Canadian Loony NOT on Life-Support

Canada, Economy

Bill O’Reilly will not like this, but the Canadian economy, tied as it is at the hip to ours, is doing just fine. Their loony is not on life-support like our dollar. No banks have gone under there—not yet.

This may mystify American teletwits (and their viewers). That’s because they try to present the recession as a function of market failure unmoored from the political class’s pillaging. It’s the housing market, the morons exclaim. Or Barack Obama’s white grandma.

Canada’s banks, I believe, are less promiscuous about increasing the money supply. Because its central bank is not as lenient about allowing the commercial banks to pyramid checkbook money on top of their own reserves, it’s my understanding they’ll be doing much less feel-good lending than our whorish paper peddlers.

Correct me if I’m wrong about that. I’m not, however, wrong about the Canadian economy, which is, so far, humming along.

Update 2: The Ethnic Particularism Of Barack Obama

Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections 2008, Race, Racism

“The solutions offered by conservative commentators to Barack Obama’s existential crisis have been conspicuous in their shallowness. Unlike Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Victor Davis Hanson is no fake scholar; Hanson has intellectual heft. Yet he proposed that ‘all Obama would have to do is apologize, quit the church, and begin talking about the issues.’

How about admitting himself to rehab, or, even better, expiating on Oprah? (I read on the Los Angeles Times’ blog that Oprah, wise woman that she is, had long ago quit Trinity United Church of Christ for reasons that evaded Obama, her protégé.)

No, I give Obama credit. His reaction to the nation-wide reaction to Rev. Wright’s fulminating—everywhere on full display—was anything but shallow. It was, however, profoundly disturbing.”

Read the complete column, “The Ethnic Particularism Of Barack Obama,” on Jewcy.com. Join the debate on Jewcy; post your comments here, or, even better, do both.

Update 1: What fun; I’ve been fending off a few attacks on the Jewcy Comments forum, here. Jump in.

Update 2: Well, I learned my lesson and that is never to mix it up with the masses. This was the first time I went ahead and partook in an open forum exchange. Before long, the malignant “Shshshshaun,” with whom I’ve been very generous on this forum over the years, chimed in, began attributing quotations to me that are not mine, assigning views to me that aren’t mine, and lumping me with company I do not keep.
This is the Zeitgeist folks. People cannot tell assertion from argument; fact from fiction. As to manners and ethics; they do not exist. One cannot retain dignity in debate around fulminating hordes.
The funny thing is this non-entity; this repulsive little unmanly maggot—here is one of his first letters to our forum, which one headless chicken on the Jewcy forum has crowned a fine argument—thinks he can, with his limited cerebral agility and reach, damage me intellectually. Who raises these inflated gas bags—and there are many like maggot man roaming the Internet—to believe they are what they’re not?

Lesson learned: stay far from the madding crowds. And stop allowing scum onto Barely a Blog.

Updated: Slavery’s YOUR Original Sin

Barack Obama, Crime, Democracy, Elections 2008, Race, Racism

In case you’ve been wondering where I’ve been all day after that disturbing speech Obama gave:

I’ve been writing an exclusive analysis of it for this site, Jewcy.com.

Well, we’ll see how fabulous Jewcy is once the essay is up. It sure doesn’t comport with other odes to Obama they’ve erected there already. What does cohere perfectly is Obama’s worldview, which revolves around slavery and race; and his wicked impious pastor’s philosophy. They are of a piece.

Not inelegantly, Obama revealed his true colors. Again, a profoundly disturbing address, despite the anti-intellectual adulation with which it is being greeted in all too many corners.

I hope to be able to link to my analysis shortly.

Update (March 19): On Jewcy.com “The Ethnic Particularism of Barack Obama By Ilana Mercer.” Details in this blog post.

Spitzer Also Edited The Harvard Law Review

Business, Constitution, Democrats, Ethics, Justice, Law, Natural Law

(The title of the post is a tad unfair to Obama, I know. But editing The Harvard Law Review is clearly no litmus test for purity of intellect or ethics.)

One thing is for sure, Spitzer did not forge his political and fiscal fortunes by means of voluntary exchanges on the free market. The Spitzer piranha didn’t give law teeth; but used bad law to bite business to the bone.

Daniel Gross of Slate had this to say back in 2004:

Spitzer made maximum hay out of the “New York State’s Martin Act. The 1921 legislation, as Nicholas Thompson noted in this Legal Affairs piece, gives extraordinary powers and discretion to an attorney general fighting financial fraud. He can ‘subpoena any document he wants from anyone doing business in the state,’ make investigations secret or public at his whim, and ‘choose between filing civil or criminal charges whenever he wants.’ Extraordinarily, Thompson notes, ‘people called in for questioning during Martin Act investigations do not have a right to counsel or a right against self-incrimination. Combined, the act’s powers exceed those given any regulator in any other state.’”

Spitzer embodied abuse of power. As a government goon, he was an extortionist extraordinaire. “He didn’t simply indict. He issued press releases. When Spitzer published a press release detailing a shocking betrayal of trust by” this or the other “of Wall Street’s most trusted names,” the company would lose billions in market value in a matter of days and would quickly settle with the thug.

I know I’ve defended the naturally licit actions of scum such as Scooter Libby against naturally illicit prosecutions. And yes, I support the decriminalization of prostitution (but not its moral elevation). Yes again: I believe Spitzer’s funds are his to move about, and that his transactions were perfectly licit. So call me inconsistent on this count, but this character is so evil, contemptible, and uncontrollable (and nauseatingly hypocritical), I consider it a mitzvah that he has been removed from office and taken DOWN, if by unjust means.

I want to see Spitzer’s name live on in infamy; he ought to ultimately die disgraced, and if we lived under a just legal system, be prosecuted—but for his crimes against innocent members of the business community. Unfortunately—and I guess I’m nothing if not consistent—I’m with Alan Dershowitz on the following count: Spitzer ought not to be prosecuted for his moral failings. Although I’m filled with schadenfreude at the spectacle of Spitzer, there is no case to be made for his prosecution in libertarian law.

More later on Spitzer’s ho—or rather on the manner in which media have infantilized the girl and turned her into a victim.