The truth hurts
Bush 43--Not nearly as bad as Stalin!
Can't argue with that. On the other hand, Amnesty International is justifiably concerned that the US is assembling a global prison archipelago outside the rule of law:
"In August, the Independent Panel to Review Department of Defense Detention Operations, appointed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld following the publication of photographs of torture and ill-treatment committed by US personnel in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (see below), reported that since the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, about 50,000 people had been detained during US military and security operations.
US forces operated some 25 detention facilities in Afghanistan and 17 in Iraq (see below). Detainees were routinely denied access to lawyers and families. In Afghanistan, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access only to some detainees in Bagram and Kandahar air bases."
[Amnesty International Report 2005: United States of America]
"The USA, as the unrivaled political, military and economic hyper-power, sets the tone for governmental behaviour worldwide. When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a licence to others to commit abuse with impunity and audacity. From Israel to Uzbekistan, Egypt to Nepal, governments have openly defied human rights and international humanitarian law in the name of national security and “counter-terrorism”."
[Amnesty International Report 2005: Secretary General's Message]
The U.S. doesn't just set a bad example for other countries. We outsource torture and call it "extraordinary rendition."
Charles at Obsidian Wings is righteously indignant that the Secretary General of Amnesty International referred to Guantanamo as the gulag of our times. Now, in all fairness, Gitmo is just one little island in America's global penal archipelago.
Some right wingers infer that AI is applying a higher standard to the U.S. Granted, the U.S. didn't come off very well--but here's what the report had to say about North Korea, Iran, and Sudan, and our ally in the war on terror, Saudi Arabia.
It should also be noted that the Amnesty International report gives roughly equal time to almost every country in the world. No country's record is equated with that of any other nation. The report simply recounts the human rights abuses that have been documented over the past year. The summaries on France and Canada each get almost as many column inches as the U.S. Yet, nobody is accusing AI of equating France's human rights record with that of the U.S.
There's no question of moral relativism or double standards. The U.S. is playing in the big leagues of human rights violation.
Hurrah! We're #1!
Is that too sarcastic yet?
Posted by: The Wanderer | May 30, 2005 at 11:49 PM
Actually, it's Charles at Obsidian Wings. Which is less surprising.
Posted by: MMGood | May 31, 2005 at 12:12 AM
...and fasten your seat-belts, because it ain't over yet!
Posted by: verbatim | May 31, 2005 at 01:06 AM
Not worse than Stalin? So far.
Posted by: mudkitty | May 31, 2005 at 10:33 AM
This has been pretty typical of the right's echo-chamber: "We're all right, they're all wrong, they all just hate us, blah, blah, blah..."
It would be funny if it weren't so sad that apparently the only moral relativists in this argument seem to be the reactionaries and neo-Stalinists who some how want to equate complaining about American torture to moral relativism.
Not even logic is safe from torture...I blame Leo Strauss
mojo sends
Posted by: vanmojo | May 31, 2005 at 10:47 AM
Dick Cheney was on Larry King and voiced his indignation at the charges of Human Rights abuse. His "faux" indigantion and attempts to "kill the messenger" by discerditing the sources is ludicrous since many of these are FBI agents reporting on what they saw:
http://hereswhatsleft.typepad.com/home/2005/05/vice_president_.html
It should come as no surprise that this administration is waging a war on the judiciary because the release of those documents were ordered by a Federal Judge. The administration had them classed as secret for twenty-five years... not because they contained any security information but because they told the truth about what is going on.
Its not a secret that we have been "outsourcing" torture by sending prisoners to Egypt, Jordan, and Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan was visited by a US Human rights commission just prior to 9/11 and said the civil liberties were nonexistent, prisoners were routinely beaten with blunt objects, selective "boiling" of various of their body parts, and while they were there two prioners were died because they were boiled alive.
While the comparison to Stalin is gross exaggeration because Stalin murdered people by the millions and we on the other hand have only had 130 reported deaths of detainees to date. This of course is only the cases that we know about.
The fact remains that we have disregarded the moral standards of the past and now are engaged in horrific and inhuman acts. As a nation we no longer can claim the moral high ground that we have in the past as we have so often and so vociferously condemned other nations for human rights violations. Simply put we no longer have any credibility in the national arena and can no longer exert pressure on other nations in these matters.
As verbatim noted... "it ain't over yet" and there may be some truth in this. About eight weeks ago there was a large press fanfare where US Marshal's rounded up 10,000 felons in a mass sweep. They were desribed by the Marshal's spokesperson as "murders, child predators, rapist, and other felons that had warrants issued for them."
At the time it struck me as odd and I wrote to Lindsay and Amanda at pandagon about how peculiar it was. I come from a law enforcement family, FBI to be precise, and I have many exagents as friends and play golf with them, as well as State Troopers and DEA agents.
What was odd is that in law enforcement, during an investigation, its always a race for time. When you get a tip about on the location of a suspect you move fast to pick him/her up because fugatives are always moving to protect themselves. So why did they save up 10,000 murders, violent sex offenders, child predators and the like for a mass round-up?
So I began asking these agents and all agreed that it didn't make any sense. None of them could offer anything other than it was a rehersal for a mass round-up of some sort.
This is what worries me because our current Attorney General issued the "torture" justification memo and the Judicial nominee Pryor was the one who actually wrote it. Men who can justify sending human beings to be boiled can justify just about anything, their moral prohibitions are duly suspect.
So I am concerned that it "ain't over yet" and my fear is that the worst may be yet to come.
Posted by: Flint | May 31, 2005 at 11:26 AM
Here's a good one... Rumsfeld citing Amnesty International as a reliable source (before they disagreed with him of course).
http://www.dod.gov/transcripts/2003/t03282003_t0327sdcjcs.html
GOP = hypocrasy
Posted by: Flint | May 31, 2005 at 04:54 PM
Hi:
I don't know if we've been judged by a higher standard. However, having criticized the transgressions of others and held ourselves up as a paragon of human rights, we certainly ought to be.
Antonio
Posted by: Antonio Manetti | May 31, 2005 at 08:42 PM
If you guys hate Bush 43 so much, why don't you emulate Col. Claus von Stauffenberg? Col. Stauffenberg came to the conclusion that real evil needed to be eliminated, and so he acted. Like a real man. Are you believers, or just foaming at the mouth?
Posted by: James Chen | May 31, 2005 at 08:43 PM
We're just foaming at the mouth. What's your excuse?
Posted by: mudkitty | May 31, 2005 at 09:02 PM
I like the guy. He's trying to eliminate quotas on Asian-Americans in academia (you know they exist) and he lowered my taxes. The extra money helped me to pay off some debt, and invest for my retirement. I also like the real talk about Communist tyranny in North Korea and China. They're pretty bad when compared what you guys are complaining about (much of my family was sent to slave labor camps in the 1950s and 1960s).
So I take it you don't really believe your rhetoric, and are just talk with no action. Mudkitty, you're just a paper tiger.
Posted by: James Chen | June 01, 2005 at 12:36 AM
Well James... right now your guy is in trouble and he needs your help. The war effort is going badly and it needs real men of conviction and faith. I'm sure that there is an army recruiting station near you... so why don't you put your money where your mouth is and sign up?
Posted by: Flint | June 01, 2005 at 09:00 AM
Yeah, Chen, sign up for the war you love so much.
"He lowered my taxes..." Have you checked your state and municipal taxes lately? Is your state sunk in the red, just like the nation? I'd venture a guess to say "yes."
Posted by: mudkitty | June 01, 2005 at 10:07 AM
James...
It must gall the crap out of you then that thanks to Bush's trade policies with China that they've been able to increase their military budget by 37% a year and are now threatening Taiwan and Japan.
I mean this is the same Communist party that enslaved you relatives isn't it?
Bush's lack of understanding of the Communist Chinese is appalling... they didn't melt away and turn capitalist over night as our greedy CEOs and Bush said they would. They must of laughed till they cried when he let the IBM and Boeing deals go through... it gave them state of the art military technology that is destined to come back at us.
Not to mention the allies that he so completely pissed off that when he asked them not to sell military technology to the Chinese Communist they told him to go piss up a rope. Which is intersting because as he has undercut American companies and outsourced many of our weapons manufacturering to European countries... those same countries are going to sell the same weapons platforms to the Chinese so America could be facing a huge Chinese Communist Military with the same weapons as the US has.
Oh yeah... almost forgot... that retirement of yours, is it in stocks or real estate? I don't think I would be too certain that you'll have too much to enjoy. The Chinses have bankrolled our "borrow and spend" economy with the purchase of US treasuries and the the foreign investors are now afraid that the US has dug itself into a 6.6 trillion dollar debt that is to deep to get out of.
They've been quietly divesting their US holdings and moving their investments into Euros and Yen as fast as they can go without triggering a crash. The sale of treasuries is down by 47% and economists are predicting a stock market correction (crash) like what we saw in the late 80s only much much worse. Various G8 leaders are concerned that it cause a global depression.
Even Greenspan last month testified before Congress, "I never said that the tax cuts were a good idea and you won't find it any where in print that I said that."
Oh yeah... realestate and housing... what has been driving the economy for the last five years... they're now scared spitless that the bubble is to about to go Pop... and then the whole false economy rips apart.
Wonder what will be left for you and those cute kids of yours?
Posted by: Flint | June 01, 2005 at 10:46 AM
BTW Chen, when you say "eliminate quotas for Asian Americans in academia" do you mean "for" or "against?"
You see, the word quota is a neutral term whose value judgement can go either way. It's only the rightwing that demonizes the term "quota." There's absolutly nothing wrong with quotas, per se. They apply to even the most minor details of our daily lives.
When I grew up, people would brag about being a tax payer and about how proud they were to pay their fair share. Oh, how times have changed.
Posted by: mudkitty | June 01, 2005 at 12:10 PM
Answers and facts for you all:
1) Can't Join the Military--I'm over 40 years old! The military won't take me. The Army and Navy do have my brother-in-law and uncle, though. I support the military through donations to the Fisher House, Red Cross (blood) and USO (I hope you do the same--please check online for the good work they do). Money and donations of blood are what I can provide at this point. Many corporations will match your donation, as does my employer.
www.fisherhouse.org
www.uso.org
2) Quotas limiting Asian-Americans in colleges are widely known, similar to Jewish quotas in the early 1900s. If you believe in equality for all, then you should be against quotas that limit the number of Asians at most major colleges. Of course, it affects me and my family directly, so I've taken an interest in this subject. Check out my essay on a related subject here: http://jameschen.blogspot.com/2005/05/where-have-you-gone-white-engineering.html BTW, do you think Asians should have higher college admission standards than whites, all other things being equal? If yes, why?
3. Taxes - I'm fully aware of the taxes that I pay, and I'm happy to say that I pay what is asked of me. Thanksfully, Gov. Schwarzenegger (R) hasn't raised any CA state taxes and fees that I am aware of. Locally, Alameda is considering a tax increase subject to voter approval on June 6. Given that I just bought a house and increased the tax basis on the property by around 300%, I will be voting "No" on the tax increase. The recent increase on my local property tax (we moved to a bigger house when my second son was born) was offset partially by the 2001 Federal Tax cut, but I still pay more percentage-wise today than 4 years ago. Please tell me about yourselves. Do you have any children? What about your relative tax burden compared to 4 years ago?
4. China can spend whatever it wants on its military--the US has no control over this. I'm also a free trader, but I don't have to buy from China (and I don't buy anything from them either for political reasons). Many of the technology-to-China deals are from the Clinton Administration (Google: Clinton, China, Loral, Hughes, satellite, or try this link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/missile/keystories.htm). I'm not aware of any Bush-related technology deals. Are you referring to the Boeing 787 Dreamliner? I think most of the avionics are to be sources in Japan and the US by Honeywell. Please provide links, if available. Is the IBM deal you are referring to the sale of the PC division to Lenovo? If so, then any technology transfer to China is miniscule. My 14-year-old nephew just built his own PC!
I'm not particularly worried about the Chinese threats to either Taiwan or Japan. Qualitatively, the Taiwanese and Japanese militaries are much better than China's. The Chinese Navy is much more of a "brown-water" navy, geared mostly towards coastal partrolling, while the Chinese Air Force is based on 1950s Soviet technology. Both Taiwan and Japan would easily defeat a seabourne invasion from China because they could not control the shipping lines or the skies above the Taiwan Straits and Sea of Japan respectively. Steven Den Beste provides an excellent analysis here: http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/12/InvasionofTaiwan.shtml Why do you think a Chinese invasion of either country would be successful, especially given Western superiority in submarines and fighter/interceptors? Which weapons has Bush outsourced to Europe?--provide links, please.
5. Investments - I'm investing using the "rule of thirds". One third each in stocks, bonds/money market, real estate. This mode of investing should provide a cushion in case of any crash in one or even two markets, and the risk-level of my 5 diversified mutual funds is relatively low, according to Morningstar.com. According to the Morningstar risk calculator, I have a 98% probablity of meeting my retirement needs of 80% of pre-retirement salary by age 65. I'm planning to leave my kids a little something in addition to the house before I'm gone, so like more retirees, I will be moving more money into short-term bonds and CDs after I retire. This lowers the risk level even further. Still, I don't want my kids to become dependent on any trust fund, so I am seriously considering donating a healthy portion of my estate to charity after my wife and I pass on.
I was there during the last two big downturns (1987, 2000), so I know that corrections are par for the course. They happen all the time, big and small. A good investor would use them as a buying opportunity. If you want to reduce your exposure to the US markets, then you can split your stock/bond holdings 50/50 into international funds. This effectively makes you "exchange-rate-neutral". I keep a low percentage (5%) in foreign funds because I have a higher level on confidence in the US markets. Some excellent analysis is available in John Bogle's (Vanguard founder) book " Bogle on Investing", available at Amazon.com.
Thirty years ago, it was the Saudis that were buying US treasuries. Twenty years ago, it was the Japanese. Ten years ago, it was the Europeans. Today, it is the Chinese. I really don't care who buys the US debt. Investors buy US Treasuries because it is still considered the safest investment around. The free markets dictate that investors are free to choose whatever investments they want. If you choose to be a pessimist, then go buy European or Japanese government bonds. There's nothing stopping you or the Chinese from selling. Given all that, interest rates are still near 40-year lows, so the selling pressures you cite just aren't there (check out 10-year Treasury chart: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5ETNX&t=my).
BTW, I am also a registered stockbroker, so let me know via e-mail if you need any help with your portfolio. Thanks for listening.
Posted by: James Chen | June 01, 2005 at 08:19 PM
BTW, I don't work on commission and I actually provide investment advice for free to anyone who asks for it (nicely, of course). I got my broker's license on the side 20 years ago, and have been investing ever since.
That said, I only recommend no-load mutual funds (available through financial supermarkets like Fidelity and Schwab) as part of an overall asset-allocation strategy. I don't recommend individual stocks, and wouldn't recommend them for anyone with a portfolio under $1 million.
Some questions I would ask include:
What is your overall acceptable risk-level?
Do you own or rent?
How many children do you have? What are there ages?
When do you plan to retire?
You get the drift...
Posted by: James Chen | June 01, 2005 at 08:47 PM
Chen - didn't you say you were in debt?
Posted by: mudkitty | June 01, 2005 at 09:03 PM
I have a mortgage, like most homeowners my age. I put down around a 45% downpayment last year, so I'm counting the downpayment as my real estate investment (roughly 1/3 of my assets). But I'm not including any possible appeciation, as it is not really quantifiable at this point.
I'm prepaying my mortgage now, with the expectation of paying off within 15-20 years. As anyone with a mortgage knows, most of the monthly payments goes towards interest in the first 5-6 years! Like I said earlier, I used part of the 2001 tax cut to pay down my mortgage.
I have no credit card or student loans to speak of, and hopefully none of you have any if you're over age 30 or roughly 10 years out of college.
The level of mortgage debt one can safely assume is another long topic that I can address on an individual basis, if you'd like. As it was, my first job out of college (undergrad), was as a mortgage investment banker--which is why I also have my Series 7/63 license (broker)that I mentioned earlier.
In a nutshell, there's nothing wrong with people carrying debt, as long as it is appropriate. School loans, and yes, even some credit card debt is "OK", as long as it makes sense. Given that mortgage debt is tax-deductable, it makes sense that most homeowners carry some level mortgage even if they can purchase the house outright. It all goes back to the "rule of thirds"--i.e. "don't put all your eggs in one basket".
Posted by: James | June 01, 2005 at 10:56 PM
Mudkitty,
How are you doing financially? Where do you invest your money? Do you lack confidence in the US markets (equity, real estate, bond) as does Flint?
I'm totally serious, BTW.
Posted by: James | June 01, 2005 at 11:00 PM
Since you asked:
I think stocks are a suckers game, unless you're an insider...insider trading is how it really works. You could get lucky, but luck is what breeds suckers. The only time I ever buy is after a bubble bursts and then I bottom feed.
Bonds are a little better, but you can't get rich off them unless you're rich to begin with.
Real Estate is a game that the average person can still win at, dispite rampant, rapacious speculation. Unfortunetly, due to rampant speculation vs. true market demand, there is a bubble in real estate, and boy when it bursts, it's not going to be pretty. And that's when the bottom feeders swoop in again. New construction, both housing and commercial, will dry up completely. It will be a mess that a democratic administration will have to clean up, again.
How many Bush family deficits will the country have to pay for? The elder Bush today was quoted as saying that he hopes his son Jeb will also be president. Jeez Louise, the founding fathers never intended that so much power be concintraited in the hands of one family.
But truely, I find it distastfull to talk about ones personal finances, unless it involves business. I'm very much like the French in that way.
Posted by: mudkitty | June 02, 2005 at 01:27 AM
Chen, or James, didn't you say that Bush's tax cut helped you to pay off some debt? If you're such a wiz at finance, why are you in debt?
Posted by: mudkitty | June 02, 2005 at 01:30 AM
Mudkitty, please refer to message above (10:56PM) regarding mortgage debt. No need to repost on this topic. Thanks.
Posted by: James | June 02, 2005 at 01:43 AM
Mudkitty,
Nothing wrong about hearing one's investing philosophy. Again, it helps me understand where you are coming from. Now I know you feel that stocks are for "suckers", which is perfectly understandable. Lots of people were burned by tech stocks in 2000.
On the other hand you should know that US stocks have outperformed US bonds by a comformable margin over the past 200 years. (source: John Bogle, "Common Sense on Mutual Funds", Wiley & Sons pub., pages 11-14). The exact numbers for average annual historical returns are 8.4% (stocks) versus 4.8% (bonds) for the period 1802-1997. You can look at these figures at Amazon.com using the book preview feature. Given this information, I urge you to seriously consider investing in EQUITY INDEX funds, which removes the element of luck in stock picking. Over the long run (20 plus years), a broad-based index of stocks would blow away an indexed portfolio of bonds.
You are also pessimistic about real estate, although to a lesser degree. Having been here during the CA real estate drop of 1990-1991, I can understand that. But real estate is a great part of any balanced portfolio, for it helps with diversification, and capital gains are taxible only in the amounts over $500,000 (for couples). And you can live in the house, too, and get an annual income tax deduction as well. You can't live in a house made of bonds, plus the bond income gets taxed every year unless you own municipal bonds.
As for your reference to the current level of Federal debt, most economists would agree that the debt should be measured to the size of the economy for comparison. This means that the most relevant statistic is not the absolute dollar value of the deficit, but the debt as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Check out this article: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6910217/
Here's a quote: "The deficit in 2004, $412 billion, was the biggest in history. Or was it? In nominal terms it was, but when measured as a percent of the total American economy, it was far from being the biggest. Since 1962, there have been 10 years in which the deficit was bigger, as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, than it was last year.
In the past 40 years, the biggest deficit occurred in 1983, when it amounted to 6 percent of GDP. Last year’s deficit was 3.6 percent of GDP. For the modern era, the record was in 1943 when the deficit amounted to 30.3 percent of GDP."
Of course, this debt percentage was highest during World War 2, which makes sense.
As an analogy, use your own income and mortgage debt as an example. Let's say you make $100,000 per year, and have a $200,000 mortgage. That's an debt-to-income ratio of 2:1. But what if your sister has a $300,000 mortgage, and makes $200,000 per year. That's a debt-to-income ratio of 3:2. Is your sister, who owes $300,000, worse off than you, who owes only $200,000? All other things being equal, an economist would say your sister is better off.
Your investment philosophy seems to be overly influenced by George W. Bush (negatively, of course). I would discourage you from allowing politics to influence your investment strategy. Instead, look at market fundamentals. For me, this meant ignoring Clinton, who I despised, and looking at the companies and industries themselves. Needless to say, I did quite well in the 1990s and even better during the 2000 Tech stock bust. Sound business decisions need to be guided by logic, not emotion.
OK, let me get off my economic and investment soapbox. Let me know if you have any questions or want to take this offline. Really.
Posted by: James | June 02, 2005 at 03:59 AM
Dude, people get burned all along the way with stocks, not just in 2000. I'm older than you, I'm sure, and I go way back beyond 2000. And I also have a sense of history...can you say great depression?
As for stocks outperforming bonds, that's only for those who get "out on time." This old canard is a typical sales tactic. Your boyfriend, George Bush, as a matter of FACT, has most of his wealth tied up in bonds (you know, the ones he calls "worthless IOUs", inspite of having the full faith and credit of The United States of America behind them.)
Mutual Funds and Equity Indexing...ha ha ha...just wait till you get burned. You must be very young. Hedge funds...ha, ha. Good luck swimming with the sharks. Sure, let someone else pick your stocks and tell you there's no risk. Jeesus. It's all a pyramid scheme.
Very few real people can afford to stay in the market for 30 - 40 years so they can earn their 7% - 12% over-the-long-haul. That's another bullshit sales tactic people fall for.
And please, I know that real estate is the only thing that's tangible, but the market sucks. It's neither a free market, nor a fair market, right now. But at least it IS tangible.
My investment philosophy is not influenced one whit by GWBush & Co. That's one company I would never put my money on.
Again, I never said talking about ones personal investment philosophy was "wrong." I stated that talking about one's personal finances is distastefull. Please pay attention to what I'm actually saying/writing, rather than what you think I'm saying. Pay attention to the words, and do stop trying to re-interperate what I'm saying. What I'm saying speaks for itself. This is the third time you've tried to put words in my mouth. It's a bad habit of yours.
The fun is online.
Posted by: mudkitty | June 02, 2005 at 11:08 AM