Friday, July 30, 2004

Letter to President Bush

Dear President Bush,

I realize that you're a very busy man, but I have a solution to many of the world's problems, you see, and since you seem to be so interested in solving the world's problems, let me point out a key area in which you could do positive work and kill a thousand birds with one stone.

End foreign aid to everyone.

End foreign aid to Israel. End foreign aid to Arafat. End foreign aid to Africa. End foreign aid to everyone.

You might be surprised to hear this coming from an orthodox Jew, given how addicted many of us are to the welfare doles.

Foreign aid does not help poor people anywhere. It simply takes money from poor people here in the US and gives it to rich dictators and other statist-types abroad. It is a totally unnecessary drain on our domestic economy, and it is immoral. A person in Nebraska should not be expected to shell out money that will be spent by a the prime minister of Pakistan.

It will help Israel, and I know you want to help Israel. After all, you're a good Christian who's waiting for what's his name to come back from the dead, and I know many Christians like yourself are just waiting for all of us to get back to Israel so we can all be slaughtered for our disbelief in your man on the stick. Anyhoo, I know you want to help Israel, and the best way to help Israel is to starve its government out of its socialist mindset. The only reason the state of Israel is able to have so many absolutely useless government programs (which, by the way, is the primary reason their economy is in the tank) is because of US funneling money to prop it up. End the aid, and aid the economic suffering of the Israeli citizens. If you end the aid, the government will be forced to become less socialist, which will have a harmonizing effect on the citizenry, as the religious and secular will no longer be competing for government funds once the government realizes it has to tax its citizens less.

In fact, this is really the only way you can help Israel. Back out of Middle East affairs entirely. The US invasion of Iraq is counter-productive for Israel's security, as it has only inflamed hatred of the Jews over there. Thanks. We appreciate that, but sooner or later, the majority of people over there will come to regret their appreciation.

Best wishes,


PS. Many other Orthodox Jews will object to this. Ignore them. They are simply socialists of a different color, and they don't realize the damage they are causing to themselves, their own station in life, and to others.

PPS. Taking advice from Bono was really dumb. You should admit this publically and beg forgiveness, sir.

KDE's VNC is awesome

I logged into my sister in law's machine last night using KDE's Remote Desktop utility, and it is by far superior to the command line utilities. When my sister in law's desktop showed up in a window on my desktop, I had a button available to make it full screen, as if the Windows XP that was running was live, running from my machine. Pretty slick, dude. What's more, the graphics were smoothed, and not as choppy in refreshing as they were previously.

I downloaded a viewer onto her machine to let her log into my machine, also, but apparently, I have some reading to do so that I can let her in past my security settings. I even disabled my firewall, and she still couldn't log into my machine! I suppose this should be comforting, but I wanted her to be able to do this, even though there was no productive purpose in her doing so. :)

It's the links section, stoooopid!

Public Enemy #1 hasn't found his link on my page, yet.

Some dare call it inconsistent....

This just occurred to me....

Republicans claim (emphasis on the word "claim") to champion the rights of gun owners, as those laws represent prior restraint, and that it doesn't matter that the person has a weapon, but only matters if he uses that weapon to harm others.

Applying this logic, though, how could the Republicans support the use of prior restraint against Saddam Hussein, a man who had not attacked the US, and had everything to lose by doing so?

Before the reader responds "but Saddam used WMD against his own people!" remember some important things:

  1. The US gave Hussein some pretty dastardly stuff in the 1980's.
  2. Other than the fact that Hussein attacked Israel during the first Gulf War, every bad thing we "know" that Hussein did was fed to us by the government. What did the government do to build your trust? Was it the reliability of the government's mail service?

Things to think about...

In this regard, it becomes quite easy to see that what Democrats are to domestic politics, Republicans are to foreign politics. Grab the guns at home and abroad! Make us (un)safe! Sheesh, at least the Iraqi citizens held private arms under Hussein's dreadful misrule. It doesn't take a Mensa member to figure out the logical result of the US military disarming the populace after the invasion.

It therefore is much clearer to me now how many have written for some time that neoconservatives are a left-wing artifact that calls themselves right-wing.

Thursday, July 29, 2004

Does Hannity have no sense?

As I write this, I'm listening to Sean Hannity spar with Terry McAuliffe (sorry if I spelled your name wrong, Terry!), the chairman of the DNC. I have no love for the chairman, as he earned my disrespect during the 2002 election by claiming that the Republicans were involved in all sorts of trickery to slant the election away from the Democrats. If the Republicans had been involved in fixing the election, the press would have picked up on it, and it would have been a federal case. Yet, after the election, the whole thing disappeared, so the good chairman was obviously lying.

Hannity quoted to the chairman (I'm calling him the chairman to avoid having to try to spell the guy's name) John Kerry's waffling on the Iraq war, quoting Kerry saying that without a doubt, Saddam Hussein had those Weapons of Mass Destruction (tm), just as President Bush had claimed.

Therein lies the problem.

Democrats are liars. Everyone with two eyes and half a brain knows this. Then the Republicans give off a list of the liars claiming that Iraq was an imminent threat with nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and he was going to strike the US!

The Republicans cite this as proof that Bush was telling the truth. It's the opposite -- it's proof that Bush was lying.

What's on my mind....

Several things don't quite add up regarding the war on terrorism...
  1. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but could someone explain this to me?
  2. I have a crystal-clear recollection of hearing a report on the radio on the morning of 9/11/2001 of a truck bomb crashing into the Pentagon. That report disappeared rather quickly. What happened?
  3. How do we know the identities of the 19 hijackers, or even that there were 19 hijackers? They were incinerated along with all the other passengers, were they not? Isn't it just a tad bigoted to assume that just because the feds were able to identify 19 Arab passengers that they must have been the hijackers? I've heard claims that the government had been tracking these people, but that seems like more of a CYA scheme than anything else.
  4. Why are we to believe that the government that was so incompetent in regulating airline security on September 11th suddenly, magically, became competent on September 12th?
These things pop into my mind constantly whenever I think about the current "war on terrorism."

Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Tale of a Communist Hippie Chick

She popped into my head again, because I was thinking about enrolling for a college class for the fall semester.

Last year, I returned to college after an absence of several years. I began the class in the summer, mere days before my daughter was born. There was a young woman in the class who still makes me shudder whenever she pops up in my head.

I refer to her as the Communist Hippie Chick.

I didn't find her particularly attractive (which was my defense to my wife, who wasn't particularly thrilled that I had been speaking to her in the first place), but my heart broke over this girl, who was clearly being used as fodder by the left wing establishment, and there was nothing I could do about it.

This was a girl who honestly thought that government has some supernatural power to make all things right in the world.

This was a girl who would come to class every session with Howard Dean pins on her backpack.

This was a girl from Canada (click the link for everything you really need to know about Canada) who thought that socialized medicine was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Already I knew that this girl was not living in reality. She claimed that the state's medical program had saved her mother's life, and I have no doubt that her mother might have received good care, but socialized medicine is a fiasco in every country it's been tried, including the US, and here she was, the political activist, trying to get even more of the medical system in the US under the control of the IFG (Imperial Federal Government).

This was a girl who actually had a union solidarity tattoo on her arm. I'm quite sure that it'll look attractive on her when she's seventy and the skin on her triceps sags down to her hips. Obviously, she doesn't know or doesn't care about how unions are a cause of unemployment wherever they exist.

I asked her once if she was a communist or a socialist. She replied that she was a democratic socialist. I could only assume that the "democratic" part was supposed to impress me. The idea here is that nine people out of ten say that the tenth man must give up his wallet, it is perfectly moral for the nine people to point guns at the tenth man until he complies.

She was not right in the head, for these and many other reasons, and she pops into my head from time to time, making me feel helpless to do anything.

Oh well.

Things that make me happy

I was practically counting down the minutes to 1 pm this afternoon, which was chatzos (halachic noon). At work, I finally got a chance to listen to Sarah McLachlan on my headphones again. I saw her in concert at the venerable dump, the Austin Music Hall, back in 1998. Sure, it was kol isha, but I was just a non-frummie am haaretz back then. Now, I listen to recordings of her, which, while not recommended by poskim, is, permissible.

It was my second trip to the Austin Music Hall -- I'd been there in October 1996 to see the G3 concert (Steve Vai, Eric Johnson, and the person I was there to see -- Joe Satriani) I was totally unimpressed by the venue for the G3 concert. It was a former warehouse turned into a music hall. It was dirty, and there were no seats. I was high as a kite from all the cigarettes and marijuana being smoked there. The music was awesome, though. Satriani is an amazing performer. Steve Vai was okay. I had only heard his music for the first time a few days before the concert, and I got an eerie feeling from looking at him. No matter what anyone tells you, it is NOT normal for a man to wear leather pants! Eric Johnson was great, and Austin is his home town, so the fans cheered him on pretty nice.

When I went there the second time, the lesbians had taken over the place, and it was clean, and there were chairs! I didn't have to worry about my bad back giving out like I do on Yom Kippur during Neilah! :) And, to top it off, it was a "special no-smoking performance." Lisa Loeb was the opening act, and she brought on her then boyfriend (no idea if they're still together) Dweezel Zappa (what was Frank thinking?), and they played a nice show, but I couldn't have cared less. I was there for one reason and that was to hear Sarah sing.

On a different note, I've been thinking lately of expanding my thoughts on Judaism and libertarianism into an essay of some sort. Who knows? Maybe I'll make a pdf and post it somewhere. Maybe I'll submit an article to the Mises website. They probably wouldn't publish it, though, as I am not a scholar. These issues plague me daily. It is very difficult to keep faith when these things go through my head.

In computer news, I was fiddling with KDE's programs that utilize VNC (Virtual Network Computing), a free protocol that was originally developed by AT&T, which is so good it makes me wonder why anyone ever shells out money for PCAnywhere. I've been using TightVNC on Mandrake Linux to log into my sister in law's Windows XP box for a while to help her out, do remote admin, etc. It's pretty nifty, if I do say so myself. A few weeks ago, I logged into her machine via VNC, set up an ftp server on her end, and then logged in with an ftp client to download files from her computer. How many average users do that? VNC is something I've only utilized so far using the command line to bring up her machine. I'll have to try the KDE implementation some time, now that I know it exists. :)

Tuesday, July 27, 2004

The thing about days like today....

I love Judaism, but fasting really sucks. Thankfully, I was well enough to go to work today, so I had something to distract me from the hunger. As I write this, we have four and a half hours to go with the fast, which is not that big a deal, but damn, I could go for a burger right now.

Also, I was able to fiddle with templates well enough to get a rudimentary links section going, so Public Enemy #1 will finally leave me alone on the subject.

Monday, July 26, 2004

Oy vey

I came from work for lunch, and realized I was too sick to go back to work, so I'm blogging.

Before my office's web filter started blocking audio downloads from the Mises Institute website, I enjoyed the archived audio lectures of Thomas Woods, who teaches at SUNY in Suffolk County. Professor Woods wrote a fascinating article that posted on the American Conservative, which points out the fallacy of the anti-war peacenik, and that the current pro-war attitudes of many conservatives are actually a left-wing artifact.

Tonight the House Burns

Tonight begins the fast of the ninth of the month of Av, the anniversary of the destruction of both of our Holy Temples in Jerusalem. For some reason, despite the fact that our observances put us in a mood of mourning for the three weeks leading up to the fast, I often am not hit by the scope of the tragedy until the day of this fast, and for a few days afterward.

Sunday, July 25, 2004

Blog matters

Anyhoo, I'm trying to create a blogroll, and Blogger ain't helpin' me!

I wanted to create a blogroll with such venerable favorites as RachelLucas, Frank J, and Kim du Toit, not to mention Public Enemy #1.

Remember to register Republican!

A friend of mine (one of the two or three people who know about this blog, so he doubtless will guess who he is) joked over Shabbos that my daughter will register as a Republican when she reaches the age of 18. As a former Republican (or at least, one who sympathizes with their cause), I felt a deep pit develop in my stomach at those words. The thought of my daughter becoming one of them was a disturbing one.

In the past few years, I have noticed one true difference (and only one) between the Democrats and the Republicans. Both vote for socialist government programs, but only the Republicans will go out into the media and tell you it's a bad thing and STILL vote for those programs.

The exception being Ron Paul, but he's by far the exception rather than the rule.

The Republicans took the House in 1994 with the promise that they were going to revolutionize America. They did nothing of the sort. They simply passed the Democrat agenda while nobody was looking.

Then, the Republicans took the House and Senate in 2002. Many people were optimistic that things would actually change this time.

I wasn't so optimistic.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

Friday, July 23, 2004

We need more Jewish libertarians!

Some time ago, Walter Block wrote a (thankfully) emotionless critique of Judaism under a libertarian microscope, gave it a failing grade, and felt he could offer no adequate explanation for this phenomenon, but quite correctly pointed out the irony that we have prospered the most in the exile in places where libertarian (or at least pseudo-libertarian) principles were in place, particularly in the area of economic freedom.

I have come to enjoy Professor Block's writings very much, as he is a clear and consise thinker and writer.

The problem it poses to me is that I agree with just about everything he writes. The Jewish appetite for the use of state power disturbs me some; that the appropriation of money from one person to another through the use of government force is called chesed disturbs me even more.

I once brought up my concerns to a rav in Brooklyn, who dismissed the taxation-as-theft ideology by comparing to a case from the life of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, which, ironically, was a case of pure anarcho-capitalism.

In the times of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, there was a rich man who never paid ma'aser on his earnings, and never contributed to the community's religious needs. When the man died, the chevra kadisha (burial society) refused to bury the man until his family paid up on his dues. To me, this is voluntary association at its finest; to the rav, this was forceful coercion.

Nothing stopped the family from burying the man themselves except their religious beliefs. No gun forced them to pony up. That, in my mind, is the difference between voluntary exchange and government coercion, where resistance is met with a bullet.

"The Jews" as a demographic are a large voter contingent in the tri-state area. Politically, we wield tremendous power -- more power than I think we ought to have because of its inevitable abuse.

Why do I bring this up? I mention this because I think the Jews should be a specific target for the Libertarian Party, or at least liberty-minded people. The Jews have a long history of prosperity with freedom, and destitution with slavery.

Today, the Jews in New York represent a disproportionate amount of the welfare dole. The problem with welfare is that without it, the extra money in the economy would eliminate its need. Effectively, the people who are on welfare only need it because of its existence. Remove one, and you remove both.

Imagine, for a moment, that the Jews in NYC all voted Libertarian in the next mayoral election, or libertarian in the next state election. Sure, we are a minority, but we are such a significant minority that the Republicans and Democrats would look in amazement and realize that they'd need to change in order to retain power, effectively enslaving them to us instead of vice versa.

I'll elaborate on this idea more in the future. Good Shabbos!

Our next deliverance

Sean Hannity wants to deliver us from evil, but many of us want to be delivered from Sean Hannity.

Wednesday, July 21, 2004

Rattling the monkey's cage

I was quite pleasantly surprised by this story on OSNews this morning. When I first started using Linux, I bounced back and forth between KDE and GNOME, but over the last year, I've almost exclusively used KDE.

Some of the things that the gnome developers did were under the claims of improving usability, but I thought they were the opposite. Well, this fellow in the OSNews story is trying to fork GNOME and remove some of the more odious "features" in the newer versions, like the retarded way they reordered the buttons in OK/Cancel dialogs.

When you think of a question having either a positive or a negative answer, do you think of it as a yes or no question or a no or yes question?

If you're normal, you think of it as a yes or no question.

If you're a gnome developer, you think of it as a no or yes question. When a gnome app gives you a dialog, with ok and cancel, the buttons are in the exact opposite places where a normal user would expect the buttons to be. I can't tell you how many times I've accidentally cancelled an application from doing something I wanted it to do because the button for OK wasn't where I was expecting it to be.

This is just one example of their nuttiness.

Good luck to that guy, and maybe some sense will return to GNOME.

Having said that, I must say I absolutely LOVE gpdf, the GNOME PDF viewer, which is really shaping up to be a great application. All it really needs is a search function, and perhaps a Mozilla plugin, and it completely replaces Acrobat Reader in most cases.

Tuesday, July 20, 2004

The Health Care Conundrum

I've been without health insurance since the beginning of January, and I haven't been thrilled about it.

When I lost my job, I fought tooth and nail against filing for unemployment. I gave in regarding filing for New York State's socialized medicine fiasco called "Americhoice," which somehow gives you the impression you're exercising freedom of choice. If freedom of choice really existed, health care costs wouldn't be so damn exhorbitant that I would feel compelled to sign up for this damn thing.

I'll be eligible for health care under my new job next month, and it will cost me a scant $50 a month to join... but the catch is that the $50 is just for me. If I want my wife and daughter on the plan, I have to pony up six hundred dollars more per month! In my tax bracket, this is likely what I would have to pay if I'm part of the government's crappy system, also.

I'm not exactly in a hurry to have a system like Canada's health care system. They have enough problems with it on their own. While I've never investigated the subject, I'm quite confident that the devalution of the Canadian dollar in relation to the US dollar began around the same time as when they began this stupidity of nationalized health care. Rapid inflation is the only way a government could ever even dream of affording such a system.

Thank you, Albany, for caring so much about your constituents that you almost irrevocably screwed up the quality of our health care. After such thrilling instancing of government professionalism, like government mail and government housing, I'm glad to see that yet another success is almost upon us with government health care.

Monday, July 19, 2004

Of Mice and Income Taxes

I hear many people say that they think the rich should pay more taxes, that the Bush administration just does "tax cuts for the rich" and blah blah blah.

I don't think the rich should have their income taxes raised. In fact, I think they should have their income tax rates cut to zero, along with everyone else, with one exception.

The only people I think should have to pay income taxes are those people who have such little regard for the property of their fellow man that they think other people should have to pay taxes, because "they can afford to pay higher taxes."

Those people need to realize that the only reason they have the income tax today is because politicians fed on that attitude a hundred years ago. Of course, the income tax would only be applied to the richest of the rich, the ones "who could afford to pay more" in taxes than the rest of us. Feh.

Sunday, July 18, 2004

Explain this to me...

I put up a load of whites in the washing machine last night, poured in some bleach, and waited patiently for it to wash. My wife brought in the shirts for me to hang, and pointed out that one of the shirts had somehow acquired blue and yellow stains.

I would like to submit myself to Guinness as the first person on record to wash clothes that became stained as a result.

So, I have no patience this weekend....

As I write this post, I am trying my best to recover from a horrible chest cold that had me in bed the majority of Shabbos.

So, the Spousal Unit and I were in a hurry to get in all our laundry done before the start of the Nine Days, and luckily, we seem to have covered everything.

In other news, I decided I hadn't the patience to play with Debian on the only machine I own, and figure I'll learn the inner workings of a Linux machine when I have another machine lying around to play with.

I feel pathetic about it, but I hadn't the patience to deal with rebooting my machine to play a dvd whilst I figured out how to get sound working.

So, I'm typing this message from Mandrake 10. Not the best, but definitely not the worst. I just wish Texstar was still packaging rpms for Mandrake, as I'm still using the rpm of Red Hat's artwork that he made a year ago for Mandrake 9.1, and it's starting to show its age, and I haven't the time to tweak the latest from RH to make it work on my machine.

Oh well.

Friday, July 16, 2004

You don't hate Microsoft but you use Linux?

Yessiree, Bob!

I bought a computer in January 2002, and it came preloaded with Windows XP Home. Great, I thought, I have the latest and greatest for my home pc.

Like most everyone else in the Windows world, I never read licensing agreements.

Then, like a sack of bricks, I was confronted with the onerous new details of XP's licensing scheme.

The article was steeped in great hysteria about Microsoft "abusing consumer rights" and other such nonsense. The essay accuses Microsoft of presumption of guilt, prior restraint, misrepresentation, and surveillance. In my opinion, only the last part of this was a valid complaint, and only the last one was something I found to be completely intolerable.

You see, presumption of guilt and prior restraint would be a valid complaint against Microsoft if they were a government agency, but thankfully, they are not. I can buy misrepresentation insomuch as no one bothers to read the fine print, but the fact that no one reads it does not nullify the obligation.

Surveillance, on the other hand, was something valid to complain about. And I had agreed to allow MS to do it by agreeing to the license.

I was furious. I knew then and there that I couldn't continue to do business with Microsoft. I had read about Linux in the past, in the late 90's, and hoped that it would be a suitable substitute.

And it was.

I was a somewhat happy Mandrake user for two years, and I switched to Debian "Sarge" Linux about two weeks ago, and I'm still learning the ropes of daily usage. Debian forces the user to do more of the basic system configuration than Mandrake does -- Mandrake does most, if not all, automagically.

It's good to learn things, though. It's fun.


Rachel Lucas has returned to blogging, and with a nifty looking new template!

Rachel's blog was really the first blog I ever read, and was my intro to blogdom some two and a half years ago.

She's very funny, opinionated, and a joy to read.

Pearl Harbor II: Revenge of the Economically Challenged

Geez, the Japanese government, not wanting to be outdone, are now getting on Microsoft's case. Apparently, Microsoft sent some people with guns to Japanese computer resellers and said that MS would kill their firstborn sons and do unspeakable things in an unspeakable fashion to the womenfolk unless they signed a contract with Microsoft.

Oh, wait. Microsoft didn't force them to do anything.

I'm a big Linux guy. I love Linux. I really, strongly dislike Windows. You might even say on some days that I hate it.

However, Microsoft is not a monopoly. I don't care what the government of the US says. The anti-trust laws are a shameless hoax to "protect" consumers from low priced goods. The sooner people acknowledge this the better off we'll all be. I invite the reader to read the articles written on this subject by Thomas DiLorenzo or listen to his audio lecture on the case against anti-trust.

Thursday, July 15, 2004

The Great Controversy: The Constitutional Amendment to "Protect" Marriage

Well, yesterday, the attempt to amend the US Constitution died in the Senate, and even though I find the idea of homosexual marriage repugnant, I say good riddance to the whole idea of the amendment.

Let's start enforcing amendments 9 and 10 and master the practice of what we have already, which is something that's sorely lacking today.

As long as the state doesn't tell me I can't be married to my wife, I have no problem with all the little fagale's congregating at Temple Shaarei Tuchus and doing their thing.

That being said, I do have a problem with all the laws that prevent me from dissociating myself from those congregants, as the law is the only thing that prevents us from marginalizing them. The majority of this country would be perfectly happy if they could simply dissociate from people they don't like, yet we are forced at gunpoint by the state to deal with people we don't want to deal with.

As long as I'm free to have nothing to do with them (which I'm not), I have no problem with homosexual marriage.

Burying Your Integrity: How I Lost My Respect For Sean Hannity

I used to work in an office that played AM radio all day long. First, we only listened to AM 1010 all day long, five days a week. I got tired of this pretty quick, listening to the liberal idiocy regarding Israel and a whole host of other topics too numerous to mention.

Then, when reception became an issue, the dial got turned to Bloomberg radio. Not a real improvement. Actually, it was downright worse. I got the liberal bias, and I got to listen to people make small talk and then ask each other how much money they were making. I had started reading articles by contemporary Austrian economists, and I realized that most of what I heard on the radio could be put in the circular filing cabinet beneath my desk.

Then we got the bright idea and started listening to talk radio, in particular, ABC, home of Curtis and Kuby, John Gambling (sidenote: I was once speaking with my father, who lives out of state, and he said he listened to Gambling 30 years ago, and didn't like him because he was too conservative; I thought this was ironic because I thought the exact opposite), Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity.

Basically, the only part of this line-up I didn't like was Gambling. Sorry, John, you can't please everyone. Nothing personal. Maybe if you grew a backbone in your political views you'd have been more appealing.

Anyhow, I'll leave Limbaugh for a future post, and focus on Hannity. Forgive the long intro.

Back in 2001, in the height of the intifada, I, like so many other Jews, looked desperately at the mass media, and saw that the Palestinian Arabs could do virtually no wrong, and no real protest against them was to be seen except from certain conservatives. So, the story goes, you give a guy something he wants, and then he starts trusting you.

So beginneth my trust for Hannity.

I became engrossed in conservative viewpoints, and enjoyed immensely the spectrum of conservative websites.

Things about Hannity always bothered me. He didn't debate. He bickered with his liberal guests, constantly interrupting them, as if he could win a debate simply by silencing the person he was debating. Recently, I was listening to Harry Browne's radio archives, and Browne mentioned how he had just been on Hannity's show (this was late May/early June 2002), and I actually remembered the show from two years ago, and the shouting match that erupted between Hannity and Browne.

I continued to listen to him, putting these things in the back of my head, watching talk-radio take the conservative movement to great heights, including taking Congress in the 2002 election.

I didn't lose respect for Hannity, however, until after the Iraq war, when certain things began happening.

Perhaps most startling was his support for Arnold Schwartzeneggar. I personally have nothing against Ah-nold, and I love the way he pronounces the name of his state. However, three years ago tomorrow, Hannity published a commentary on WorldNetDaily talking about how adultery is so horrible and that if a man can't be trusted in his marriage, we can't trust him as a politician. And here Hannity was, supporting AS for governer, because it was more important that a Republican win than to have someone of principle in the office.

This past week, I heard Hannity say "Thank G-d we have an honest man in the White House."

We do NOT have an honest man in the White House. I'll be putting up a post IY"H about our illustrious Chief Executive some time in the future, which will tie in to how Hannity buried his integrity because it was HIS guy in the office, because ABC (anyone but Clinton) would be better.

Tuesday, July 13, 2004

First post

I'm just a simple Yid living in the New York area. Here I shall opine (IY'H) on Judaism, observance, and politics, my flavor being libertarianism, and the apparent conflicts that appear between them.