In Today’s Times, reported Edmund L. Andrews grudgingly acknowledges “surprising” (and soaring) federal revenues, and undaunted by mere facts, demonstrates how to spin one’s way out of such damaging admissions.

Democrats and many independent budget analysts note that overall revenues have barely climbed back to the levels reached in 2000, and that the government has borrowed trillions of dollars against Social Security surpluses just as the first of the nation’s baby boomers are nearing retirement.

Just treat the democrat partisan slant as conclusive, throw in some unspecified “independent analysts” ‘ opinions as confirmation, and point accusingly at federal standard budgetary operating procedure (spending Social Security revenues) as supposedly unique to this administration and this congress.

John Hinderaker goes after the Times story here.

It’s not easy to get to the bottom of all this, since elements of the moonbat left have targeted Jeff Goldstein’s Protein Wisdom with not one, but two, Denial of Service attacks (reported via Blackfive).

Evidently, one Deborah Frisch, a University of Pennsylvania Ph.D., employed as an adjunct instructor in Psychology at the University of Arizona, a lady actually capable of defending Ward Churchill in these terms:

Hours after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Ward Churchill compared the victims to the Nazis. A professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, he wrote in an essay that those killed at the World Trade Center were not innocent civilians but “little Eichmanns.”

The analogy is so outrageous, one thinks, that surely he immediately got into trouble.

Actually, the analogy is extremely apt and not outrageous at all. It is clear from the context, that Professor Churchill was referring to Hannah Arendt’s comments about Eichmann.

Hannah Arendt was a journalist for the newspaper “The New Yorker” when she saw the Eichmann Trial in Israel in 1961. Her book is based on a series of articles she wrote about the trial.

In the article, she coined the term “banality of evil.” Hitler’s henchmen who had behaved monstrously did not look like monsters. Instead, they were bland and benign. According to Arendt, Eichmann’s character flaw was mindless obedience to authority, not a sadistic or psychopathic personality.

This, of course, is even scarier than finding that Eichmann and other Nazis were crazy in some way. Arendt’s analysis inspired Stanley Milgram’s experiment on obedience to authority at Yale University and Philip Zimbardo’s Prison Study at Stanford University.

So there is nothing absurd or outrageous about using the term “Eichmann” to refer to the stockbrokers who died that day. It’s a little strange to completely ignore the firefighters, secretaries and building maintenance workers who died that day. And singling out the stockbrokers and ignoring the firefighters dehumanizes them the same way Nazis dehumanized Jews.

I agree with Churchill that America was not an “innocent victim” on 911. I’m tempted to agree that “titans” of finance are more guilty than the rest of us. But even though they’re better compensated than the rest of us, they’re no more guilty, really. We’re all little Eichmanns. Only the far left is willing to admit it.

made a series of postings in the Comments section of Goldstein’s blog of an irrational and highly inappropriate character. Some readers thought these postings might actually constitute a threat to Mr. Goldstein’s child, and a number of people lodged complaints with the University of Arizona and the authorities.

Having provoked a firestorm, La Frisch prudently resigned her teaching position, and asked for the whole thing to stop.

Goldstein, posting on another site, denied feeling victimized.

1) I don’t feel victimized. Debbie Frisch is as nutty as the ring around a squirrel’s crapper, but I don’t think she’s a threat. She’s more of an object lesson in having too many cats.
2) I allowed Debbie to continue commenting here because she was (paraphrase: making a fool of herself).
3) (parahrase: She did make a fool of herself: a big one.)
4) But no matter. I don’t want apologies.
5) On the other hand, pie would be nice.
6) Or a bottle of really good tequila.
7) Blue agave, Deb.
8) None of that cheapass rail shit you were huffing the other night.
9) Go on, I’ll wait…

Deborah Frisch seems to have a long record of posting less-than-civil comments to blogs she disagrees with. I found another case early in 2005 at Professor Bainbridge.

—————————

UPDATE

This unseemly affair started 7/3 with Frisch posting comments in response to criticism of the New York Times’ publication of the SWIFT program.

Frisch’s academic career.

—————————
FURTHER UPDATE

All this unseemly correspondence, and denial of service attacks on Protein Wisdom, are still continuing Sunday night. link

Baron Bodissey, this week, has a terrific essay identifying the crucial components of Islam’s attack on the West:

Covert funding based on successful long-tern extortion via the manipulation of petroleum prices.

The use of criminals, psychos, and malcontents as cannon fodder.

And so we have what might be called a Demonic Convergence, a confluence of destructive impulses that Islam gathers unto itself. In the terms of Chaos Theory, Islam is a “basin attractor”, an asymptotic solution to all the differential equations of nihilistic human behavior.

Any impulse that longs to destroy Western Civilization — which, for the modern world, means all civilization — will gravitate towards Islam. The criminal gets ideological justification for his behavior, the sadist gets to rape and murder to his heart’s content, and the hippie radical gets to stick it to the Man for all eternity.

This is what we’re up against: the Big Tent of ideological nihilism. The closer any given society gets to the behavioral sink, the more Islamic it tends to become.

And, finally, the habitual treason of the journalistic clerisy of the West, providing the essential Fifth Column.

A must-read article.

Hat-tip to Richard Fernandez.

The twisted imaginations of a lot of Photoshop users go to work on the above image.

Lawrence Kudlow points out that Bush’s tax cuts have worked as promised.

Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent? In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy, and much larger than the total economic size of nations like India, Mexico, Ireland, and Belgium.

This is an extraordinary fact, although you may be reading it here first. Most in the mainstream media would rather tout the faults of American capitalism than sing its praises. And of course, the media will almost always discuss supply-side tax cuts in negative terms, such as big budget deficits and static revenue losses. But here’s another suppressed fact: Since the 2003 tax cuts, tax-revenue collections from the expanding economy have been surging at double-digit rates while the deficit is constantly being revised downward.

For those who bother to look, the economic power of lower-tax-rate incentives is once again working its magic. While most reporters obsess about a mild slowdown in housing, the big-bang story is a high-sizzle pick-up in private business investment, which is directly traceable to Bush’s tax reform.

It’s not like he’s all that conservative, really. (He spends money like a democrat, and he added another major entitlement program.)

And it’s not like he’s done such a great job managing the war. (He’s invaded only two lousy Islamic countries and he has not even interned the antiwar radicals.)

But he does have one great quality: He is absolutely fabulous at upsetting and irritating the left. When the typical moonbat starts talking about George W. Bush, he turns positively purple with rage, and emits a fine spray of spit as the pace of his hysterical rant accelerates.

Mark Morford demonstrates the correct technique in today’s SF Chronicle:

It is like some sort of virus. It is like some sort of weird and painful rash on your face that makes you embarrassed to walk out the door and so you sit there day after day, waiting for it to go away, slathering on ointment and Bactine and scotch. And yet still it lingers.

Some days the pain is so searing and hot you want to cut off your own head with a nail file. Other days it is numb and pain-free and seemingly OK, to the point where you think it might finally be all gone and you allow yourself a hint of a whisper of a positive feeling, right up until you look in the mirror, and scream.

George W. Bush is just like that.

Everyone I know has had enough. Everyone I know is just about done. There is this threshold of happy deadened disgust, this point where the body simply resigns itself to the pain, a point where the disease, the poison has seeped so deeply into the bones that you just have to laugh and shrug it all off and go for a drink. Or 10.

You do have to love Bush.

Following news reports of several people being executed in Somalia for watching World Cup soccer matches on televsion, Mail&Guardian Online reports that the Islamic fundamentalists propose to enforce daily prayers by pain of death(!):

Somali Muslims who fail to perform daily prayers will be killed in accordance with Qur’anic law under a new edict issued by a leading cleric in the Islamic courts union that controls Mogadishu.

The requirement for Muslims to observe the five-times daily ritual under penalty of death was announced late on Wednesday and appears to confirm the hard-line nature of the increasingly powerful Sharia courts in the capital.

“He who does not perform prayers will be considered as infidel and Sharia law orders that that person be killed,” said Sheikh Abdalla Ali, a founder and high-ranking official in the Supreme Islamic Council of Somalia.

“Sharia law orders the killing of any Muslim person when he fails to perform prayers,” he said in an address at the opening of a new Islamic court in Mogadishu’s southern Gubta neighbourhood.

Ali added that it was the duty of every Somali to implement the provisions of Sharia law, which when fully accepted would allow “everybody to enjoy life based on peace and prosperity”.

And I used to think our nuns forcing us to attend mass on First Fridays during elementary school was tyrannical.

Some people living on the West Coast do. They may soon find themselves within range of North Korean missiles.

The SF Examiner is grateful that President Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defense system is as operational as it is today, and it knows who resisted its development.

North Korea’s threatening spate of missile launches — including an unsuccessful try with an advanced version of its Taepodong 2 Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile that is capable of hitting the United States — has sparked a cacophony of talk from leaders and foreign policy experts around the world.

As they debate and discuss various options at the United Nations and in capitals around the globe, the rudimentary U.S. missile defense system is poised to shoot down anything launched from North Korea that threatens the American homeland or the critical interests of our regional allies like Japan and Australia.

Noticeably absent are the voices of those who, since President Reagan first proposed such a system in 1984, have fought development and deployment of the missile defense system the U.S. must now depend upon in dealing with North Korea. These folks have claimed over and over that the system they derisively call “Star Wars” can’t possibly work, would be too expensive, would incite a new world arms race, etc., etc. Names that come to mind in this regard include senators like Joe Biden, D-Del., Jack Reed, D-R.I., Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., and the Clinton-Gore administration that delayed and dilly-dallied with work on missile defense for most of the ’90s.

It is important that the American people understand two aspects of the current crisis as it relates to missile defense. First, the system President Bush recently ordered advanced from its testing stage to operational status when the North Koreans began preparing the Taepodong 2 launch is extremely rudimentary because it is still being developed. The system now includes only 11 ground-based launch sites in Alaska and California capable of knocking out long-range missiles like the Taepodong 2, and four Aegis-class Navy destroyers equipped with missile defense battle management systems and Standard-3 missiles capable of hitting medium range threats.

Second, they will no doubt protest to high heaven, but “Star Wars” critics must bear the major burden of responsibility for the delays and setbacks that have prevented the missile defense system from becoming fully operational long before the present crisis with North Korea. There have been technological problems, especially in the very early stages, but those were temporary and subject to American technological prowess.

Far more serious have been the setbacks engineered by the critics — like then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell’s maneuvers to kill the first Bush administration’s Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (G-PALS) plan, the Clinton-Gore gutting of the Strategic Defense Initiative office in 1993 and the delaying tactics used by Senate Democrats in the first years of this decade to reduce the current program’s funding.

It is a sobering thought to wonder how much more secure the United States and its allies would be today in the face of madness like North Korea’s launches if instead of a limited defense still in development we could depend upon the robust protection first proposed many years ago.

Frank McCullough, and his listener Frank from Staten Island, think those liberals are going to get us all killed.

Yale University received subpoenas from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Defense, and the National Science Foundation requesting 10 years of the university’s financial records connected with some 47 Federal research grants amounting to approximately $45 million dollars.
WebCPA:

A February report by the Department of Health and Human Services that referred to a gene research program found that more than a third of the university’s more than $500,000 in invoices did not comply with federal standards, and costs were improperly transferred across budget cycles to make up for shortfalls.

“Regardless of the outcome of the current investigation, we must get all our processes right and make sure that we are good stewards of the funds entrusted to us by the federal government,” Yale president Richard Levin said in a statement.

The most detailed press reports seem to indicate that the discrepancies are associated with stem cell research.

LifeNews.com