Looks like the new Iraqi government is following the Bush administration example of taking controversial yet politically connected operators and giving them positions overseeing things they have no experience dealing with.  For example: Who is the new interim minister overseeing the Oil Ministry?  That's right, Chalabi.  Not only does he have no experience with the petroleum industry, but millions of dollars seem to mysteriously disappear from just about every enterprise he's been involved with.  The man has no shame but he seems to make a pretty good living off of it.

Thomas Sowell on the economic inequities between whites and blacks today:

For most of the history of this country, differences between the black and the white population--whether in income, IQ, crime rates, or whatever--have been attributed to either race or racism. For much of the first half of the 20th century, these differences were attributed to race--that is, to an assumption that blacks just did not have it in their genes to do as well as white people. The tide began to turn in the second half of the 20th century, when the assumption developed that black-white differences were due to racism on the part of whites.

So far, so good:

What is not nearly as widely known is that there were also very large disparities within the white population of the pre-Civil War South and the white population of the Northern states. Although Southern whites were only about one-third of the white population of the U.S., an absolute majority of all the illiterate whites in the country were in the South.

I'm with you, Thomas:

Slavery also cannot explain the difference between American blacks and West Indian blacks living in the United States because the ancestors of both were enslaved. When race, racism, and slavery all fail the empirical test, what is left?

Culture is left.

OK, getting a bit sketchy here.  Depends on what you mean.

The culture of the people who were called "rednecks" and "crackers" before they ever got on the boats to cross the Atlantic was a culture that produced far lower levels of intellectual and economic achievement, as well as far higher levels of violence and sexual promiscuity.

Ahh, Southern culture as a whole is a problem--I can't really argue against that.

While a third of the white population of the U.S. lived within the redneck culture, more than 90% of the black population did.

So the African-Americans were victims of a British-based redneck culture--intriguing.  But why are Whites now in a better socio-economic position?

It eroded away much faster in Britain than in the U.S. and somewhat faster among Southern whites than among Southern blacks, who had fewer opportunities for education or for the rewards that came with escape from that counterproductive culture.

But why was it slower to disappear amongst Blacks?  Oops, the article ended--no explanation.  Why would African American's continue to be trapped in a culture imposed on it?  Why did they have fewer opportunities for education or for the rewards that came with escape from that counterproductive culture?  What is left?

Racism is left. 

Sowell, who is African-American himself, constructs a perfectly sound theory of why African Americans continue to, on average, to be stuck in lower socio-economic strata, yet willfully blinds himself to the basic reason why they continue to be stuck there.  There is no doubt that in the Jim Crow South and in America in general, racism limited economic and educational opportunities for for African-Americans.  Indeed, it is not surprising that an ethnic group that had such a culture imposed on it, and that was prohibited from even learning to read for the first two hundred and fifty-years of its existence on the continent, would lag behind in recovering from such a blow.  That legacy has disappeared only slowly--and Jim Crow's "separate but equal" played a large role in assuring that African-American recovery would be slow. 

Finally it must also be said that Sowell paints the American traditions of his race with a terribly broad brush.  There are many strong communal traditions which have served the African Americans well, through these difficult times.  Furthermore, their manner of speaking is relatively irrelevant to success, as long as they can function in the greater society.  Instead of focusing on elements of Southern culture that have done a disservice to Blacks, Sowell portrays the culture as all of one piece, chains that must be broken and discarded before African-Americans can take their rightful place in American Society.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  As citizens, African Americans are fully entitled to all of the rights given other races--culture notwithstanding.  Mainstream American culture can and must adapt as much to the African American culture as the other way around.

Sowell stood one step away from getting a grip on the problem and shrank from the obvious conclusion.  Let's hope he gets it soon.

The new resolve in the Democratic Party is showing results.  The ruinous and indefensible changes to the House ethics rules that would allow one party to essentially shut down ethics violations will be rescinded by the House Republicans. 

On Social Security, Bush's ill-conceived plan to gut Social Security and replace it with private accounts in a desperate attempt to erase his legacy of spending has hit a brick wall.

On filibusters, a Washington Post poll shows that only 26 percent of Americans support giving the Republicans an easier time of moving their judicial candidates by ending the minority party's ability to filibuster nominations.

These events demonstrate that the only thing needed to defeat the Bush agenda is a strong, unified caucus willing to fight for what is right.  Keep it up, boys and girls.

I. The Enterprise
"At times material to this indictment there existed a criminal organization which is referred to hereafter as "the Chicago Outfit." The Chicago Outfit was known to its members and associates as "the Outfit" and was also known to the public as "organized crime," the "Chicago Syndicate" and the "Chicago Mob."  The Chicago Outfit was an "enterprise" as that term is used in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1961(4)."

Peter Fitzgerald takes down the entire leadership of the Chicago Mob from Marcello on down.

Great coverage at the Chicago Tribune.  (Reg. Req.)

The limits of the Bush Doctrine seem more and more evident when one actually pays attention to the paucity of the adminstration's international economic policies.  Last week it was " he of the perpetual 'deer in the headlights' expression" Treasury Secretary John Snow begging the Chinese to revalue the renminbi and today it is the President begging Bush family friend Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to pump a little more oil before the summer!  Although the Bush administration has gotten a lot of mileage out of wishful think and redefining the terms of engagement, begging others to fall in line behind our fiscal trainwreck is ultimately not a viable international economic policy nor should we fool ourselves into believing that because we are the world's largest economy that everyone else is eventually going to come around and bail us out. 

Who knew that being the world's only remaining Super Power meant not only not having to say you're sorry all the time but that you'd also be reduced to seeking hand-outs like a bum!

Attention America:  The Chicago White Sox are on fire with a 15-4 record and a seven-game winning streak. 

Its called fighting for what we believe--and it is worth it.  What is the Democratic Party if it doesn't fight for what it believes in?  And the results?  Excellent.

The country's leading business lobbying associations, close GOP allies in recent legislative efforts and political campaigns, have told senior Republicans that they would not back the Frist initiative to force votes on President Bush's judicial nominees.

Fundamentalists think that the fact that they voted for a man who won only 51% of the vote is enough to give them near-total control of every branch of government.  Democrats have to show them that we will continue to fight for the values of tolerance and personal freedom we believe this country should stand for.  We have nothing to lose but our chains.

For years, critics on the right have decried the "culture of victimhood" in this country.  However, as the views of social conservatives have been marginalized by the liberalizing trends of the last sixty years, the political right has now recognized victimhood as a very potent form of energizing the base.  Even Tom DeLay, usually the predator, not the prey, has now begun to rely on the shroud of martyrdom as a method of defense.

Of late, one of the most egregious examples of this trend has been the expansion of the term anti-semitic to refer to any person questioning the policies of the current Likud government of Israel.  Daniel Okrent, the New York Times Public Editor has provided the most eloquent skewering of this trend in his latest column on the Times' covearage of the Middle East.

the charge that The Times is anti-Semitic. Even if you stipulate that The Times's reporters and editors favor the Palestinian cause (something I am not remotely prepared to do), this is an astonishing debasement. If reporting that is sympathetic to Palestinians, or antipathetic to Israelis, is anti-Semitism, what is real anti-Semitism? What word do you have left for conscious discrimination, or open hatred, or acts of intentional, ethnically motivated violence?

The Times may be - is - imperfect. It is not anti-Semitic. Calling it that defames the accuser far more than it does the accused. (Note:  Registration is required to access this content).

Accusations of this sort are designed to do one thing: limit the discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.  They represent the worst of the worst, exploitation of the memories of actual anti-semitism for entirely different reasons.  They debase the suffering of millions in the past and water down the public's tolerance for actual anti-semitism.  There is only one thing to be done--calls like this should stop.

Tyler Cowen thinks Shaq is the greatest NBA player of all-time.  According to him some of the reasons Shaq is better is that Coach Jackson played a role in Michael Jordan's sucess:

4. The first time MJ left Chicago, the remaining Bulls still made the Eastern Finals and were one referee call away from winning them.

5. Phil Jackson should get the credit for much of MJ's supposed locker room presence in motivating players.  It didn't do the Washington Wizards any good.

See any logical flaws in that argument?

Schwarzenegger Sorry for Border Comment.

I bet he is. 

There has been much back and forth in the comments about the separation of church and state in American life.  Some of those in favor of more church interference in schools focus on the fact that local school districts should be able to impose religious elements in the curriculum where one religion is in the majority in the local area.  This formula guarantees Christian imposition throughout the U.S.  However, I wonder what some of our commenters feel about the problems at the U.S. Air Force Academy, where evangelical Christians at the top are apparently at the root of a series of disturbing incidents involving religious discrimination at the school.

Less than two years after it was plunged into a rape scandal, the Air Force Academy is scrambling to address complaints that evangelical Christians wield so much influence at the school that anti-Semitism and other forms of religious harassment have become pervasive.

There have been 55 complaints of religious discrimination at the academy in the past four years, including cases in which a Jewish cadet was told the Holocaust was revenge for the death of Jesus and another was called a Christ killer by a fellow cadet.

The 4,300-student school recently started requiring staff members and cadets to take a 50-minute religious-tolerance class. . . .

 ''They are deliberately trivializing the problem so that we don't have another situation the magnitude of the sex assault scandal. It is inextricably intertwined in every aspect of the academy,'' said Mikey Weinstein of Albuquerque, N.M., a 1977 graduate who has sent two sons to the school. He said the younger, Curtis, has been called a ''filthy Jew'' many times.  .

--The official academy newspaper runs a Christmas ad every year praising Jesus and declaring him the only savior. Some 200 academy staff members, including some department heads, signed it. Whittington noted the ad was not published last December. . .

--The academy commandant, Brig. Gen. Johnny Weida, a born-again Christian, said in a statement to cadets in June 2003 that their first responsibility is to their God. He also strongly endorsed National Prayer Day that year. School spokesman Johnny Whitaker said Weida now runs his messages by several other commanders.

Those who follow the Iron Mouth know that many of our editors believe that church and state should be separated by a wide gulf, and that the Churches are doing just fine by themselves, thank you, and do not need a boost from taxpayer dollars or the government's bully pulpit.  This is a national school, run on national dollars, and designed to provide the country with its pilots.  There is no place there for the religion of some citizens to be imposed on others, or preferences to be handed out to only those of a certain religion.  If ever there was a case for separation of church and state in a school setting, this is it.

From the state that brought us "Ruff's Liquor and Guns," an establishment that sells booze, guns, tobacco, and porn:

The Arizona Legislature has approved a bill that permits patrons to take guns into bars and restaurants that do not conspicuously post notices prohibiting firearms.  The bill (SB1363) provides that the rootin' tootin' gun-totin' customers can't drink alcohol - a compromise the State Senate reached.  So now bartenders across Arizona will have to ask their patrons, "What'll be, and are you packing heat?" 

Arizona law already permits its citizens to carry concealed firearms.

Earlier this month Loren Wade, a talented but troubled running back for the Arizona State University football team, was indicted for first degree murder for shooting to death a former teammate outside a nightclub.  The Legislature's response, of course, is to encourage more drunks to carry guns.  Lawmakers are concerned that gun owners heretofore have been forced to leave their weapons inside their cars.

As the self-proclaimed pro-gun member of the Iron Mouth editorial board, I have to applaud the Arizona Legislature for its wisdom.  At last I can sit down at a classy restaurant knowing that if they screw up my order, I can do more than leave a lousy tip.  There's nothing like a loaded Glock to cure a soggy chimichanga.

Update, 4/26/05 (RW): Governor Janet Napolitano vetoes the bill.

 

The Iron Mouth seeks to be original--only rarely do we link directly and quote whole the writings of another.  Tonight is one of those nights.  I quote below from Chris Nelson, author of the Nelson Report, as printed on Steve Clemons' the Washington Note.  Its a must read.

BOLTON BATTLE...the real fight

If the fight over John Bolton's UN nomination were just about John Bolton, he'd be history already. But this isn't about Bolton, it's about the exercise of power. Same thing with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

If this was even 5 years ago, hed be toast.

We are at the point now where the Republican Leadership refuses to allow the possibility of a loss on anything, regardless of the merits. This renders "debate" meaningless, since nothing said actually matters, so truth is irrelevant.

"Science" depends on faith; everything is a test of power. Oppose something the President wants, and you aren't just wrong, you are betraying the Party. The underlying message is that you are also offending a very particular definition of God.

The sad, sorry Bolton/DeLay spectacles are about total war, the kill-the-prisoners exercise of power that national US politics has become since the 2000 election. If it were merely about power, it wouldn't be so terrifying. Washington is used to that. . .it's what we exist for. But the fear, the self-loathing, the pathetic, cowardly, sniveling, excuse-making drivel from such "leaders" as Lugar, Hagel, Chafee, the entire House Republican Leadership under DeLay. . .and the ever-so-very carefully expressed angst of the Democrats. . .is about something far more dangerous to the Republic than mere political power.

What we are seeing is a fight for the political soul of the nation. We've had these before, in the existential sense. . .in my political lifetime, the civil rights movement, the anti-Vietnam war movement, the women’s rights versus, to a certain extent, the right to life movement. But this time it's totally and completely a fight about God. . .specifically, whether God is going to rule in the United States.

The Constitution says that would be illegal, and any serious expert can tell you that not only were the Founders liberal in their interpretation of the Deity, but they intentionally enshrined a purely secular civic government, including the courts. They didn't think that Jesus had an official plan for us, much less did they think that politicians who defined their duties in secular terms were defying the word of God.

Tom Delay manifestly believes this, and it sounds like any number of Senate Republicans either agree, or lack the imagination or moral courage to disagree. . .why else would some endorse threats against Republican-appointed judges who dare to interpret the law in secular terms? This is what the Bolton fight is really about: you can't dump him, because that lets the Democrats win on both the facts and principle. . .fatal notions to a desire to pack the courts with religious and secular policy extremists.

Why else would there be the constant drumbeat of attacks on the "liberal media", except to undermine public trust in the Constitutionally provided mediator between the politicians and the people?

The Founders knew how to protect what they intended; this crowd has figured out how to undermine the very rule of law in the United States. Listen to what DeLay is arguing...that his excesses have nothing to do with his "persecution", interesting choice of word, by the Democrats and their "liberal press allies". If a majority of Congressional Republicans don't, in their hearts, see the hypocrisy of all this, the Republic is doomed.

The real story behind Bolton and DeLay is obvious, to anyone not already seduced by the dark side.

I can't emphasize the importance of this.

Connect the dots. There's still time