Freedom Flame Burns in Iran

Iran has been ripe for revolution for a few years now. The chimes of freedom should have rung six-months ago after the election was rigged giving Ahmedinejad the "win" over the peoples choice Mousavi.

The subsequent uprising needed only the support of the United States and Obama voted "present" instead of giving his support. People died and one in particular will be the heroine of the revolt when it's all said and done:

Neda Soltan was not political. She did not vote in the Iranian presidential election on June 12. The young student was appalled, however, by the way that the regime shamelessly rigged the result and reinstalled Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ignoring the pleas of her family, she went with her music teacher eight days later to join a huge opposition demonstration in Tehran.

“Even if a bullet goes through my heart it’s not important,” she told Caspian Makan, her fiancé. “What we’re fighting for is more important. When it comes to taking our stolen rights back we should not hesitate. Everyone is responsible. Each person leaves a footprint in this world.”

Ms Soltan, 26, had no idea just how big a footprint she would leave. Hours after leaving home, she was indeed shot, by a government militiaman, as she and other demonstrators chanted: “Death to the dictator.”

As an aside, note that Time's Person of the Year was Ben Bernanke while the Times (UK) chose Soltan. Telling indeed.

Anyway, the violence has flared up again and this time the results may be different. This is a continuation of the earlier protests but took on more fervor in wake of the death of Grand Ayatollah Montazeri who ran afoul of Ayatollah Khomeini but believed in a more relaxed theocracy than does the current leadership.

Things are getting bad as this video allegedly shows a child killed in the battles against regime forces:



This one shows the citizens beating said forces back:



The power of the digital world is on full display in this conflict as the ayatollahs have been trying to tamp down any news coming out but the young are using You Tube and Twitter to get the word out.

Let's hope that Obama can take time from his Hawaiian stay and support the people of Iran this time.

All breaking new reported here.

Ayn Rand, Friedrich von Hayek and Glenn Reynolds

Retired Inquirer book reviewer Frank Wilson takes a stab at explaining the resurgence of book sales for Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and Hayek's The Road to Serfdom. He gets the reasoning exactly wrong:

To attribute the surge in popularity of these books to "conservatives" seeking solace after a defeat at the polls is both tempting and easy. But it almost certainly has less to do with partisan politics than with fundamental principles.

While Glenn Reynolds, who is mentioned at the outset of the piece has had a great deal to do with the resurgence of Atlas Shrugged, he, nor any other person I've read has said it was because of "conservatives". Hell, Reynolds has a more libertarian streak then a conservative one. In my opinion, most essayists on the "right" tend to be more libertarian with a conservative tinge than outright conservative as historically described.

Some years after The Road to Serfdom, Hayek wrote an essay called "Why I Am Not a Conservative." In it, he describes "as liberal the position which I hold and which I believe differs as much from true conservatism as from socialism," and he proceeds to argue that "the liberal today must more positively oppose some of the basic conceptions which most conservatives share with the socialists." Of course, Hayek uses liberal in its classic sense, referring to someone whose aim is "to free the process of spontaneous growth from the obstacles and encumbrances that human folly has erected." (John Galt couldn't have put it better.)

Those encumbrances are the government and government policies and programs. We have seen more encumbrances in the last six-months put in our way than the fifty-years previous. Today's "liberal" is as far removed from classic sense as can be possible.

Moreover, what Hayek says about conservatives applies equally well to many who today call themselves progressives:

"Conservatives are inclined to use the powers of government to prevent change or to limit its rate. . . . They lack the faith in the spontaneous forces of adjustment. . . . The conservative feels safe and content only if he is assured that some higher wisdom watches and supervises change, only if he knows that some authority is charged with keeping the change 'orderly.' "

We on the right believe in reduced government and don't feel we need any authority to induce order. We want a president and a congress who enact legislation to deal with inherently governmental function including national security, a strong military, the progression of rights and liberty and after that, just get the hell out of the way.

Conservatives of today are not what they were even twenty five years ago. We are not against change and in fact champion it in many cases. We push for the freedom whereby businesses can thrive and create new and better products that make our lives easier. We wish for the meddling fingers of the government to be reduced to the lowest level possible. The idea that we fell safer with the thought of a "higher wisdom" is ludicrous and shows that Mr. Wilson's view of who and what the modern conservative is taken right out of The Nation and is so far from what the movement has become as to be inane. The modern Conservative is one who does not necessarily need anyone but himself and his wits to get ahead.

It is today's liberals who need a leader to keep thing "orderly" and by orderly they mean oppressive. They want the government controlling everything and that is not exclusive to Democrats. Republicans have strayed into that territory, most notably after taking over the Legislative branch and having total control.

In this view, neither today's "progressives" nor today's "conservatives" are liberal, which is to say committed, in Hayek's words, to the "set of ideals that has consistently opposed all arbitrary power."

Wilson opts to lump conservatives and "progressives" into one group when they are mutually exclusive ideologies. Conservatives of the libertarian bent tend to abhor government except for that government that is absolutely necessary to maintain civil order and national security. Modern Liberals loathe individual freedom and free thought, they want the government to tell us what to do.

Wilson is a liberal and one who tries to explain away the new-found success of these two books. He knows that an electorate that thinks like Hayek or Rand would be bad for the modern liberal movement and feels he has to quash any idea that these books are gaining in popularity because of the policies being thrust upon us on a daily basis. Hayek and Rand are the anti-liberals and in that respect make their ideas the enemies of current political hierarchy.

Celebrating Independence Day

Tomorrow we celebrate that most American of holidays. It was 233-years ago that forward-thinking men threw off the shackles of tyranny and declared themselves and our new nation free. A few more years of war would settle the deal but this was a shot in the arm for the colonial army at a time it needed it. The Declaration of Independence solidified our reasoning and put us on a path of no return.

It was great men who fought for our freedom; George Washington being the most famous. But other men deserve recognition and I wish to provide that this morning.

Daniel Morgan:
Born in New Jersey and raised in Virginia, Morgan was a frontiersman and lifelong warrior. He gained some measure of renown in the French & Indian War before showing how good of a commander he was during the revolutionary war. He saved "Granny" Gates at the 2nd Battle of Saratoga and forced a surrender by British leader Burgoyne.

He showed his true ability to lead an army at the battle at Cowpens. He implemented a battle strategy so brilliant he beat the hated British Lt. Col. Tarleton. The battle was won and the course of the war was changed forever.

Nathaneal Greene:
Greene was a self-taught military man and effective leader. He knew who to promote, who to trust and how to keep British General Cornwallis chasing shadows throughout the South.

It was a bold move for Washington to promote and give Greene the responsibilities he did. He was repaid with a good General and an even better confidante.

Henry Knox:
Knox, from Boston scored the single-greatest coup in my opinion of the war. He led a group of men to Fort Ticonderoga and slogged through rough weather and tough paths to Boston with an arsenal of British weapons that the continentals had captured. This move forced the Brits to quit Boston and gave the city back to the Americans--a significant victory and one that bolstered early hopes.

I recommend several books if you want to read more about these great men and others who fought for the cause.

-Jeff Shaara's The Glorious Cause is my favorite and well worth your time this summer.


-David McCullough's 1776 id another good read although I was more intrigued by Shaara's character development.

-A Short History of the American Revolution by James Stokebury is an excellent book that covers the important events in a terse yet surprisingly entertaining manner.

Text of the Declaration of Independence can be found here along with names and states of those who had the guts to sign it.


Enjoy the holiday.

Wednesday Afternoon News & Notes

Happy hump day to you.

Here's what's new:

-Why they hate Sarah Palin. Thoughtful yet highly edited.

-Hooray! I live in one of states where freedom is an afterthught and liberty is but a dream. Hey, at least New York is even less free.

-Speaking of New York; the Phillies open up another short series against the Mets at Debits Field tonight. They face Johann Santana who has essentially owned us (although Howard, Ruiz, Ibanez and Werth have feasted on him) but the Phillies are now in first place and the way they're hitting, I'll bet they stay there for awhile.

-Yeah, that whole hope and change approach to dealing with Iran is working out just great...for Iran.

-Americans think quite differently than Pelosi and The One on "torture".

-Juxtaposing the economies of two Caribbean nations. Spoiler: the one with more government intervention performed much worse.

Whither Conservatism?

There's been much in the media written about the end of the Reagan era and the shift of America from a center-right country to a center-left nation. I'll chalk that up to the usual media bias and the feeling of exultation in the media after the last two ass-kickings we dropped on them when Bush won in 2000 and 2004.

But what of the Republican Party?

We have become a party that has strayed far from our roots--roots rediscovered in 1980 and pushed forward in 1994. The Reaganism of smaller government, lower taxes, a strong military and the idea of America as a beacon in the world for all to aspire to has been replaced with a party that voted for a new entitlement program (prescription drugs for seniors), has made many small fiefdoms through earmarks of federal tax dollars (Ted Stevens) and, in essence, became a clone of the Democratic Party. They all fed at the trough and ushered in what we now have--a far left President--elect.

It's hig time for some serious soul searching by our elected men and women of the GOP. Are we a party of bridges to nowhere and greedy lobbyists or a party of smaller government, lower tax rates and freedom? I choose the latter and it was those basic tenets that were the hallmarks of Reaganism.

When George W. Bush was elected the White House, I was leery, just what the hell was "compassionate conservatism"? But then he immediately lowered taxes and we pulled out of a recession. He was brilliant after 9/11 and saw that the War on Terror was not going to be won in Afghanistan but in Karbala and Fallujah and Basra. Freeing a Muslim nation from tyranny sent a message that we were serious.

But then his conservative became what was defined as "compassionate conservatism". Prescription Drugs for Seniors was the largest entitlement program signed into law in decades. Bill Clinton reformed welfare (albeit with a knife at his throat held by Newt Gingrich) and W. gave us an entitlement program guaranteed to cripple us for years. He let the deficit balloon to heretofore unseen heights and got a majority Democratic House and Senate for it. He strayed far off the Reagan ranch and into LBJ territory.

So here we are and what can be done?

For starters, let's continue electing men and women like Sarah Palin and Mitch McConnell and stop electing the likes Don Young, Randy Cunningham and Tom DeLay. Let's elect true conservatives who will hold the line on spending and ensure that freedom is the number one priority. That freedom includes the right to speak, write and say what one wishes, have the right to dictate what you do with your money and not the state and the right to live your life according to how it was envisioned by our Founding Fathers and not by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

We need to get back to our roots and remake the party into what it was before the greedy, thieving bastards of the last ten years took it over. Conservatism works and it will win again whether it be two, four or ten years out.

Hell, you shouldn't have read me and should've just listened to 'Zo. Amen my brother...er, except for the Huckabee stuff.

Via AP who notes that Fox News should make some space for this guy. He speaks conservative instead of the usual gutter Republican that people like Bill O'Reilly and most of the guests on the channel do:

Privacy Rights Trashed in Ohio

It's now clear that employees of three separate agencies (in four instances) looked into Joe the Plumbers records in violation of privacy laws:

The director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, Helen Jones-Kelley, confirmed on Monday that she approved a records check on suddenly famous Joe the plumber, who was mentioned frequently by John McCain in his Oct. 15 presidential debate with Barack Obama.

Driver's-license and vehicle-registration data about Wurzelbacher were obtained from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Also, the State Highway Patrol is investigating unauthorized access to data about Wurzelbacher in the attorney general's office from a test account that the office shared with contractors who developed a computer network for the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police.

Does anyone have a doubt that Ms. Jones-Kelley would have balked at looking into, say, the abortion records of someone if she had the means to allow it? There's absolutely no difference here because she was plainly looking into confidential records in an effort to smear a private citizen who Obama delivered an incendiary political comment to--after Obama approached him in the mans backyard.

Is this a peek into how Obama's appointees will use the weight of the government to silence critics?

Security and confidentiality of private information is the cornerstone of American civil rights. It seems that it is official Ohio policy to snoop on those one disagrees with and Governor Ted Strickland has evidently no qualms about it being so.

The perpetrators of these crimes--and yes they are crimes--should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law without delay. They broke a law and used government resources to do so.

What Independence Day Really Means

232 years ago, brave men made a decision to lay their lives on the line for a common cause, a cause so great they risked everything.

Men like John Hancock who was a well-off business owner. He was so despised by the British that a proclamation offering amnesty to those who pledged allegiance to the crowd specifically excluded him and another great patriot Samuel Adams.

Men like Benjamin Franklin who by 1776 was an internationally known celebrity. He signed on to what proved to be his greatest experiment.

Men like a Virginia gentleman named George Washington who left his wife and farm to lead a rag-tag band of volunteers against the greatest army the world had yet seen.

Men like Nathanael Greene who battled British general Cornwallis throughout the South trading temporary losses for ultimate victory.

Men like Henry Knox who was an integral part of Washington's crossing of the Delaware and defeat of the Hessian's at Trenton.

Men like John Glover who led what was to become my beloved US Navy. He gave a schooner to the cause that was used to raid British shipping. Glover saved the war cause on several occasions.

I ask, do we have men like this today? Would Barack Obama sign his name to a document that would effectively put a price on his head and lead to his hanging? Would Lindsey Graham give up a life of luxury and fight for the ideal of freedom? Would Bill Gates defend the nation that has made him one of the wealthiest men in the world? Would Bill Clinton risk his life by supporting a cause greater than anyone?

There are but a few who would sacrifice everything and you can tell who they are because they have already done so. Men and woman who've opted for the meager pay and danger of serving in our military. Men like John McCain who was sentenced to five years of hell in a rancid prison. Men like former Senator Robert Dole and JFK. Men who risked their lives so that we could remain free.

A Brit--Sir Winston Churchill--who had the spirit of America in him said: "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

Those men who gave up everything so that we may celebrate nearly two and a half centuries later deserve to be remembered so hoist a cold one to these great men and women who gave us the ultimate gift...America.

Thursday Night Music--American Pride Edition

The usual Friday Night Music is happening tonight because I fully intend to celebrate my freedom and the freedom of the greatest country ever created by indulging in large quantities of food and Yuenglings.

Tonight we feature songs about America and not protest type so you won't be hearing Pearl Jam, Buffalo Springfield or any of the others groups who choose to spotlight the bad in America instead of the good. Granted, some of the best music ever made were protest songs but this is a day for celebrating the good in America.

Update:Celebrating the 4th in Samarra, Iraq (H/T: Jeff Emanuel):


We start with Charlie Daniels and In America. In the late seventies, we had suffered through nearly a term of Jimmy Carter and the country was in the dumps. Iran held our citizens captive, the USSR invaded Afghanistan and the economy and inflation were a nightmare. Unemployment was in the 12% range and the worst president ever told us all to put on a sweater. Fortunately, Ronnie Reagan was elected and we came out of that down period with a renewed sense of optimism and pride This song was released in 1980, not 1976 as it says at You Tube.:


Next we have Simon and Garfunkle singing about traversing the wide open spaces of this great country live in Central Park, NYC:



Next we have Jimi at Woodstock doing the Star Spangled Banner. Some thought this a desecration of the song but I think it was that most American of things: the freedom to interpret and say things as one pleases. Woodstock was a seminal event in our history and this was the most intriguing moment of that event by far.



Next, I'm not a huge country music guy but Toby Keith is a patriot and he sings like one:



Finally, the Marine Poet sets those who blame America straight:



Happy Independence Day to you. Please remember the sacrifices of those who made us and have kept us free for 232 years.

Can Red China Survive the Internet Age?

They seem to have withheld a gaggle of info to this point but some is leaking through:

Our own tests this morning with WebSitePulse's China firewall tester have only yielded a block on youtube.com thus far—the other sites' home pages (and some specific articles about Tibet) appear to be going through. As we know, though, China's firewall doesn't always filter everything all the time, and may be implemented differently in different areas of the country. Sites that appear accessible in Shanghai right now might not be accessible in Beijing, and something that's accessible in China's capital may mysteriously "disappear" later on. Researchers at UC Davis' Computer Science department found that the firewall would accidentally allow banned terms through about 28 percent of the time, particularly during high-traffic times.

The problem with these arbitrary blocks is that users are increasingly aware of them. Posts made to Danwei.org, a site about Chinese media, show that Chinese Internet users not only know which sites are being blocked at which times, but why. "Youtube is blocked in China as of 22:45, Beijing time. See no evil, hear no evil..." wrote one poster, with others confirming the disconnect and pointing out that it "has a lot to do with Tibet." Another poster noted in a thread about YouTube and other news sources being blocked, "This govt officials should get a life and deal with reality!"

28% of the time during high-traffic is not insignificant. A billion people live in China and let's suppose as a conservative number 50-million are online daily. Again, this is going on basic info since all data coming out of the country is to be taken with a grain of salt. That could potentially be 14-million people getting info they never could have seen five years ago or even back when the authorities brutalized the students at Tiananmen Square in front of the world.

Imagine if a quarter of those who read what their nation was doing to Tibet started spreading the word. That's 3.5-million people allowing their friends and neighbors to know what is happening. Again, not an insignificant number.

The question remains: Can China survive the Internet age? Short-term, yes. Long term, probably not. They are only filtering info on China but what of stories of life in America or Europe? You can't tamp down the inbred yearning for freedom that exists in all humans forever and if a grassroots effort started the peaceful protests at Tiananmen Square, how many people could be roused to action today?

Would the Chinese government, who have assiduously worked to keep embarrassment to a minimum with the Olympics being held there later this year, resort to the tactics used in Tiananmen nearly twenty years ago? Watch the video below and tell me if they could afford it (warning: violent scenes and blood):