentioned in earlier posts, the flow of illegal immigration has slowed recently, but I suspect that a large portion of the population is not going to be happy to give legal status or social services until they are confident that we have got control over our borders.  A not-insignificant amount of people are understandably upset about the effects of illegal immigration on their local labor markets, about the added strain on our social safety nets and state budgets, and about the perception that politicians on both sides of the aisle are more than happy to turn a blind eye to illegal immigration as long as it helps them politically.  We can allow many, many people from Mexico and South America to enter America legally and become citizens in full even as we strive to control our border.  These are not mutually exclusive.

3.  WHITHER PRINCIPLES?  The Massachusetts House of Representatives gave preliminary approval (one more vote is required) to a bill that would allow Governor Deval Patrick to appoint a successor to the senatorial seat of Ted Kennedy.  After it has passed the House, it will head to the Senate.  In the one-party-rule of Massachusetts, there is really no question whether this power will be granted.  There is only a question of what they will get in return from national figures, like President Obama himself, who are counting on them to do it.  I’m guessing Obama and other national Democratic celebrities will be spending a little more time in Massachusetts next year campaigning for candidates for the midterms.

Machiavelli is alive and well in Massachusetts

Machiavelli is alive and well in Massachusetts

What’s more entertaining still is hearing the Massachusetts politicians trying to portray their action as something principled.  After all, it was only five years ago that Democrats passed a bill taking this exact same power away from the Governor because they were afraid Mitt Romney would appoint a Republican to Senator Kerry’s seat if the latter were elected President.  There is no principle here, but a very specific purpose: putting a 60th Democrat in the Senate in order to be able to overcome a Republican filibuster on health care.  They can’t wait the five months until the special election is held, because they can’t let the health care issue (even though the non-tax aspects of the bill would not take effect until 2013) languish and continue to suffer attack after attack.

We all know this is simply an act of political opportunism.  I just wish they would admit it.  The tactic so far (Robert DeLeo, Speaker of the House, employs this tactic in the article cited) has been to say: We just want to make sure that Massachusetts has a voice on health care and other issues.  Yeah.  This has nothing to do with the fact that they’re Democrats, by the way; the Republicans would do the same thing in the analogous situation.  It just speaks to the absence of principle in our political sphere.

4.  LEFT/RIGHT, OR BLACK/WHITE?  The debate continues over whether the fierce opposition we have seen at tea party protests and health-care town halls is racially motivated.  Of course there are racists and morons on both sides of the aisle.  But I don’t see racism at the heart of this opposition.  The anger toward Reid, Pelosi and people like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd is just as intense, if not more intense, than the anger toward President Obama.  Obama still has a higher support rating amongst whites than John Kerry did in the 2004 election.

I will have a column on this shortly.

5.  WORST DAD OF THE YEAR AWARD goes to Jose Alfredo Ajpacaja-Ajiatraz, who punished his daughter (for stealing, though it doesn’t matter) first by beating her and then by shaving her hair off.  At least, the daughter says that he beat her.  He denies it.  But the fact that he shaved her head…well, let’s just say it lends credence to the claim that he’s enough of a jerk to beat his daughter.

6.  GREEN CONDOMS.  According to the medical journal called The Lancet, there are 200 million women around the world who want contraceptives but do not have access to them — and this results in 75 million unintended pregnancies per year.  There are two separate issues when it comes to contraceptives: promoting contraceptives for children and young adults who are having sex, and promoting contraceptives for married couples who cannot afford them.  I understand why most Christians have mixed feelings about the first: on the one hand you hope that a child will use a condom if he/she does have sex, but on the other hand you worry about promoting a culture of promiscuity.  However, even those who object to giving condoms to children — unless they are persuaded by the Catholic argument against contraception — should be all in favor of promoting condoms for married women who cannot afford contraception — and should expect that this will result in fewer abortions, and will slow out-of-control population growth in developing countries.

7.  PARANOIA TIME.  A watch that used GPS technology to show you where your child is, within 10 feet.  Wise security in an unsafe time?  Or the paranoia of helicopter parents?  You decide.  As one commenter notes, however, this could be great for those who have parents with Alzheimer’s.  What other uses might there be?  The watch can be programmed to send you a message if your child strays out of a particular area, and it tells you if it’s been taken off.  A way to make sure your kid goesn’t go to Makeout Point?

Morda Helol in all his glory

Morda Helol in all his glory

8.  JEDI FRIGHT.  Morda Helol, known to non-Jedi as Daniel Jones, was recently expelled from a Tesco store in Wales when he would not remove his Jedi hood.

“I told them it was a requirement of my religion but they just sniggered and ordered me to leave,” he said.  “I walked past a Muslim lady in a veil. Surely the same rules should apply to everyone.”  The handbook of the UK Jedi Church, founded by film nut Daniel last year, states: “Jedis must wear a hood up in any public place of a large audience.”  But a Tesco spokesman countered that Obi-Wan, Luke and Yoda all went about hoodless “without going to the Dark Side.”

Daniel added: “I’ll advise worshippers to boycott Tesco if it happens again. They will feel the Force.”

Religious persecution.  Pure and simple.

9.  BIPOLAR POLICY.  The Poles and Czechs feel betrayed, as though they’ve been sold out in order to appease Russia.  Suddenly they’re not sure whether we will protect them from Russian domination.  I don’t blame them.  We’ve done a great deal to draw the former Soviet States into the twenty-first century as capitalist democracies, and they’ve done reasonably well.  Given what I know right now, I’m not in favor of the deal/plan Obama has made.  It’s never a good sign when Vladimir Putin is leading the applause.  But I’m holding out hope that we will indeed form another strategic partnership with them, and will indeed strengthen our missile defenses.  That requires me to trust Obama, which I’m finding it increasingly difficult to do.  But I’m trying.  As Politico reports, even Democrats are asking: what exactly are we getting in return from Russia?  Obama better have an answer — and a good one.

10.  IS THE ONE’S FOREIGN POLICY WORKING?  Iran promises that Israel will not last much longer.  Blazing words for a country that’s under extreme pressure for developing nuclear weaponry.  I don’t so much mind when he dismisses the Holocaust as a lie.  Anyone who has not been raised under the mental domination of a psycho-theocratic regime knows that is false, and anyone who is in such a regime will believe it anyway.  I mind that Ahmadinejad continues to provoke us, throw out deals back in our faces and tell us that he intends to destroy Israel — and we refuse to believe him and continue to think that he’ll be reasonable and friendly if we’re just nice enough to him.  I don’t think it works that way.  Obama needs something to show for his foreign policy changes, and he needs it soon.  He’s quickly losing credibility and quickly coming to look like a weak-willed appeaser.  He needs to show me that this can work, because so far I’m not seeing it.

Oddly, Joe Klein thanks Ahmadinejad for having enlightened ancestors such as Cyrus, king of Persia who allowed the Israelites to return home (mentioned in Isaiah among other places.  I see no connection between Cyrus and Ahmadinejad.

11.  JOURNALISTIC INTEGRITY.  Time has done something of a hit job on Glenn Beck, using for its cover a year-old picture from Jill Greenberg, who admits that she intentionally made him look back.  Greenberg is the one who intentionally made John McCain look bad for The Atlantic (so much that they refused to pay her once they learned the truth).  She is spiteful and childish.  I’m not a Glenn Beck fan, but he makes a good point that it’s rather hypocritical to criticize Beck for trading on people’s fears when that’s precisely what magazines like Time do with all their stories of impending disasters.  The Right cultivates and trades on fears of the Left, and the Left does the same of the right.  It’s a rotten game.

12.  BIG GOVERNMENT: BIG MISTAKE?  A cogent explanation of the argument against big government.

13.  PRIVATE EYES.  The ACLU defends its decision to follow CIA agents to their homes, take photos of them, and share them with alleged terrorists in Gitmo.  I guess they only believe in privacy in certain situations.

14.  FIGURE OF SPEECH.  The Big Speech doesn’t seem to have turned the tide.  Disapproval of Obama’s reform has not reached it’s highest point, at 56 to 43 percent.  Obama will appear in five televised interviews this Sunday.  Will All Obama, All the Time get the bill passed?  Branding opponents as racist nuts doesn’t seem likely to work, either.  Where is the elevated, deliberate discourse we need?  Can the church provide it?  More information that is missing or twisted in the debate.

15.  TODAY’S TWO-SIDES.  A twofer.

First, from the Left, Kai Wright claims that Jimmy Carter was correct that race underlies the Obama opposition.  Eugene Robinson concurs.  From the Right, David Brooks says no, it’s not about race.  And Jonah Goldberg condemns the use of this “tackle box full of race bait.”  This is an important issue.  Read them all.

Second, from the Right, David Kramer at WashPo argues that placating Russia won’t work.  Robert Farley, however, calls it “a victory for a sane foreign policy.”

16.  Finally, COLUMN(S) OF THE DAY.  Since today’s Friday, I’ll give one for the Righties and one for the Lefties.  For the Righties, Charles Krauthammer on the question of whether Obama lies.  For the Lefties, David Gibson arguing that the Left has closed the ‘God God.’

I will not be posting a Report tomorrow.  Have a good weekend!

Surfing in the Presence of God

We’ve got an excellent new article up at the Evangelical Portal at Patheos.  A California surfer reflects on encountering God in the water, and the need to preserve God’s creation for the witness it gives.

It begins:

As a surfer, some of the most profoundly connective experiences I have had to God have come in the water. For me, the best time to surf is at sunset, often referred to as an “evening glass-off” session in southern California. At sunset during the late summer months, the wind is calmed and the surface of the water is stilled. The waves turn glassy, and as the sun drops beneath the horizon line of the ocean, the water turns mercurial in nature.

Read the rest.

Morning Report, September 3rd: "Trigger" to a Snowe Job, Another Palin-Bashing Party, the Best Military Reporter Ever?, Giving the Finger to Opponents, First Lady from Venus, and the Rove-Daschle Clash of '09

One Christian’s perspective on the day’s news.

1.  BIGGEST NEWS ITEM OF THE DAY: Happy Birthday to my beloved Joyce.

2.  FORECASTING SNOWE.  The health care reform saga takes another turn, or at least another trial balloon is being floated.  Talk emerges from the White House that the Obama camp and Olympia Snowe, Republican of Maine, are working on a compromise in which a government option is realized only if other reforms amongst private insurers fail to meet certain targets.  The idea is ostensibly this.  If costs can be made sufficiently low through free-market mechanisms, then wonderful.  If they cannot, if costs are still too high after a certain amount of time has elapsed, then this “triggers” the institution of a government option.

In theory, this is an excellent idea, and something I (and many others, of course) have advocated as a reasonable compromise.  I like the way it asks both parties to be true to their convictions.  Both parties want lowered costs, and, therefore, more accessible coverage for the poor.  If Democrats are truly interested only in increasing choices and competition and lowering costs (i.e., if they do not mean this as a first step toward the socialization of health care), then they should be satisfied if those goals can be met through private market means.  If Republicans are truly convinced that free market mechanisms are sufficient to lower costs and make coverage more accessible, then they should accept a test of this sort.

The devil is in the details.  Conservatives do believe that free market mechanisms are sufficient to lower costs, but the health-care market, even today, is not a free market.  It is radically regulated and constrained by the state, and will only become moreso under the new reform bills.  It is not only a question, given current rates, of whether private insurers can provide a reasonably reduced rate; it is a question of whether private insurers can do so with the added constraints and requirements and regulation entailed in the rest of the health-care reform bill.  Let’s imagine that the average low-cost insurance plan today costs X.  It may seem reasonable under present circumstances to ask private insurers to develop plans that cost 0.8X.  Yet present circumstances will change under the new regime, in ways that no one presently can understand in full.  The free market of private insurers might be able to do it (look at some promising new approaches here).  But they might not, through no fault of their own.

Essentially: the absence of a government option does not a free market make, and absent a truly free market it may prove impossible for private insurers to offer plans at sufficiently low rates.  Thus this would not constitute a true “test” of whether the free market is sufficient when it comes to health care, because the market will remain unfree even if the government option is removed.  Also, if one is concerned about the government gaming the system in order to institute a government plan, it is not sufficient to agree upon a target rate and establish a non-partisan arbiter to determine whether the target has been met.  This is because the government, by altering a single regulation or requirement or mandate, can force insurance companies over the target.  It is partly a question of good faith, then, and neither party presently is inclined to trust in the good faith of the other.

If the signals coming out of the White House are confusing, perhaps it’s because they’re confused.  Ezra Klein reports on divisions within the White House on where to go with health-care reform.

3.  Regular readers of this blog will know that I have mixed feelings regarding Sarah Palin, but that I cannot stand the way in which the mainstream media has abandoned all journalistic standards in its quest to mock and vilify her.  Now comes another hit piece from Vanity Fair, excerpts of which can be found here.  The piece is based entirely on the say-so of Levi Johnston, formerly the boyfriend of Bristol Palin, Sarah’s eldest daughter.  Since when have daughter’s ex-boyfriends become reliable sources?  Yet no attempt is made to verify Johnston’s claims, nor even to compare the present claims with previous ones (which they blatantly contradict).

Picture from www.michaelyon-online.com

Picture from www.michaelyon-online.com

4.  By far the best reporter on the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts has not been employed by any of the major news organizations.  He is rather a citizen-reporter, funded by those who contribute through his website because they value what he offers.  His name is Michael Yon, and if you have never read his material, you are in for a treat.  Ed Morrisey of Hot Air interviews Michael Yon by phone, and it’s worth hearing.  Check it out.

5.  In the midst of this contentious health-care reform debate, surely many on one side have given the finger to many on the other.  This is the only case of which I know, however, in which a man on one side took the finger of a man on the other side.  At a MoveOn.org rally, a supporter of Obama’s proposed reforms was “walking through” (just walking through?) the anti-reform group when an “altercation” began.  Who knows how the fight started, or who was at fault; probably both.  What we do know is that the pro-Obamacare fellow bit off the little finger of a 65 year old man who was protesting against Obama’s reform.  The older man picked up his finger and walked to a nearby hospital for treatment.

6.  Just as liberals feared that Bush would turn the country into a theocratic totalitarianism, conservatives fear that Obama will turn the country into a fascist totalitarian state.  Let me just say: not likely.  Sigh.

7.  A vile commercial, exploiting the 9/11 tragedy, for a pro-environment group.  It’s safe for work; it’s just morally obtuse and in unbelievably bad taste.

YouTube Preview Image

I’m not opposed to showing the planes crashing into the towers (this is an animation, obviously), if the purpose is to remind Americans of the men, women and children who were slain on that day.  I do mind if it is cynically exploited, not to mention minimized, for other purposes, even if those purposes in themselves are worthwhile.  Also, what happened on 9/11 was not a “tragedy” on a par with environmental disasters.  Speaking of it as a tragedy or disaster removes the agency involved.  It was a murderous act, an attack–and, like the killing of Archduke Ferdinand, its detrimental consequences cannot be measured, much less compared to natural disasters, in terms of the number of lives lost.

8.  Tim Pawlenty clearly intends to run for the Republican nomination for President.  Yet does he have the charisma and the keen intelligence that will be required to defeat Obama.  Call me skeptical.

9.  Nine out of ten Americans say the country is still in a recession.  Why is this news?  Got me.

10.  Apparently Japan’s rising First Lady was abducted by aliens and taken to Venus.  Some might see this as a negative, but I say good for her.  We could use a little interplanetary perspective right now.  And why couldn’t the aliens have taken her to Uranus?  The jokes would practically write themselves.  She also claims to have met a previous incarnation of Tom Cruise in a previous life.  I wonder if his thetan count, or midichlorian count or whatever it is, was as high back then as it is now.  Anyway, we can all rejoice that we will have a more entertaining First Lady of Japan than we have in quite some time.

11.  International rumblings.  Remember, Obama’s deadline for Iran’s response to his overtures is in a few days.  And the V-word is, inevitably, spoken: Afghanistan, says one author, is looking like Vietnam.  For a countervailing opinion, two highly respected Washington journalists explain why Afghanistan is not Vietnam.

12.  Column of the Day: the award goes to Michael Barone, who explains that the “facts on the ground” with regard to immigration, and underlying the immigration reform debate, have changed.  The most salient fact to change: there is no longer a flood of immigrants.  Barone gets the prize for turning out attention to a new topic (anyone else feeling health-care burnout?) but also for reexamining old positions in light of new facts.

13.  Today’s Two-Sides comes from two major political players.  Karl Rove, writing (obviously) for the Right, contends that Obama is selling a more radical health-care reform than America really needs.  Tom Daschle, writing (obviously) from the Left, and (it should be noted) in the employ interested parties, provides a different perspective.