Gunfight in the IP Corral, Part the Third
It would be undignified to allow Mr. Scoville to “unload both barrels” without firing back, especially when I maintain a strong belief in my subject matter. Let it first be said, however, that Mr. Scoville is right on at least one point. He accuses me of succumbing to simple political gamesmanship in one of my points, and he is correct.
There are three types of argument a man may make: that of principle, that of policy, and that of politics. Principle, of course, deals with the philosophy of a thing, and whether it is right or wrong to consider pursuing a course of action. Policy deals with the methodology of a course of action. Politics, however, deals with the egos and lower thoughts of men. I succumbed to a political discussion earlier, and it was ill-founded.
As for the rest…
First, I did not mention “transparency” in my discussion for a reason. The idea that men would wish to be transparent is a noble sentiment, but ridiculous to expect. Would you wish to broadcast your ideas and motivations for each major decision you are forced to make in your life? Heavens no! We wish to make a decision, argue only in support of it, and then leave it alone. To expect more of our politicians is absurd.
“Transparency” is produced only when it benefits men to reveal certain information about the other. A senator will not reveal his corporate ties unless they are used against him by an opponent. Likewise, if two opponents have both received unsavory corporate contributions, they will not reveal the other’s – this is an understood ideal scenario of game theory. Julian Assange has nothing to lose by revealing the Afghan War Diaries – and, as he probably disagrees with the war, everything to gain. On the contrary, the U.S. government has everything to lose from transparency and nothing to gain.
Mr. Scoville argues that classified documents should always remain classified in the interest of troop safety. Were that the case, the torture at Abu Ghraib in violation of U.S. and international law as well as the questionable behavior of the Blackwater organization. The argument that war crimes are an unfortunate accident of war has been used time and time again. When they are committed by the victor, they can be ignored. When they are committed by our enemy, they must be condemned. We can go back and forth on this.
The fact of the matter is that Wikileaks has not posted any information it has received regarding the war over the past seven months. Any information released to the New York Times (and others) is old news on the front, but new news to the American public. Were Mr. Assange to release documents from the past month, even the past six months, he would draw my condemnation as well. But this is not the case.
Though I have referenced him here, it is also noted that I did not mention Mr. Assange by name anywhere in the article except in the meta-tag. I have no doubt that Mr. Assange no doubt thinks too highly of himself. I also believe that he injects his own opinions into the information, not to his credit. Yet to say that the only information he has posted were the things critical to the U.S. is entirely false. That, of course, is his most recent release. I think that you will find that it is not his only release, and that his fire has been directed against most everyone.
Mr. Scoville’s final point (except for the one about playing piano in fourth grade – which we shall address later) asks “since when did hunting down Osama bin Laden become an issue of political popularity?” This, of course, may be perhaps the heart of the issue. I do not believe Osama bin Laden is behind our involvement in Afghanistan any more. We have plenty of evidence to suggest that he is at least inactive or ineffective (if not dead), and perhaps more to suggest that our funds might be better spent cleaning up our intelligence community.
And yet, in summation, I cannot argue that the concerns about safety would be invalid had Mr. Assange simply delayed release of these documents until the day after the troops were sent home. Mr. Assange has provided no proof that anything occurred in Afghanistan outside the expected. Nor did he uncover anything comparable to Abu Ghraib that existed outside the realm of military strategy. While I believe that Wikileaks is a necessary counterbalance to that which would attempt to remain secret (regardless of its motivations), the organization made a questionable judgment call in timing. This cannot be disputed, and it was not appropriately discussed by myself or Mr. Scoville. For myself, I attempted to deflect criticism about timing. For Mr. Scoville, he attempted to criticize timing while ignoring the positive impact of a Wikileaks in the world. We are but men.
All this being said, it is most interesting to me that Mr. Scoville played piano in fourth grade while the other kids played football. I believe I was getting fitted for glasses in the fourth grade that would never be replaced by contacts – thus dooming me to a life of nerd. We also would both grow up to listen to Phish. Perhaps this says something about us, which we leave to your consideration.
Wikileaks and the Proverbial Cat and Bag
Full disclosure: I am a 100% supporter of Wikileaks.org. I continue to hear countless tales that this information could be used to compromise American troops on active duty, but I have yet to see any direct proof that it has done so. In fact, I believe that the organization actively strives to prevent that scenario in order to preserve its credibility.
That being said, the recent release of the Afghan War Diaries has raised some serious questions. The White House isn’t quite sure how it wants to play the papers: sometimes saying that they aren’t a big deal while at other times saying they “have the potential to be very harmful” to the U.S. Both the Democrats and Republicans have every reason to be a bit nervous about Wikileaks. For obvious reasons, the papers affect the Democratic administration trying to continue to sell a war that just became a lot more unpopular. Yet the Republicans should not forget that the majority of the papers deal with the war under President Bush, and they can be brought up again.
To be sure, the Afghan War Diaries are not a “smoking gun” in any sense of the word. But they do represent the next stage in the organization. In April, Wikileaks released video of a U.S. helicopter attack on civilians. Now, with the War Diaries, the game has stepped up. The organization has grown in popularity/notoriety, and the U.S. government doesn’t know if it’s a mere fad organization that got lucky, or the start of a trend that would be devastating to government secrecy.
This has bad news written all over it for the President choosing to continue the Afghan war, but it doesn’t mean much better for the Republican party. Their recent past / prospective presidential candidates have been McCain (hawk), Palin (hawk), Gingrich (hawk) and Romney (hawk). Meanwhile, the Tea Party is beginning to muster. One of their choice speakers (Paul) is a notable non-hawk. I won’t say a dove, but he is outspokenly in favor of withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan.
I will be watching with intent the discussions held in the wake of the War Diaries leaks. I will be watching more the progress of Wikileaks – for now, the next level of revelations could be far beyond some mixed communications reports from the front.
RightOnline Day 1 – “If you can blog…BLOG.”
United States Representative and conservative firebrand Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) addressed conference attendees after lunch today – he made some pretty broad tactical appeals to online activists that have been uncommon to date on the Right, and to that extent, I was pretty impressed with his speech. He also stuck mainly to economic issues, which is what conservative sweethearts will need to do on their end to help coaxing centrist and libertarian voters out of their strongholds, back into the political and policy spheres.
I’m not a cameraman, but you can view (well, hear really) Pence’s speech in its entirety at my Qik profile.
Cross-posted at Liberty Pundits and The Next Right.
RightOnline Day 1 – Building Coalitions
Las Vegas is insane.
Everything I’ve heard about this Disneyland-for-adults is true: neon, sparkles, bells & whistles, herds (and hordes) of people, STAR WARS slot machines (pictures later)…I will definitely have to come back here one day for purposes other than business. My friend Jon Henke (@JonHenke) and I flew from DC yesterday by way of Newark, NJ and didn’t even land in Vegas until 1am PT…it was a long day, and I slept in a bit. It was easy to do in my posh suite at the Venetian, with my sunken living room and remote-controlled drapes! Life is hard.
The first panel I attended today featured Todd Thurman (@toddthurman) of the Heritage Foundation, Brian Faughnan (@brianfaughnan) of Liberty Central, and Alexa Moutevelis (@alexashrugged) of the RNC, all moderated by my Liberty Pundits co-blogger Melissa Clouthier (@melissatweets). The panel focused on connecting grassroots activists in the field to policy shops in DC – like Heritage, Cato, or other think tanks – as well as to communications resources and activism training like those offered by FreedomWorks or the Leadership Institute.
Probably one of the better bits of information passed along during the discussion was the notion that activists in the field shouldn’t be shy about engaging DC-based resources. Yes, DC is busy. Yes, DC occasionally has a heightened, over-inflated sense of self. But DC is also sitting on piles of your cash, looking for a way to return value back to you. So don’t be shy about sending emails or picking up the phones to ask for help.
But more than just connecting grassroots activists to DC to get talking points and policy papers to support candidates back home, the panel focused on connecting activist to activist using technology – that means Twitter, Facebook, the blogosphere, and other online resources.
The RNC announced some nascent, new API and they are transitioning all of their online tools to an open-source platform…the API is apparently already available for developers…more on this later. Despite this move to make RNC resources more available to more people, there was some grumbling in the audience that the RNC fails (on occasion) to return voter vaults back to activists on the ground once they pull out of town following a race. This makes people currently involved with components of the Tea Party movement a bit reticent to cooperate with the RNC in Washington.
After a few questions, and after some dancing around the issue, I asked the panel: is there a sense, going into this November’s elections (and subsequently in 2012) that the Right should be worried about the Left exploiting a growing rift between conservatives and libertarians? If so, how can we, or more appropriately, should we be doing anything differently than the suggestions you’ve all made here today to, strengthen the coalition between these two groups?
The consensus from the panel seemed to be that there’s not really any danger this year – libertarians and conservatives agree in principle that the prevailing issue of this election is the economy, stupid. Throwing the bums out is priority #1 in 2010. But the funnel of candidates is currently full, and the new Congressional primary begins, effectively, on November 3 – it is possible that infighting on the Right might get nastier in 2011 and 2012.
Todd Thurman told me after the panel “We just need to make sure we’re talking, and that we’re sticking together in areas where we agree.” I agree in principle with this strategy, but only inasmuch as it’s a first step. Because there is potential for infighting to become nastier on the Right as we approach 2012, it’s important to talk about areas where we disagree too – libertarians remain (rightly) mistrustful of the Big Government GOP – the same GOP that is trying to ride the Tea Party Tiger into new majorities this fall. Ignoring our differences now can be our foil later.
Cross-posted at Liberty Pundits and The Next Right.
The Economic Potato, Part Two
Let’s just talk turkey here for a second, or rather, potato. The economic potato, if you will. I mentioned first that the first portion of the potato involved a refocusing of the government away from haphazard bailouts and an endless injection of liquidity into the system.
Let me also say that I believe governments can appropriately stimulate the economy, in a statement that will be a departure from conservative orthodoxy. There are certain industries whose grip over the economy is so strong that a small amount of funding has a large economic multiplier. These industries generally have use in every sector of the economy, but it is a rare meeting of the right industry with the right stimulus.
Next week, the House of Representatives is about to start discussing a portion of the Pickens Plan for energy independence. Specifically, they will be debating the merits of a $64,000 tax credit for trucking firms to buy rigs that run on natural gas. I support this plan.
The $64,000 tax credit can be used toward the acquisition of trucks. However, companies would still be held responsible for installing the refueling infrastructure necessary to fuel these rigs at their own expense. The trucks are useless without refueling stations, and it is questionable that any trucking company wants to buy natural gas trucks without also investing in the infrastructure to power them.
As such, it seems logical to me that trucking companies would first wish to upgrade the infrastructure in areas where their trucks can easily return to a base. For instance, the East Coast may see a new wave of fueling station upgrades as firms strategically install the minimum number of stations needed to make the trek from one key area to another. In a purely hypothetical situation, trains may cart goods from Baltimore to Boston, then natural gas trucks would transport certain goods to the Massachusetts area while standard gasoline trucks were used for the trips into Maine.
As businesses continued to realize cost savings from the natural gas machines, it would then behoove them to expand their infrastructure while foregoing purchases of diesel engines in exchange for the natural gas engines. Diesel engines would eventually be retired and trucking companies would maintain natural gas pumps at the necessary places.
Look what I did: I just stimulated the economy with a temporary $64,000 tax break on natural gas engines. But more than that – I gave us a long term direction.
Two things drove the U.S. economy from 2001 to 2008: war and egregious consumer spending driven by cheap credit. We are now tired of war, and credit is difficult to find. As such, we have no economy; we have no purpose. If we are going to rip out of this recession, the economy needs a leader.
I believe investment in alternative energy is the natural (no pun intended) leader for an improved economy. But infrastructure plays are not cheap, and the technology is not quite ready for a full roll-out. But is it possible that we have mis-judged alternative energy because we are thinking too big?
When I was in D.C., I noticed many public trash cans had solar panels on top. These panels powered a trash compactor within the can. Such was their purpose. High tech trash cans. I also regularly utilize a program at work called “PlanetSaver” which should really be called “Save the Company Money by Installing this Software That Turns Off Your Unused Monitor.” Little Windows scripting and suddenly BAM!, the firm is saving electricity costs. These are alternative energy plays. They are simple, and they work.
Quite frankly, wind farms are ugly. They also generally fail to produce the sheer amount of energy needed. But what if we stopped trying to make them do everything? What if we could sell a farmer a windmill at a reasonable price that would power his irrigation, and that was it?
I believe that for decades, innovation and economic growth valued the new and shiny rather than the efficient. By this, I mean that we have valued the computer for its capabilities to do more, rather than its ability to save time doing stuff we already did. As such, conservation (not only of funds, but of time or labor) as an economic engine has fallen out of favor. Yet there are signs that tell me it may be back.
Groupon, an application that promotes saving via coupon clipping, has recently received a $1 billion valuation. That is HUGE for a company that just sells coupons. Alternative energy may find its way as well when it can speak to companies about its cost-saving benefits. Also, you’ll have to make sure that you don’t have any liberals on the sales team that talk about saving the planet. That can backfire.
I believe cost-cutting will begin to be an economy-driver in and of itself, especially if epic inflation kicks in via the Federal Reserve. Time will tell.
And when we have found a way to distill alternative fuels from potatoes, then you shall have all the more reason to call me Prophet.
The Economic Potato, Part One
All of you need to get your act together, stat. Many of you are still operating in a sort of “pissed at Obama” mode that clouds judgment. You sit there, eating the finest of crabcakes and lobster from the East Coast, unaware that the powers that be have every intention of ripping even the lobster from your mouth. Either you take things too seriously or not seriously enough, or both.
The grand exit from this recession, desired by many, is not going to come in the way that the politicos, economists and financial planners believe it will. They (and many of you) are watching things like housing numbers, consumer spending, etc. for clues to the end of this situation. At the same time, they are decrying Obama “job-killing policies” and saying that mess like “austerity” will somehow fix us.
Idiots. If anyone thinks that austerity is some sort of magic pill that’s going to pull us out of the recession at a rapid-fire pace, they are, in a word, wrong. Austerity has all the possibility of throwing us into Great Recession Round 2, if not approached with the appropriate style. I only endorse austerity as the current Administration (and its enemy Republicans) have no notion of how to use stimulus of any sort.
Clearly, everyone has forgotten what makes successful economies happen. Successful economies occur when gentlemen with large brains see some way of capitalizing on gaps in the market and exploit them. We enter epic economic booms when the world is revolutionized, as was witnessed in the technology bubble of the ’90s. Investors, economists, politicians, etc. are so concerned about bubbles that they have forgotten the benefits of the Internet investment cycle. You are reading this post as a result of those investors and innovators alike. You will see it tweeted later today. The Internet has become so commonplace today that investors have forgotten the risks needed to put it in place.
The 2000s was not an investment cycle like the Internet cycle. We, as a country, did not do anything new. We built and upgraded many houses using styles familiar to architects of the 1990s. We purchased many consumer goods from China. And we patted ourselves on the back as we transitioned to a “service” economy.
I have no issue with a service economy in principle. However, if the economy can be compared to a baked potato, we have forgotten to cook the actual potato out in favor of making amazing butter for it.
When I state that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans understand stimulus, I am talking about potatoes. Democrats have decided to pursue a course of adding salt to the uncooked potato with poorly directed stimulus funding – in essence, by randomly injecting liquidity into the system. Republicans, on the other hand, scream “tax cuts” or “bacon bits” for the potato. Tax cuts for whom? Bush-era tax cuts seem to indicate that unconditional tax cuts do not spur real economic growth in a risk-averse populace.
Before I draw the fire of the conservative types that accidentally read this blog because of George, bear in mind that I am not unilaterally opposed to stimulus or tax cuts. I’m merely saying that neither party seems to be able to do it right. Neither one is cooking the potato.
Thus, I condone the use of austerity, so long as spending reductions outpace any sort of tax cuts. I am not in favor of false austerity, where spending is cut only marginally. If we’re going to do it, we must go big – and here’s why.
- There are reasonable long-term concerns about the deficit if we are expected to take charge of world growth again. Europe’s debt situation sucks, in a word. China’s looking like its growth may be a little long in the tooth. Latin America doesn’t seem to have the special sauce. So, if it is to be us to take up the economic torch, deficit-reduction plans should be in place.
- It would be far easier to negotiate currency terms with China if we didn’t need them to buy so much of our debt. Asking China to keep buying our debt and loosen the peg on the yuan is a mutually exclusive request.
- It would send the message to our corporate overlords that there are no more bailouts coming. Why should any company invest any more? If you wait long enough, Congressional Democrats will inevitably throw a bone out there. So far, they’ve covered the financial sector, the health care sector, the automobile sector, and probably the state governments next. The risk of spending your own money is a fool’s gamble when there’s money flying out of Washington.
While the first is a concern, the second and third bullet points deal with the heart of why austerity must be done with a purpose instead of half-assed. Austerity only works if we intend to send a message. Otherwise, long live record low interest rates and epic amounts of government debt.
There are two parts to this potato. This merely discusses the first – that austerity must become a part of the economy in tandem with the second half of the potato. I shall discuss the second half of the potato in my next post.
Failin’ Sarah Palin
She was an interesting tactical VP pick for McCain, especially after Barack Obama passed over selecting Hillary Clinton as his VP.
She’s constantly making headlines – people like her. She’s an effective fundraiser, edgy speaker, and potential 2012 presidential candidate.

I'm sorry, folks. I'm educated. I want an educated person representing me in the White House.
I wonder: did she quit spelling class as quickly as she quit the governorship of Alaska?
Update:
Apparently Governor Palin was embarrassed about the flap, and has since deleted the tweet. So, basically, the hyperlink above doesn’t take you anywhere anymore.







