Redstate

Posted at 10:09am on Sep. 11, 2007 Where I Was On September 11

The World Trade Center

By Dan McLaughlin

Until September 11, 2001, I worked in the World Trade Center, halfway up Tower One. I wasn't doing political blogging at the time, but was writing "the Baseball Crank" as a weekly baseball column for the online edition of the Providence (R.I.) Journal. Here's my account of that day, written for ProJo two days later while it was all still fresh. I'm bumping the date on this, which we ran here on the fifth anniversary.

On Tuesday, they tried to kill me.

I am ordinarily at my desk between 7:30 and 8:30 in the morning, in my office on the 54th floor of one of the World Trade Center's towers. Tuesday, I was running late - I stopped to vote in the primary election for mayor, an election that has now been postponed indefinitely. Thank God for petty partisan politics.

Around 20 minutes to 9, as I have done every day for the past five years, I got on the number 2/3 train heading to Park Place, an underground stop roughly a block and a half, connected underground, to the Trade Center. The train made its usual stop at Chambers Street, five blocks north of my office, where you can switch to the local 1/9 that runs directly into the Trade Center mall. The subway announcer - in a rare, audible announcement - was telling people to stay on the 2/3 because the tunnel was blocked by a train ahead of us. Then he mentioned that there had been "an explosion at the World Trade Center."

Now, I grew up in the suburbs, so maybe I'm not as street smart as I should be, but after living in the city a few years, you develop a sense of the signs of trouble (like the time there were shots fired in the next subway car from mine). I didn't know what the explosion was, maybe a gas leak or something, but I knew that I was better off getting above ground to see what was going on rather than enter the complex underground. So I got off the train to walk to work.

When I got above ground, there was a crowd gathering to see the horror above: a big hole somewhere in the top 15-20 stories of the north tower (having no sense of direction, I thought that was Number 2 at the time, not Number 1 where my office was), with flames and smoke shooting out. I quickly realized it would not be safe to go into the office, despite a number of things I had waiting for me to do, so as I heard the chatter around about there having been a plane crash into the building (onlookers were saying "a small plane" at that point) and a possible terrorist attack, I turned away to start looking for a place to get coffee and read the newspaper until I could find out what had happened. That was when it happened.

The sound was a large BANG!, the unmistakable sound of an explosion but with almost the tone of cars colliding, except much louder. My initial thought was that something had exploded out of the cavity atop the tower closer to us and gone . . . where? It was followed by a scene straight out of every bad TV movie and Japanese monster flick: simultaneously, everyone around me was screaming and running away. I didn't have time to look and see what I was running from; I just took off, hoping to get away from whatever it was, in case it was falling towards us. Nothing else can compare to the adrenaline rush of feeling the imminent presence of deadly danger. And I kept moving north.

Read On...

Posted in Featured Stories | War — Comments (43)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:56am on Jul. 23, 2007 Republican Moderates May Walk Away From Veto Threat

Big Spenders Back Democrat Appropriations Bills

By Bluey

The coalition of 147 House Republicans who signed a letter vowing to sustain President Bush's spending vetoes might be falling apart. An article in Congressional Quarterly reveals that some of the Republicans who signed the letter have voted in favor of the Democrats' budget-busting bills; meanwhile, others might try to wiggle their way out of the promise. Here's an excerpt:

“I’m boxing myself in, in a very strange way, and I have to figure it out,” said Christopher Shays of Connecticut, the only House Republican from New England to survive the 2006 election. “I’m going to re-look at the letter I signed and may have to go down to the White House and say I’m not on board.”

So far, the House has considered four fiscal 2008 spending bills that the president has threatened to veto over cost: Energy-Water (HR 2641), Homeland Security (HR 2638), Interior-Environment (HR 2643) and Labor-HHS-Education (HR 3043). Overall, 62 lawmakers who signed the pledge have voted for at least one of those bills.

Four House Republicans — Shays, Wayne T. Gilchrest of Maryland, Steven C. LaTourette of Ohio and Mike D. Rogers of Alabama — who signed the letter nonetheless have voted to pass all four bills.

Just last month I called the letter as a sign of renewed discipline on fiscal restraint, but perhaps I should have known better. We've seen this kind of behavior in the past. It's reminiscent of the promise you'll get on the campaign trail, only to find your lawmaker do the exact opposite in Congress. Let's face it, some politicians just can't get enough pork.

Complicating matters for President Bush is the fact that the Office of Management and Budget is undergoing a transition between directors. With Democrats showing no sign of confirming former Rep. Jim Nussle before the August recess, the administration isn't exactly in the best spot. That's probably part of the Democrats' plan. If they can peel off moderates like Shays (lifetime American Conservative Union rating: 41.6%), Gilchrest (61.2%) and LaTourette (72%), then Bush will be left no choice but to give in to higher spending or face a government shutdown.

Posted in Congress | Featured Stories — Comments (17)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:32am on Jul. 20, 2007 Senate Democrats Endorse Censorship

GOP fails to get votes to block Fairness Doctrine

By Bluey

A showdown over free speech in the U.S. Senate last night turned out to be a one-sided vote with only one Democrat siding with Republicans to block the return of the Fairness Doctrine. Sen. Norm Coleman (R.-Minn.) introduced the amendment to prevent the Federal Communications Commission from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

Needing 60 votes, it failed when it received the support of 49 senators, including Democrat Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana. The National Republican Senatorial Committee plans to make this is campaign issue for Senators Mark Pryor (Ark.), Joe Biden (Del.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Tom Harkin (Iowa), Mary Landrieu (La.), John Kerry (Mass.), Carl Levin (Mich.), Max Baucus (Mont.), Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Jack Reed (R.I.) and Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.).

Posted in Congress | Featured Stories — Comments (4)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 7:46pm on Jul. 17, 2007 The Tale of Two Propaganda Machines

Notice Any Similarities?

By Bluey

This morning, a "Democratic official" disclosed Harry Reid's plans for tonight's Senate debate on Iraq. The memo, as reported by Politico, gives instructions on how to use the media to force America's defeat in Iraq. Among its contents:

• Web-Based Products: “Center for American Progress will live-blog the all night session.”

• Propaganda Production: “The Steering and Outreach Committee will release a video of Iraq veterans and military families calling for a change of course in Iraq.”

• Highlighting and Encouraging Direct Action: “Outside groups will hold a 'call to action' event Tuesday night to call on Republicans to end their Iraq filibuster.” “Iraq veterans will make visits to Senate offices asking Republican Senators to allow an up or down vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment.”

• Television Products: “Senate Democrats will tape TV feeds and actualities back to their home states.”

Click here to see who is using similar tactics.

Posted in Featured Stories | War — Comments (10)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 4:18pm on Jul. 17, 2007 The Old Boys Club Is Getting Annoyed With Jim DeMint

Conservative Leader Stands Firm on Earmark Reform

By Bluey

No good deed goes unpunished in the U.S. Senate. That's the lesson Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.) is learning for taking principled stands for fiscal restraint and against amnesty. Roll Call ($) has a lengthy article today detailing the growing frustration of Senate Republican leaders with DeMint.

DeMint led a small group of Republican conservatives who successfully killed immigration reform in June and has openly dueled with Democratic leaders over earmark reform, calling them out for refusing to adopt Senate-specific earmark rule changes before going to conference on a broader ethics bill that includes them.

That willingness to sidestep his leadership on immigration last month, and his ongoing fight with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) over earmarks reforms, has begun to irritate Republican Senate elders, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Minority Whip Trent Lott (Miss.).

According to several Republicans, party leaders have made it clear to DeMint that while they may give him some running room over the next few appropriations-laden weeks, they will not tolerate what they see as repeated efforts to hijack the Senate floor and the public spotlight.

It's that latest battle with Reid over earmark reform that seems to be testing the patience of some Republicans. Even though the ethics bill in question passed 98-0 earlier this year, Reid wants to dilute the earmark rule as it pertains to the Senate. DeMint doesn't want to let him get away with it and has threatened to hold up the bill through the August recess if necessary. The fact that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) supports the earmark language and Reid voted for it isn't exactly helping their cause.

Still, DeMint seems to have annoyed some members of the Old Boys Club, who have no qualms about spending taxpayer money on earmarks, and are therefore reluctant to reform the earmarking process. Fortunately for conservatives, DeMint isn't about to give up. "This isn't a job I wanted, but I'm good at it," he told Roll Call, adding, "I'm going to continue doing what I'm doing."

Posted in Congress | Featured Stories — Comments (9)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:29am on Jul. 17, 2007 Fred Thompson Doesn't Need McCain's Castoffs

By Bluey

A week ago Michelle Malkin wrote about the possibility of John McCain's former staffers taking jobs with Fred Thompson's up-and-coming presidential campaign. At the time I didn't take it very seriously, but since then the McCain exodus has grown. Yesterday he lost his communications staff.

Matt Lewis writes at Townhall that this could be a boon for Thompson:

The real winner here may turn out to be Fred Thompson. Until recently, I was wondering where in the world he would find a staff. After all, many of the top talent had been grabbed up. Well, it turns out McCain's value may really be as a staffing and training agency for Fred Thompson.

I disagree. Any decision by Thompson to hire McCain's castoffs would send a horrible message to Thompson's legions of supporters. I suspect many of grassroots activists who are supporting Thompson's candidacy flocked to him because McCain was such a turnoff. While the candidate must bear much of the blame, McCain's staff aren't absolved from responsibility.

Thompson has already done a good job recruiting a respectable staff. If he knows what's good for him, he'll stay far away from McCain's leftovers.

Posted in 2008 | Featured Stories — Comments (10)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 11:18pm on Jul. 15, 2007 RE: ACTBlue version for Republicans?

By Bluey

The Right Roots effort was a step in the right direction, but it too was a top-down effort. The list of candidates was pre-selected by The Powers That Be.

I just want to remind Adam that Erick and I were among the gang of seven bloggers who constituted "The Powers That Be."

Posted at 7:50pm on Jul. 15, 2007 On Faith And Free Trade

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Don Boudreaux's post is a must-read.

Posted at 7:49pm on Jul. 15, 2007 Behold NewsBusters

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

It is about to become Michael Moore's worst nightmare.

Posted at 7:48pm on Jul. 15, 2007 The New Class Envy (Part Deux)

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Of course, part and parcel of the new class envy evinced by Kevin Drum in the post below is the belief that since there are so many supposedly undeserving beneficiaries of a so-called new "Gilded Age," something must be done to bring about some semblance of financial equality and economic justice. And that something, naturellement, involves raising taxes on the rich.

To make them pay their "fair share," you understand.

Thank Heavens for Greg Mankiw, who tears this meme apart:

The best source for objective data on the distribution of the tax burden is the Congressional Budget Office. The C.B.O. goes beyond anecdotes and bald assertions to provide hard data on who pays taxes. One can argue about the details of its methods, but there is no doubt that it is nonpartisan and that its tax analysts are some of the best in the business.

The C.B.O.'s most recent calculations of federal tax rates show a highly progressive system. (The numbers are based on 2004 data, but the tax code has not changed much since then.) The poorest fifth of the population, with average annual income of $15,400, pays only 4.5 percent of its income in federal taxes. The middle fifth, with income of $56,200, pays 13.9 percent. And the top fifth, with income of $207,200, pays 25.1 percent.

At the very top of the income distribution, the C.B.O. reports even higher tax rates. The richest 1 percent has average income of $1,259,700 and forks over 31.1 percent of its income to the federal government.

So the top fifth and the top 1% are responsible for over 56% of the nation's tax revenue. Never mind this sentence. I misread. My bad.

"But Warren Buffett complains that his taxes are too low," you exclaim as an argument in favor of higher taxes on the rich. Well, there is a reason for his taxes being low. Here it is.

Read on . . .

Posted in Economy | Featured Stories — Comments (59)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 7:46pm on Jul. 15, 2007 The New Class Envy

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Kevin Drum says that "it's nice to know that there are a few rich people who aren't complete a--holes, but it seems safe to say that the majority fall pretty safely into this category."

What brings about this severely tetchy writing? The following passage from this story:

The new tycoons describe a history that gives them a heroic role. The American economy, they acknowledge, did grow more rapidly on average in the decades immediately after World War II than it is growing today. Incomes rose faster than inflation for most Americans and the spread between rich and poor was much less. But the United States was far and away the dominant economy, and government played a strong supporting role. In such a world, the new tycoons argue, business leaders needed only to be good managers.

    ....That changed with the arrival of "the technological age," in [Lew] Frankfort's view. Innovation became a requirement, in addition to good management skills -- and innovation has played a role in Coach's marketing success. "To be successful," Mr. Frankfort said, "you now needed vision, lateral thinking, courage and an ability to see things, not the way they were but how they might be."

Drum responds by saying that when this kind of talk "comes from some guy who thinks he practically risked life and limb by climbing to the top of the corporate ladder and then engineering a couple of big mergers, it almost makes me want to retch. These guys wouldn't know risk if it hit them in the kneecaps with a two-by-four."

Hmmm. Is that all the story says? Let's see what it tells us about former Citigroup chairman Sanford Weill.

Read on . . .

Posted in Economy | Featured Stories — Comments (0)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 1:52am on Jul. 15, 2007 The Decline And Fall . . .

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Forgetting one's own history through sheer laziness is bad enough. Forgetting it willfully is incomprehensible:

Britain's World War II prime minister Winston Churchill has been cut from a list of key historical figures recommended for teaching in English secondary schools, a government agency says.

The radical overhaul of the school curriculum for 11- to 14-year-olds is designed to bring secondary education up to date and allow teachers more flexibility in the subjects they teach, the Government said.

But although Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Joseph Stalin and Martin Luther King have also been dropped from the detailed guidance accompanying the curriculum, Sir Winston's exclusion is likely to leave traditionalists aghast.

A spokesman for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority said the new curriculum, to be taught from September 2008, does not prescribe to teachers what they must include.

But he added: "Teachers know that they need to mention these pivotal figures. They don't need to be instructed by law to mention them in every history class.

"Of course, good teachers will be teaching the history of Churchill as part of the history of Britain. The two are indivisible."

Sir Winston's grandson Nicholas Soames, also a Conservative Member of Parliament, described the move as "madness."

"It is absurd. I expect he wasn't New Labour enough for them ... this is a Government that is very careless of British history and always has been.

"The teaching of history is incredibly important," he added.

"If you're surprised that people do not seem to care that much about the country in which they live, the reason is that they don't know much about it."

One is, of course, aware that Churchill had to fight to make himself heard and credible in life when people thought that he was a know-nothing, washed-up loser. Apparently, despite the awesome legacy he left behind and the special and glorious place he carved out for himself in the remembrance of humankind, he is nevertheless obliged to fight to make himself heard and credible again--and this time, from beyond the grave.

A sense of sanguinity in reaction to this astonishing news is partially restored with the hope that Churchill's legacy will allow him--even from the Great Beyond--to place himself anew at the forefront of the thoughts of his compatriots. It's a pity though that this should have ever been necessary in the first place.

Posted in Featured Stories | Foreign Affairs — Comments (22)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 1:51am on Jul. 15, 2007 The Need For Tax Reform (Again)

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

I have harped many a time on the need for the United States to adopt an alternative tax system so as to bring innovation to our revenue-collection structure and to help ensure the vitality of our economy through it.

Of course, tax reform should reach further than changing the tax payment system for individuals. As it turns out, while the rest of the world is marching ahead with constructive reform and innovation, our corporate tax system remains antiquated.

Posted at 1:50am on Jul. 15, 2007 Circumstances Force Jane Galt To State The Obvious

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

And so, she does.