62 Comments

1. Kyda Sylvester:

Laugh-out-loud funny heading there, Roger.

The sharks are circling the water but this time it’s themselves they’re sizing up for attack. I love it when fascists implode.

It’s always a good day when Bush decides to wash his hands. How many does this make?

Jun 4, 2005 - 10:09 pm 2. Ron:

All those fascist murderers in one place, what a lot of trouble could be nipped in the bud with a 10,000 pound Daisy cutter. Now that would send a message wouldn’t it, the phone would be ringing but the boy’s wouldn’t be picking up the phone. The Syrians have shown by their actions not to be friends but enemies, why cut them slack and let our boys and girls killed in Iraq.

Jun 4, 2005 - 10:10 pm 3. Sandy P:

“Duck season.”

“Rabbit season.”

So many choices, so little time.

Jun 4, 2005 - 10:47 pm 4. Kyda Sylvester:

That was a very interesting report, especially the part about Operation Matador and the double-dealing Assad (what do you suppose it would take to get him to Gitmo?). Thanks, Roger.

Jun 4, 2005 - 10:55 pm 5. Homer:

Roger, Debka has a higher trust factor with most of us than all the MSM combined. We know what we are getting.

Jun 4, 2005 - 11:09 pm 6. Ron Wrght:

Middle East Quarterly: What is Baathism?

Roger

A source of mine just sent me this link a couple days ago. This is a must read to understand the reach of the Baathist Party. The party hardliners are the ones actually in control in Syria.

*****

Middle East Quarterly: What is Baathism?

Kanan Makiya: Baathism is one of the many streams of Arab nationalist ideology and practice. It is undoubtedly the most virulent strain. While Michel Aflaq, one of the founders of the Baath party, was interested in fascist ideology, the party started to fuse elements of socialist ideology with Arab nationalism after World War II.

[...]

Read More

Jun 4, 2005 - 11:33 pm 7. ed:

Hmmmm.

Ok. This is going to be a wierd bit of speculation, so if I go too far please let me know.

What if Assad wants to eliminate the Baath Party in Syria completely and Bush is helping him?

Frankly I don’t know anything about Assad. I know he was trained as an eye doctor and that he stayed out of politics completely until his father’s death. Then he was, I thought, kinda forced into taking over.

What strikes me as odd is both Syria’s bizzare set of stumbles and Bush’s extremely magnimanity on not striking at Syria.

1. Why bother supporting the insurrection in Iraq?

It can’t be because of democracy. Dictatorships have existed alongside democracies for generations now with little ill effects. Sure there’s some unrest, but a strong military can always put down insurrections. And having a democracy nearby offers the opportunity for graft, corruption and big profits.

Really now. Anybody think Bush wouldn’t be willing to send a couple billion Assad’s way if Syria weren’t supporting the insurrection?

2. Why pull out of Lebanon?

If all we’re talking about is public opinion, then so what? The Syrian Army murdered tens of thousands of people stamping out an insurrection in Syria. Why the hestitation now?

So what if Assad wants nothing to do with the Baath Party or running Syria? What if he’s nothing more than a figurehead and the actual power lies in a cabal of generals? What if Assad is working with Bush to destabilise Syria for a revolution?

Because nothing Syria has done, or the Bush administration has NOT done, has made any sense.

Jun 5, 2005 - 4:49 am 8. chuck:

OT: Back to Africa, I like this opinion column in The Telegraph.

Jun 5, 2005 - 7:00 am 9. chuck:

OT: A nice essay on the EU vote. Its the Week in Review!

Jun 5, 2005 - 7:56 am 10. Rick Ballard:

Why should DEBKA be regarded as less trustworthy than the NYT or al-WaPo? It uses a different presentation template and introduces facts selectively to support the template but in what way does that differ from AP or the other two propaganda rags mentioned above?

An absolutely honest and transparent description of DEBKA would be “DEBKA – An Israeli based NYT/al-WaPo style information service.” Some type of apology to DEBKA might be necessary from time to time, given that they are generally more factually accurate than the NYT/al-WaPo. Either that, or start referring to the AP/NYT/al-WaPo as having “renowned erratic qualities”. Of course, my personal favorite descriptor would be “organs for the dissemination of seditious agitprop” which is honest and transparent but might have a bit too much of a blowtorch feel.

Jun 5, 2005 - 8:14 am 11. David Thomson:

ìMiddle East Quarterly: What is Baathism?î

This is the real question: What is Baathism today? Are there many dogmatic believing Baathists? Most of these members are probably similar to the former Marxists at the time of the Soviet Unionís collapse. They are merely cynical thugs who seek the best deal possible. Attaining an affluent lifestyle is their first and primary interest. I get the impression that Syriaís government will change dramatically for the better before the end of the year. It should be the next domino to fall.

Jun 5, 2005 - 8:40 am 12. Jamie Irons:

OT to chuck (7:56 AM):

That TimesOnline article, “The Peasant’s Revolt” — was superb!

Jamie Irons

Jun 5, 2005 - 8:46 am 13. PeterUK:

Chuck,

The Federasts have not as yet stood in public with tears streaming down their faces crying,”They don’t like us,they really don’t like us”.

Incidentally Jenkins is a lefty and was an advisor to Tony Blair,since it has been leaked that Tone,never a one to jump on a loser, has cooled on the EU,could this be part of the ongoing distancing process? Blair is quoted as saying, “Europe is not worth fighting for but Africa is”,strange I thought we paid him to fight for Britain.It would appear that Blair wishes to leave a legacy,I trust his impeccable opportunists instinct.

France and Germany have recently held a summit,funny I thought it was a European Union,it is odds on that are going to ambush Blair when he becomes the EU President.

Jun 5, 2005 - 9:12 am 14. chuck:

PeterUK,

With the Euro staggering about looking ready to collapse, I have got to wonder what Chirac and Schroder can do. Seem that events may just have outrun their intervention.

Re Simon, yeah, I vaguely recalled him as leftward and wasn’t quite sure what to make of the article. A thought that had been kicking about in my mind for some years is that the EU would cause the European states to disintegrate into their constituent parts. Seems like Simon is saying this is likely to happen anyway. It is easy to forget that modern Germany was a product of Prussian conquest, modern France of internal conquest by the revolutionary armies, so even these countries are patchworks. A continent of principalities could be an interesting place and would certainly demand a political structure bearing little resemblence to the current EU.

Jun 5, 2005 - 9:31 am 15. PJ:

Actually, you may be right, Ed. This could be Baby Assad’s get-out-of-jail-free card. How positively Rovian!

I wonder if Michael Moore will get the seat of honor at this convention.

Jun 5, 2005 - 9:46 am 16. PeterUK:

Chuck,

Europe of the Regions was a princple tool of this bastard state of Europe.England was to be broken up into some twelve regions and disappear from the map,Scotland and Wales were to remain.

Our many jowled Deputy Prime Minister has recently been given a kicking as he tried to set up Regional Assemblies for these regions.Some of the processes were found to be illegal,but the main objection is that County,City,Town and Parish Councils already exist,so either there was going to be an extra layer of government or the other councils were going to lose power.

Interestingly some of the Regional Assemblies had set up offices in Brussels,sadly it was found that the County Councils refused to fund them and that they didn’t have any support.

This great political scam was not a very astute move when the public places politicians just above journalists and nonces,but below pimps, pushers, pickpockets,used car dealers,lawyers and double glazing salesmen.

Jun 5, 2005 - 9:51 am 17. ed:

Hmmm.

Frankly I think anyone operating a country in contention with the USA must realise the long term prospects aren’t all that good. And let’s face facts, if we could buy our way out of trouble we probably should. If Kim Jong Il called up Bush and asked for $5 billion, in small unmarked bills, to hand over control of North Korea, frankly I’d do it.

So perhaps Assad sees the writing on the wall too. Or perhaps he wanted nothing to do with this in the first place. It seems that subsequent generations to dictators are either wholeheartedly interested, such as Uday, in which case you have to really watch those bastards. Or they want nothing to do with it, which might describe Assad.

So if you were Assad and got dragooned into being a figurehead, i.e. “do this or die”, then how would you get out of it? The simplest way I could think of is to let the driving faction overextend itself and to use the American military as an anvil. Let the driving faction wear itself out and lose internal credibility. In the meantime funnel operational intel into American hands and try to destabilize the current political setup.

Which rather describes Syria today.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:17 am 18. Kyda Sylvester:

Thanks, Chuck, for two superb pieces (I feel like Anthony Daniels has been rattling around in my head…although he organizes and expresses my thoughts infinitely better than I ever could).

I love this from “The Peasants Revolt”:

The Dutch government had tried to scare them into a yes. It used television footage of Auschwitz and Srebrenica to imply that a no vote meant war. It said that electricity would fail and lights would go out. The economics minister, Laurens-Jan Brinkhorst, took leave of his democratic senses and declared the referendum stupid because the Dutch people “are being allowed to vote on an issue they know nothing about”. The prime minister, Jan Peter Balkenende, pleaded with the electorate not to “humiliate me when I go to Brussels”, an invitation no red-blooded democrat could refuse.

I often rail at the hubris of our elected officials but they’re mere pikers when stacked up against the Euros.

As long as we’re linking OT, Glenn Reynolds has a WSJ piece (requires registration) about the decline of old media and the rise of “we-dia” (can’t say I think much of that tag).

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:30 am 19. PeterUK:

Chuck,

You might like the view of the future of the Euro to go with the Jenkins piece http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/06/04/do0401.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/06/04/ixop.html

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:33 am 20. simone_r:

A judo coup against one’s own regime?

“When you hear hoof beats, think of horses before zebras”

There seem to be a lot of zebras running around though.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:38 am 21. Kyda Sylvester:

Peter, the usurpation of local control is a hard row to hoe. It’s thought to be why New Jersey politics at the state level is, has been and will continue to be such a sinkhole of ineptitude and corruption. Republicans are firmly entrenched in their local fiefdoms and see no reason to rock the boat.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:43 am 22. David Thomson:

“As long as we’re linking OT, Glenn Reynolds has a WSJ piece (requires registration) about the decline of old media and the rise of “we-dia” (can’t say I think much of that tag).”

Her is the free WSJ link:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006779

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:46 am 23. chuck:

PeterUK,

I hadn’t heard that bit about the regions. How seriously are the Welsh and Scotch Parliaments taken? All I’ve heard is the Scotch Parliament building was a bit *ahem* over cost.

Getting rid of the Euro sounds like a major chore, it was hard enough to set it up in the first place. Yet the reasons for doing so look compelling. Somehow, I think that Europe is going to be dealing with its own problems for the next decade or two, being anti-American isn’t going to solve anything. Perhaps we should also thank Chirac and Schroder for rousing the forces of nationalism, with unintended consequences, not doubt. History is funny that way.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:49 am 24. Kyda Sylvester:

I do not know whether the euro zone will break up (though I wouldn’t mind taking a small bet that it has less than 18 months to go in its present form)…

Oh goody, maybe I can take the trip to Italy back off the back burner.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:50 am 25. Buddy Larsen:

Kyda, wrt entrenched pols, whatever happened to term limits? It’s like we labored mightily, brought forth a mouse, then the mouse ran off, and we just shrugged.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:54 am 26. c:

Kyda, I have held both lira and Euro in reserve for travel there. Never was too sure about this great anti-US hegemon experiment.

Their recent referenda and our ‘04 election have shaken the international/ trans/ bureaucratzi class on both sides of the Atlantic. The Euro elites are as stunned that the French and Dutch voted to be less “Europeanized”, as our American betters were when Americans didn’t vote to be more like Europe.

National identity and character are counting for something, again.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:56 am 27. chuck:

OT: More on the US strategy in Asia, Beyond the War on Terror.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:59 am 28. chuck:

Buddy,

I don’t like the idea of term limits. My thought is that whoever stays in Washington the longest, runs the place. If we toss out the congress critters only bureaucrats will remain. Take your choice, but at least there is the theoretical chance of replacing the former.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:04 am 29. Kyda Sylvester:

Buddy, California does have term limits for governor (of sorts–it’s 2 terms consecutively) and the legislature (of sorts–when my Senator and my Assemblyman were term limited out, they just switched chambers–one of the perks of the bicameral system).

Term limits is one of those arguments that my philosophical self continually has with my pragmatic self.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:05 am 30. Kyda Sylvester:

Chuck–It’s lost in the fog of memory, but didn’t the courts rule that states could not term limit federal offices??

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:14 am 31. Kyda Sylvester:

If Kim Jong Il called up Bush and asked for $5 billion, in small unmarked bills, to hand over control of North Korea, frankly I’d do it.

In a New York minute. Would that it should be so easy.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:19 am 32. PeterUK:

Chuck,

The Scottish Assembly Ha Ha,the Welsh Assembly Ha Ha Ha ha…The cruel truth is neither can exist without the English taxpayers money.We have the ludicrous situation where Scottish MPs at Westminster can vote on how English money is spent in England but English Mps cannot vote on how English money is spent in Scotland.This is known as the West Lothian problem and will one day come to a parting of the ways.

As a footnote if it were not for the Labour constituencies in Scotland we would not have a Labour government.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:22 am 33. Kyda Sylvester:

2. Why pull out of Lebanon?

If all we’re talking about is public opinion, then so what? The Syrian Army murdered tens of thousands of people stamping out an insurrection in Syria. Why the hestitation now?

Baby Assad stepped in it big time with the Hariri assassination. Even his staunchest Euro supporters were pissed off, disgusted and generally fed up.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:26 am 34. Buddy Larsen:

So true…worse to limit the good than to not limit the bad.

Jun 5, 2005 - 11:43 am 35. Buddy Larsen:

The Good, the Bad, and the Limited.

Jun 5, 2005 - 1:00 pm 36. ed:

Hmmm.

“Baby Assad stepped in it big time with the Hariri assassination. Even his staunchest Euro supporters were pissed off, disgusted and generally fed up.”

And that means what? That the European elite wouldn’t continue supporting Syria? Is that at all an issue when Syria is getting so much support from *Iran*? And when has anyone notice the European elites giving so much as a second thought to Lebanon?

Wouldn’t it have been extremely easy for Syria to inflict a sectarian war there? Syria still controls Hezbollah, which is also the largest single armed group in Lebanon. Syria still controlled the government. It’s not THAT difficult to create a pretext.

Would Europe have treated Assad worse than they did Saddam? I don’t think so at all. I think Assad could easily have inflicted a new civil war in Lebanon, remember that was the primary fear. Then Assad could have used that pretext to again impose Syrian military rule. Perhaps even take the second step of absorbing Lebanon into Syria proper. If Assad were divide Lebanon into seperate provinces, based on the various divisions in the Lebanese people, I don’t think there would have been much opposition.

Really. What has been the European elite’s reaction to past fait accomplis? A shrug of the shoulders and a desire to work with the new order? Well, yes. That was the reaction after the invasion of Kuwait.

Frankly I think Assad could easily have turned Lebanon into a bloody pit and retained control. Assad could have quietly threatened to turn Lebanon into a bloody pit, and still retained control. And I think Assad could have made threats, absorbed Lebanon but give slight autonomy to each individual ethnic/religous area and easily kept control.

No offense to anyone but the people in Darfur are still waiting for the European elites to stop making deals with Sudan.

Jun 5, 2005 - 2:11 pm 37. ed:

Hmmmm.

“Peter, the usurpation of local control is a hard row to hoe. It’s thought to be why New Jersey politics at the state level is, has been and will continue to be such a sinkhole of ineptitude and corruption. Republicans are firmly entrenched in their local fiefdoms and see no reason to rock the boat.”

That’s a curious thing since the Democratic party is so strong in NJ. Most towns are run by Democrats and the Democratic party almost has a lock on the legislature.

And frankly most Republican politicans in NJ are hardly either.

Jun 5, 2005 - 2:13 pm 38. Kevin P:

Roger;

“What is Baathism?”

At this point Baathism is just a cover name for for a small group of battling families or cliques struggling for power. I think any political philosophy is just window dressing for getting control of the whip hand. This is no different then a mafia family that has the Don die and the various sons manuever for control.It is probably smarter to study the history of battles for the title of king rather then try to find the dialectic underpinnings of the party.

As far as the EU constitution the recent rejections will just delay the inevitable. I have misplaced the exact quote but one of the leading EU technocrats said that whether the vote in France was yes or no the EU march from a loose confederation to a unified USE will continue, with or without the OK of those pesky citizens. I am at a loss at why any intelligent UK citizen doesn’t realize that they will minor partners in a EU dominated by France and Germany. Why any sane person would allow themselves to give up sovereignty so they could become France’s valet is beyond my imagination. France tried and failed for centuries to make Britain their lapdogs. Is the U.K. really going to hand it over to the likes of Villepan and Chirac. Churchill must be crying to see his country handed over without a fight.

Jun 5, 2005 - 2:42 pm 39. Kyda Sylvester:

There are plenty of localities in Republican hands in New Jersey and the party seems content with that–local control in certain areas of the state. Few seem to seriously aspire to more and no one seems particularly interested in any kind of meaningful governmental reform–why go looking for trouble. What’s a New Jersey Republican anyhow? Clifford Case? Tom Kean? Christy Todd?

Jun 5, 2005 - 3:01 pm 40. PeterUK:

Kevin P.

Carl von Clausewiz said,”War is not a mere act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political activity by other means”.

The EU is a continuation of war by other means.

Most in the UK do not want anything to do with the EU,except trade, but this abomination has been surreptitiously and insidiously insinuated into the lifeblood and polity of the nation.It has distorted the political process,every nasty little twist and turn has been hidden or called something else.

Legislation has gone onto the statute book by statutory instruments without debate or disguised in the small print,it is only when we find that something is illegal or compulsory do we know.

Often regulations do not take effect until long after some treaty or other has been signed,but the worst casuistry in all this is that governments have claimed legislation as thir own.This has two reasons, one so that we don’t find out that Westminster is a hollow sham and power now resides elsewhere,and two it allows our civil servants to gold plate regulations to make them even more stupid and draconian.

Other than that I’m all for it.

Jun 5, 2005 - 3:14 pm 41. Kyda Sylvester:

You guys never should have given up your guns.

Jun 5, 2005 - 3:24 pm 42. PeterUK:

t

Jun 5, 2005 - 3:24 pm 43. Kevin P:

PeterUK:

I may take another 20 to 40 years but someday the people of the UK are going to come face to face with what they have given away.There will be some legislation out of Brussels that will enrage the population.They will throw out whatever party is in power. And it won’t make any difference. brussels will threaten economic penalties for non compliance. And some eurocrat will spit out this line. “The citizens of the UK missed an opportunity to shut up>”

Jun 5, 2005 - 5:47 pm 44. Jamie Irons:

PeterUK

You said at 3:24 PM (and I quote):

t

Now it was a famous countrman of yours who famously wrote:

“Brevity is the soul of wit–”

But this may be going too far…

Jamie Irons

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:01 pm 45. Jamie Irons:

I wrote

countrman

but of course I meant countryman.

Perhaps I should have said paisan…

Jamie Irons

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:05 pm 46. PeterUK:

Jamie,

I thought it only right to give old von Clausewitz his full name.If you just cut and paste the quote round the t it all makes sense.

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:11 pm 47. PeterUK:

Kevin,

Our unwritten constitution says that no government can sign away that which has been signed away also no government can sign anything which binds a subsequent government,Lastly Brussels has no money and we do,as soon as we get politicians with sufficiently endowed in the gonad department it will come to pass,Ye Verily,that we will tell them to depart in a copulating mode.After all it is partly our contributions which keep the mendicant nations from going up in flames.

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:18 pm 48. Jamie Irons:

Peter,

There must be something funny with my browser (the latest incarnation of Apple’s “Safari”)…

All I get with your 3:24 PM post is the single letter t…

That’s why I made my little “joke”…

;-(

Jamie Irons

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:23 pm 49. Buddy Larsen:

“T for the Countrman”…Cat Stevens. Or as he is known now Mahhamed Dabba Dabba Dabba.

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:23 pm 50. chuck:

Ye Verily,that we will tell them to depart in a copulating mode.

Perhaps it is time to revisit this classic: The British Empire’s second-greatest gift to the world.

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:38 pm 51. PeterUK:

Jamie,

You are right,it would be easier to move the t to the von Clausewiz at 03:14.

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:39 pm 52. PeterUK:

Chuck ,

Yes it is a great source of pride,Anglo Saxon is such an expressive language,long after Shakespeare and Milton are forgotten,when you stand on one our hills you will hear,just above the beat of the wind farms, an echo down the centuries,a faint ghostly voice, “Fack Orf”

Jun 5, 2005 - 6:48 pm 53. Buddy Larsen:

LOL, Peter–if you’re ‘earin’ that a LOT, yer prolly doin’ JUST fine!

Jun 5, 2005 - 7:02 pm 54. Buddy Larsen:

O/T but incredible WTC 911 survivor story:

Jun 5, 2005 - 7:56 pm 55. ed:

Hmmm.

“There are plenty of localities in Republican hands in New Jersey and the party seems content with that–local control in certain areas of the state. Few seem to seriously aspire to more and no one seems particularly interested in any kind of meaningful governmental reform–why go looking for trouble. What’s a New Jersey Republican anyhow? Clifford Case? Tom Kean? Christy Todd?”

No offense but if NJ were such a bastion of Republicanism then why is it a blue state? Both senators are democrats. The ex-govenor is a democrat. The current govenor is a democrat. The next govenor probably will be a democrat. Take a look at the 2004 election map. Other than a couple counties, including Monmouth, the entire state of NJ voted democrat.

And yet this is a bastion of Republicanism? be real here.

As for past Republican govenors, that’s who people elect when their taxes rise to too high a level. But since the legislature is controlled by democrats, there’s not much that can be done.

And as for Kean. Really now, you did read that monstrosity of the 9/11 commission right? As for Christine Todd Whitman. Don’t make me laugh.

Jun 5, 2005 - 9:19 pm 56. Kyda Sylvester:

In fact in 2004 Bush carried 8 of 21 NJ counties. But what is your point?

Mine is hardly that NJ is bastion of Republicanism but that there are pockets of Republican control at the local level (county freeholders, muncipal governments) and that seems to be all the state party aspires to (after all, local politics in New Jersey is fairly lucrative). It certainly seldom sees fit to field a viable candidate at the state-wide level and even when it does it’s someone on the order of a Case or a Kean or a Todd-Whitman. You want to laugh, knock yourself out.

Jun 5, 2005 - 10:23 pm 57. ed:

Hmmm.

“Peter, the usurpation of local control is a hard row to hoe. It’s thought to be why New Jersey politics at the state level is, has been and will continue to be such a sinkhole of ineptitude and corruption. Republicans are firmly entrenched in their local fiefdoms and see no reason to rock the boat.”

Let me point you back to your original statement.

Why should Republicans be enamored of state governance of local issues when Republicans cannot gain control at the state level? That has been my point. Which is why I kept pointing out the weakness of the NJ GOP in state level elections. Why the NJ GOP hasn’t been able to take even one senate seat and why the GOP doesn’t have any control over the state legislature.

Logically then what you’re advocating is that Republicans should immediately cut their own political throats by giving up local control, the only control they actually have, in exchange for being completely eliminated from NJ politics.

Really now. What do you want? You want Republicans to advocate what? Elimination of their “little fiefdoms”? In exchange for what? Complete control by state level democrats?

If you’ve got a serious point to make, I haven’t found it. So either restate it clearly or give it up.

Jun 6, 2005 - 10:49 am 58. Buddy Larsen:

Ed, it’s none of my business, but if I’m reading right, you’re inside one of the local GOP organizations and have taken offense at the other commenter’s characterization. I’d like to suggest, if I may, that you and she are natural allies and that quibbling over such a fine point may be indicative of precisely the sort of problem that the party has in the state.

Jun 6, 2005 - 11:25 am 59. Kyda Sylvester:

Look, New Jersey politics and government is a hotbed of corruption. The Republican party in New Jersey has demonstrated no interest whatsoever in changing that status quo. Since it has no power at the state level and seemingly doesn’t care about doing anything to change that status quo either, what could it be protecting? Those “local fiefdoms” are the Republican party in NJ ergo it must be protecting them. Nothing will change if it’s left up to the Democrats because they have things just the way they want them. So it’s up to the Republicans to advocate for change. They don’t do it either. Why not? Well, perhaps they too have things just the way they want them. Like I said, politics at the local level is lucrative.

I apologize for my poor communication skills. On the other hand, like Ed Koch once told a reporter who kept pounding him on the same point, I can explain it for you but I can’t understand it for you.

Jun 6, 2005 - 4:44 pm 60. ed:

Hmmm.

1. “Ed, it’s none of my business, but if I’m reading right, you’re inside one of the local GOP organizations”

Actually I’m not. I have very very little to do with the NJGOP, and the GOP in general, since I figured out that the GOP is doing very little for my issues as a fiscal conservative.

2. “Look, New Jersey politics and government is a hotbed of corruption.”

This is correct. To my knowledge there are currently about 23 townships under investigation for corruption and fraud. A dozen school systems where administrators have embezzled money. And there have been at least three county prosecutors who have stolen vast quantities of forfeiture funds. I think a couple years ago NJ had the distinction of having the most town mayors under simultaneous indictments of any state in the union.

3. “The Republican party in New Jersey has demonstrated no interest whatsoever in changing that status quo.”

And how, and why, would the Republican party do so? You’ve pointed out yourself, as have I, that the NJGOP has very little power. It holds relatively few seats in the state legislature. It doesn’t hold the govenorship, and it doesn’t look like it will either with Corazine running. It doesn’t hold either senate seat.

Just HOW would the NJGOP enact this change? What is the process for a MINORITY party in state level politics to FORCIBLY change the entire political structure of the state of New Jersey?

And WHY?

Right now the NJGOP, again, does not have any serious political power. The only thing it can offer it’s members is the limited self governance at the local level. What you’re proposing is that the NJGOP tell it’s members to go F*** themselves and hand over everything to the Democrats.

Ok. So why aren’t you yelling at the DEMOCRATS?

Your heart might be in the right place, but your position is frankly absurd.

Jun 7, 2005 - 7:53 am 61. Buddy Larsen:

There’s more than one way to skin a cat, Ed.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:15 am 62. rosignol:

Frankly I think anyone operating a country in contention with the USA must realise the long term prospects aren’t all that good. And let’s face facts, if we could buy our way out of trouble we probably should. If Kim Jong Il called up Bush and asked for $5 billion, in small unmarked bills, to hand over control of North Korea, frankly I’d do it.

Cheap at twice the price, compared to 1) the cost of deposing the SOB by force, and 2) the property damage and loss of life NK forces could inflict on SK.

Jun 8, 2005 - 5:29 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: