LAT reacts to Blair conversion

The LAT editorializes this morning concerning Tony Blair's conversion to Catholicism. The LAT has lots to say but not much is worth reading: Something about the Church of England being established by the government contrasted with the absence of a government-established church in the U.S. proving something about John Kerry not receiving Holy Communion because he favors unrestricted abortion and that makes Mitt Romney a sinner because he wants to defeat Mike Huckabee who is a born again politician. And so on...

Medical malpractice

This morning on the front page, the LAT argues that California's $250,000 cap on pain and suffering awards in medical malpractice lawsuits ought to be raised. The LAT begins the argument by citing the case of a 72-year old woman who died following double knee replacement surgery. Her son, an anesthesiologist, tried to find lawyers to represent his family in a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital and doctors who cared for her, but no lawyer would take the case because of California's cap on pain and suffering awards. The LAT fails to mention until near the end of the article that the son was searching for lawyers who would take the case on a contingent fee basis. Had he been willing to pay a lawyer for time and expenses, he surely would have found one.

The LAT takes a swipe at insurers too, arguing that insurers are raising doctors' premiums at a time when their loss payouts have declined. The LAT attributes this to insurers' "business models and financial investments" instead of their "core businesses." The LAT seems not to understand that financial investments are an essential part of an insurance company's core business.

California's cap should be raised to compensate for inflation. But even if it had been raised, no lawyer would take the case of the 72-year old woman's death on a contingent fee basis. Many will not take any case on a contingent fee basis, because it requires a commitment of capital and resources without any assurance of a satisfactory return. It requires lawyers to gamble.

The exceptions to the no-contingent-fee rule may include public interest law firms, class action law suits and law suits against the Catholic church.

Knee jerk: Blame the U.S./Bush

It was inevitable that pundits and editorial writers who work for major newspapers and television networks would respond to the Bhutto assassination by blaming Bush and the U.S. It's something such pundits and editorial writers do, even if it's illogical, as in the case of the Bhutto assassination.

There was always a risk of an assassination -- if not Bhutto then Musharaff. In that part of the world, life is cheap and dangers are many. The U.S. had to accept the assassination risk because it had no choice.

IRS delay

One of the few places in the LAT where you can find actual news and accurate information is in anything written by Kathy Kristof. Her stuff usually appears in the Business Section. Today she reports on the delays that taxpayers will suffer in 2008 when filing their income tax returns, especially taxpayers expecting a refund. The delays are the result of the late AMT fix that Congress passed last week. Pelosi and Reid were warned months ago that a late fix would cause a multitude of problems for taxpayers but they ignored the warning. They knew a fix was inevitable, because failure to fix was not an option, and they knew months ago the kind of fix they'd have to agree to. Still, they twiddled their thumbs, and ruminated, which further reinforces the proposition that Pelosi and Reid are unable to face facts.

Broder on Pelosi

David Broder is right about Nancy Pelosi. In his WaPo column today, Broder argues that Pelosi is refusing to acknowledge the mess she and other Democrats have made of their first year in control of Congress since 1994, to her and their detriment, and to the detriment of the nation. If she persists, Democrats face another year without significant achievement and possible ouster in the 2008 elections.

LAT blows poverty stat

In today's editorial on "Domestic Tranquillity," part of their "American Values" series, the LAT says that in the U.S. "60 million people survive on $7 a day." This has no foundation and on it's website, the LAT has changed the statement twice. Earlier today, the LAT preceded the statement with a qualifying phrase such as "some have said" or "some say." Later, the qualifying phrase was removed.

The source of the statement is Global Research.ca, an "alternative news" radical left-wing Canadian website, which claims that a 2004 analysis by the U. S. Census Bureau reached that conclusion. But nothing similar appears on the Census Bureau's website. Instead, the facts appearing on the Census Bureau website rebut the Global Research claim.

Be very careful about the "facts" cited in LAT editorials.

LAT tries Kerry rehab

The LAT this morning reports on John Kerry's crushed dream of being president of the United States. He was so close, the LAT suggests, it's a shame he didn't make it. And, the LAT seems to suggest there's still time.

But Kerry was a failed candidate, a pretender and a fact manipulator. He was from the wrong part of the country and was saddled with the wrong political philosophy. Kerry will have a chance when the LAT returns to it's roots, which means his chances are slim and none.

LAT ignores Christmas

The LAT this morning fails to mention Christmas in today's editorial. Instead, it seems the editors intentionally avoided mentioning it, as if were a disease or a profanity. Rather than celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ today, the LAT suggests, people should celebrate that they have a day off from work. It's the LAT's way of sticking a finger in the eye of religious people.

Register likes Paul

Judging from today's editorial, the libertarian O. C. Register is atwitter about Ron Paul, who they call Dr. Paul. You can't blame them. He's the only libertarian candidate ever who stands to get more than a smattering of votes in a primary or general election.

LAT touts "hate" crime bill

The LAT editorializes this morning in favor of "hate" crime legislation, which would provide stiffer punishment for crimes against gays and lesbians than crimes against heterosexuals. This is a snake pit. Why should crimes against any segment of the population justify greater punishment than crimes against any other? Are we not all equal in the eyes of the law?

If there are more crimes against blacks than non-blacks, should crimes against blacks be punished more severely? If here are more crimes in New Jersey, say, than Alabama, should crimes in New Jersey be punished, under federal law, more severely? Shouldn't federal law apply equally in all the States? If a gay is robbed and a straight murdered, should the robbery be more severely punished?

Who or what is a gay? A lesbian? Is there a blood test that proves gayness? A urinalysis? Is a gay one who has engaged in homosexual acts? One who has homosexual tendencies? One who feels homosexual? Is a bi-sexual a gay or lesbian? A transsexual? Can a criminal know by looking? If a crime is committed against a gay who was thought to be straight, is that a hate crime? Suppose the victim is straight but thought to be gay, is that a hate crime?

Amity Shlaes: Deal or no deal

In the O. C. Register opinion pages today, Bloomberg columnist Amity Shlaes argues that in business there are two kinds of people: deal people and price people. She says deal people are bad and price people are good, because only they put a price on things and price is essential.

Every columnist needs an attractive sounding (read eye-catching) theory, else they can't get in print. That's Shlaes' theory. It's only a theory. A columnist's theory doesn't have to be valid, only attractive. That's what Shlaes' theory is: attractive, not valid.

It isn't valid first because it's silly to try to divide business people into just two categories. They can be smart or dumb, wealthy or poor, successful or not, well educated or poorly, self-made or silver-spooned. They may come from marketing, manufacturing or finance. Some have had no background in business and no business training yet have been unbelievably effective. Bill Gates would be an example.

The distinction between deal and price is a false one. Prices are arrived at by deals: Seller has something to sell, buyer wants to buy. They agree on a price or there is no deal. The price of the deal includes all the add-ons and supplementals, like guarantees, terms and promises, some implied, some explicit. Every buyer and seller is concerned about all aspects of the deal -- price and other aspects -- and underlying every deal is supply and demand. Every consumer understands supply and demand because every consumer experiences it every time he or she visits the grocery store or the gas station. If tomatoes are plentiful, the price is lower. If tomatoes are scarce, the price is higher. The same with gasoline.

This has been understood since Adam Smith, and surely before. Amity Shlaes hasn't invented something new.

What Shlaes was trying to say, presumably, is that she doesn't want government putting it's finger on the scale, influencing the deal in favor of one party to the deal or the other. In this she has a point. Government shouldn't interfere with market forces, but it often does. In fact, it most often does. Mostly, government does it because somebody insists on it. People aren't patient. They want what they want and they want it now. So they put pressure on the government to act, and it often does, often not wisely.

Shlaes is wrong about the Bush plan (or more properly the Paulson plan.) In the Bush/Paulson plan, government has not put it's finger on the scale. The plan is voluntary. Investors and loan servicers don't have to participate unless they want to, and many have chosen to. What's in it for them? They avoid having to foreclose on some loans. Foreclosure is expensive. If a way can be found that enables a borrower to make payments on a loan instead of defaulting, and the loan eventually gets paid off and the lender gets a reasonable return, then both sides are better off. (Incidentally, business people measure return after eliminating sunk costs. Sunk costs are spilt milk. In making decisions about what to do next, business people measure return based on present value, today's value, not original cost. There is no point in crying over spilt milk, or sunk costs.) Business people make these kinds of deals all the time.

Shlaes seems to be concerned that the value (price) of some subprime loans or packages of loans may not be determinable now. The market (buyers and sellers) will decide that. Shlaes needs to be patient.

McManus trash

Doyle McManus writes his opinion of Republican presidential candidates and the LAT puts it on today's front page. Trash like that ought to be in the opinion section.

McManus tries to draw a distinction between the Republican presidential candidates and President Bush on foreign policy and national security, but the differences are slim and none. Huckabee tried to put some daylight between himself and Bush but got slapped down for it.

The big differences are between Republicans, who believe in a strong military and vigorous foreign policy, and Democrats, who believe in a weak military, an accommodating foreign policy and surrender in Iraq. McManus could have written about that. In any case, his column should have appeared on the opinion pages.

California jobs

The LAT reports today that California's payrolls grew by just 900 last month. Economist are pessimistic about 2008 according to the LAT. Why not raise taxes?

Dixon on Zimbabwe

LAT reporter Robyn Dixon writes in a column-one story of the disaster that is Zimbabwe. It's a fascinating piece and a must-read. Dixon is a gutsy women. Entering Zimbabwe is not something many people would do, because it's dangerous, as Nazi Germany was dangerous. Robert Mugabe should be tried for crimes against humanity but world leaders don't seem to care. Read Dixon's piece.

California budgeting

The LAT reports this morning that the governator will announce on January 10th severe budget cuts necessitated by a projected $14.5 billion deficit. Only days ago the California Assembly approved a plan to add $14 billion to the budget for a state universal health care plan. It's always easy to increase expenditures but never possible to reduce them. Democrats in the California legislature most likely don't plan to reduce them. They plan to raise taxes instead, but there's a diminishing return. The higher you raise taxes, the less they return because people find ways to avoid them, like by moving out of state.

Harry on the NewsHour

Harry Reid appeared tonight on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer and lied, misrepresented and postured throughout the interview. He is the worst possible representative for Congressional Democrats, aside from Nancy Pelosi, because he can't speak without whining. To hear Harry tell it, everybody was out of step except him. If President Bush and Congressional Republicans had agreed with him and done what he wanted, there would have been no disputes and they would have gotten a lot done. At no point in the interview did Harry admit that he must compromise with Republicans in the new year if it is to be different from 2007. Harry believes that bipartisanship is where he gets his way and other people give him what he wants. This year has taught him nothing.

Nearly as bad as Harry was Mark Shields, who followed Harry with David Brooks. Shields sees 2007 the same way Harry Reid does. If it wasn't for President Bush and Congressional Republicans,  a lot of things would have gotten done. 

Shields loves Mike Huckabee -- he has done great beating those terrible other Republican candidates without any money. Most likely, Shields loves Huckabee because he'll be easier for Hillary or Obama to beat than Romney or McCain.

Snippy editorial from LAT

In a snippy editorial today, the LAT criticizes the Bush administration because Attorney General Mukasey wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee saying he wasn't going to share certain documents. Yesterday, President Bush said that the administration will cooperate with Congress in the CIA tapes investigation. The two things aren't necessarily contradictory but the LAT went on the attack anyway, suggesting Mukasey is getting his comeuppance. Why the rush to pronounce sentence? Why does the LAT not offer something positive? Is there something that the LAT wants to see done? Or does the LAT just want to bitch?

LAT reviews politics in 2007

LAT reporter Janet Hook this morning reviews the 2007 contests between President Bush and the Democratic Congress and pronounces Mr. Bush the winner hands down. She writes as though it was surprising, but it wasn't. Anyone who thought that Democrats could run the government from Congress with a small House majority and a razor-thin one in the Senate either had poor judgment or was smoking or drinking something hallucinatory.

Democrats have claimed all year that they had a mandate. A 51-49 margin in the Senate is gridlock, not a mandate. Worse, they behaved all year as if they had a mandate, sending up pointless resolutions and dead-on-arrival legislation. Their behavior was irrational. It is not possible to negotiate with an irrational person or party, which explains why President Bush and Congressional Republicans could not negotiate with them.

Democrats took unnecessary swipes at the president all year, at times ridiculing him and sometimes threatening him. This was pointless and irrational. It is stupid to insult someone and then offer to negotiate with him or her.

Democrats have behaved stupidly and irrationally all year. They should install new leaders for the new year, leaders who are rational and experienced and mature and intelligent. But leaders of that kind might not be able to get elected in an irrational party.

LAT: What this country needs is more enviro-nuts

The LAT argues today's in an editorial (part of its "American values" series) that Democrats are good because they agree with the Sierra Club but Republicans are bad because they don't. Sadly, the Sierra Club believes in taking private property without due process. The Sierra Club is sort of an environmental Gestapo. The LAT says Republicans are split on environmental issues because of evangelical Christians, who are among the LAT's favorite targets.

Levey laments AMT fix

Democrat propagandist Noam Levey of the LAT reports today on the AMT fix that Congress voted yesterday, but clearly he's disappointed. The fix was available any time this year but Democrats refused to face the fact they had only a one vote margin in the Senate. So they stupidly kept sending up dead-on-arrival bills, wasting time, generating hard feelings and causing IRS to print millions of forms containing pre-fix rules. Besides which they caused a delay in re-programing IRS computers so that IRS will not be able to timely process tax returns that are filed early. IRS warned about this before Thanksgiving but arrogant Democrat congressional leaders paid no attention and instead kept on fantasizing about a miracle victory over Republicans.

It's been like that all year with Democrats -- thinking they could force things they didn't have the votes to force. Repeating the same mistake and expecting a different result each time suggests at least a mental disability if not insanity.

LAT touts CA health plan

The LAT editorializes this morning in favor of a plan that passed the California Assembly to place on the ballot a proposition which, if successful, would authorize a state run health plan to provide health insurance coverage for some Californians who don't already have it. The main problem is it will cost $14 billion a year and the only way to raise that is with a tax increase, mostly on businesses, as if Californians were not already taxed enough. And, California's 2007-2008 budget already has a $14 billion hole in it.

Democrats control both houses of the legislature and the governor, nominally a Republican, sides with Democrats. Therefore, the proposition will surely make the ballot, presumably next November.

Democrats, like other socialists, believe in compelling people to do things, which means the plan will have lots of costly mandates. The people who will be forced to pay will not be the people who will benefit from the plan. Since there will be more of the latter than the former, the plan could well pass, with the result that more businesses will leave the state and many high earners will too. Will enough remain in California to pay the additional $14 billion? That is the question.

LAT discusses finance

As part of its "American Values" series of editorials, the LAT today writes concerning the federal budget, taxation, the value of the dollar and Social Security. Today's editorial is less a liberal screed than previous editorials in the series. Today's editorial even makes some good points. But it makes some bad ones as well. Speaking generally, the LAT believes more in government than it should. Government cannot make your life perfect, it can only screw it up. Some government is necessary. The LAT just wants more than is wise.

O. C. Register sounds off on torture

The O. C. Register is excited today about the destruction of the CIA tapes, which is OK if the thing isn't blown out of proportion. (After all, it's just video tape. People can and will imagine what was on the tapes, but then what?)

The Register then moves on to discussing torture and interrogation techniques, arguing against torture and in favor of a public debate about techniques, which would be stupid. Interrogation techniques are useless unless the person being interrogated is in the dark about what interrogators might do to him or her. If it's all discussed publicly, terrorists will know the tactics in advance and that will makes them useless.

Goldberg on Clintons

Jonah Goldberg writes today on the LAT opinion page describing the Clintons -- Bill and Hill -- as he sees them. Although he doesn't use the word "buffoon," he describes Bill as one, and he's right. How a nation as great as ours could elect a buffoon as president puzzles, but ours did.

Democrats overseas

What is it about Democrat former presidents and vice-presidents who feel perfectly comfortable criticizing their own country when outside the United States? Who are they appealing to and for what reason? Do they get some kind of reward for trashing their own country? A pat on the back from Europeans? Environmentalists? Socialists? Is it about money? They sell books by selling out their county?

It's like trying to entertain friends and impress strangers by revealing your family's skeletons. Respectable people don't do it but Al and Jimmy do.

LAT takes aim at Romney

The LAT appears to have picked Mitt Romney as the likely Republican presidential nominee because they've published hit pieces on him two days running. Today's is about how Romney legally utilized Caribbean tax havens to minimize U.S. taxes both for himself and investors. 

Pelosi: deer in the headlights

Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared on the NewsHour last night and more than once had that "deer in the headlights" look on her face. And she told some whoppers. She insists that the American people want congressional Democrats to keep sending up bills that have no chance. For what purpose? 

Pelosi and the other congressional Democrats are like a drunk behind the wheel insisting he can drive. Everybody else can see how dangerous it is, but not the drunk.

Justice

The LAT editorializes this morning on justice, arguing (1) that it is just to consider crimes against some citizens as deserving of greater punishments than similar crimes against other citizens and (2) that it is just for Supreme Court justices (or potential ones) to predetermine the outcomes of issues brought or to be brought before the court prior to hearing arguments.

Under a LAT judiciary, the rape of a mature lesbian would call for more severe punishment than the rape of a young girl.  And the killer of a healthy baby would go free so long as that baby had not yet inhaled a breath of air at the time of its death.

Irresistable force, immovable object

Both WaPo and WSJ have pieces in today's newspapers about intra-party fighting between House and Senate Democrats. Democrats brought this upon themselves by overestimating their strength and underestimating Republican congressional opposition and President Bush. The intellect of Democratic congressional leaders must be questioned. The likely outcome of nearly every Democrat congressional initiative in the past year has been clear from its beginning. If a leader persists in producing legislation that he or she knows cannot possibly get enacted, that leader's intellect must be questioned. Democrats gain nothing from persistent defeat, which is what they've experienced all year.

Some argue that Democrats are compelled to introduce legislation they know can't be enacted so as to please MoveOn.org and other parts of their base. From news reports, it appears that their base is no happier with them than anyone else. The Democrat leadership needs new blood and a new approach.

LAT editorial series

The LAT has published two of its so-called "American values series" editorials and today publishes a few letters from readers in response. Naturally, favorable responses got published three times as often as negative ones. Here's a negative one: The editorials are pompous, the issues are a litany of liberal dogma and the arguments are poorly reasoned.

WSJ on GAAP

The WSJ editorializes today on GAAP, that serpent's nest of incomprehensible rules that U.S. companies and auditors must comply with if they are to be considered as reporting "in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards." The WSJ argues that international rules ought to be adopted and U.S. rules scrapped. They could not be more right.

How today's U.S. rules came to be is a puzzle. A board was formed years ago to handled all this but it immediately got off on the wrong track, issuing such detailed rules that a Philadelphia lawyer could not interpret them with any decree of confidence. 

This led to even more detailed rules, to interpret the former rules, and these new rules were even more detailed and they needed even more interpretation. This path led to madness, which required new rules, which had to be interpreted too. And then loopholes had to be closed, and that required more new rules, and so on, ad infinitum. Today, the original goals of rules based accounting have been all but lost, and accounting theory, applied using judgment, has been forgotten.

Market down, worms out

The Dow was down nearly 300 points yesterday. Today the worms appeared in the LAT business section. It was predictable -- not the Dow, the worms.

One of the worms is Tom Petruno. He always appears following a sizable market drop. Peter Gosselin is another, though he doesn't appear as often as Petruno. Maura Reynolds is the other.

LAT on "life"

Today, the LAT editorializes for unrestricted abortion, against capital punishment, for monkeying with embryonic stem cells and cloning, and, presumably, for euthanasia. The sole underpinning for these positions cited by the LAT was "rights" -- the right to live, to die, to be free, to pursue happiness -- not that these rights are God-given, according to the LAT.

But the LAT seems confused about some of these things. Take the abortion question, for example. The LAT says every woman has the right to kill her unborn child. But doesn't that violate the child's right to life?

The LAT says the state doesn't have the right to execute people for crimes. Why not? The LAT doesn't say.

Scientists ought to have the right to experiment with embryonic stem cells and, eventually, to use them to clone or genetically modify human beings, because that could lead to less disease and better human beings. Why should this be permitted? Because humans are free, apparently, or because the idea is modern, the LAT seems to say.

The LAT cannot be accused of philosophical consistency.

Budgeting

Democrat propagandist Noam Levey spins in today's LAT the problems that Congressional Democrats are having trying to pass a budget for the fiscal year that began last October 1 as a Bush problem. But the central problem is that Democrats spent all their legislative days last summer playing games: trying to pass non-binding resolutions, investigating endlessly. Now they argue that President Bush should just give them what they want.

Democrats have overplayed their hand since they came into the majority in 2006. They have only a one vote margin in the Senate but they behave as if their margin is far larger. With a one vote margin, the majority needs to be realistic and work with the minority to get things done. Harry Reid has never tried that. Instead, he has alienated Congressional Republicans and President Bush with unnecessary harsh words.

The LAT's perfect union

The LAT editorializes this morning that what this country needs is a more perfect union. By that, they mean a union where men can marry men and women women -- and perhaps dogs and horses and whatever else one chooses. The LAT's "perfect"union would not be religious, and any reference to a Creator would apparently need to be deleted from our founding documents, or at the very least ignored. Accordingly, when Jefferson wrote that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights he misspoke, or miswrote. The LAT would re-write that, and does, by arguing that all human beings are created equal, by whom they don't say.

The LAT sees this nation as needing a lot of perfecting. They propose to tell us how in a series of editorials.

Levey on the AMT

Democrat propagandist Noam Levey has apparently become the LAT's AMT expert, for he writes a Q&A on the subject in today's newspaper. It's a non-technical Q&A, as might be expected, but it also is a pro-Democrat one, as might be expected.

Levey describes Republicans as "fiercely" resisting Democrat efforts to raise taxes on some people to give a tax break to others. The "others" that the Democrats have targeted are people who probably vote Republican, but Levey doesn't acknowledge that.

Levey seems to think it's OK to raise taxes on one group of taxpayers in order to give a tax break to a different group. He justifies that by arguing that the targeted group are wealthy and, in his opinion, pay too little. If you were a member of that group, how would you feel about that?

Steyn agrees with LAT

Mark Steyn thinks as poorly of the Bush/Paulson subprime mortgage fix as the LAT does. They're both wrong.

Steyn seems to think the plan isn't optional, that loan servicers and investors were forced to go along with the plan and therefore that the U.S. is going to hell in a hand basket. But loan servicers and investors agreed to the plan according to reports.

Steyn is concerned about government negating contracts, or at least amending them, by fiat. But that's not what happened.

Perhaps it's weird to people who have always been journalist, but business men and women change contracts and compromise promises all the time. Business people do what is in their interest. If a customer buys 100 widgets and can't pay for them all, business people try to work something out -- give the customer more time to pay, cut the price a little or whatever. If you force the customer into bankruptcy you may get nothing or nearly nothing. It's often to your advantage to help your customer survive.

It's the same with subprime mortgages. If the mortgage holder forces the borrower into bankruptcy, he or she loses a lot. If the holder enables the borrower to stay in the home and continue making payments then the holder loses less. Why would the holder not take the deal that minimizes his or her losses?

Another investigation

The clamor for another investigation -- on the CIA tapes this time -- is tiresome. Congressional Democrats have devoted a year so far to investigations of one sort or another and have little to show for it.  This devotion to investigating instead of doing what Congress is supposed to do, like pass appropriation bills, seems an irresistible compulsion, one that could result in election defeat for Democrats next November. What is the likely outcome of the investigation currently being clamored for? Someone could be embarrassed (besides the Democrat Congress) and someone could lose his or her job. Nothing more is likely to happen. So why waste time and resources on a likely dead end? It's politics.

Petruno says Bush plan won't work

LAT columnist Tom Petruno, who has predicted market collapse all during the boom that began in 2003 and has continued since, now argues that the new subprime mortgage plan introduced this week by President Bush and Treasury Secretary Paulson has no chance. Investors are too greedy and will not do what they agreed to do, he seems to suggest. Therefore, the plan will collapse, like the market has apparently. Presumably, Petruno thinks government mandates, with penalties for failure to comply, are necessary to make bad old investors do what is in their interests. It's in the liberal soul: government must make rules and assess penalties.

LAT nitpicks Romney's speech

Perhaps it's a measure of the effectiveness of Romney's speech that the LAT editorial page editors feels the need to nitpick Romney's speech, finally calling Romney's statements contortions and suggesting they were intended to cover all the political bases. Then the LAT takes a swipe at Republican evangelicals, calling them hyper-politicized. This editorial is an embarrassment to the LAT. Evangelicals are no more hyper-politicized than many groups in the U.S., including gays and lesbians, blacks and Hispanics, unions, environmentalists and many others. Romney's speech was well written, sometimes even elegant, and well planned, which is why the LAT had to nitpick.

LAT on Romney's illegal gardeners

In a piece today, the LAT reports on illegals who worked for a landscape contractor who maintained Romney's lawns. In an exchange with reporters, Romney seems to get the better of it. Interestingly, the newspaper refers to these workers as illegal immigrants. In other stories they usually call them undocumented workers. Get it? Illegal for Romney, undocumented otherwise.

Congressional investigations

The Democrats are screaming for new investigations concerning the CIA tapes. It beats doing budgets and AMT legislation.

LAT digs dirt on Huckabee

LAT investigative reporter Richard Serrano reports today on dirt he has dug up on Mike Huckabee, GOP presidential candidate. That should have been predictable for two reasons: Huckabee is a leading candidate now and Serrano is a dirt digger, a biased one. For several years he tried to dig up dirt on various Republicans in an effort to support the fantasies of Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson, unsuccessfully.

Lexington vamps for McCain

The Economist's Lexington argues this week that John McCain should be the GOP's presidential nominee but the reasons Lexington gives for liking McCain are precisely the reasons he isn't the leading GOP candidate. They include McCain's position on immigration, campaign finance reform, global warming, business regulation and taxation. Lexington's McCain advocacy suggests he or she is out of touch with Republican points of view.

Petruno surprises

The LAT's Tom Petruno, who never reports when the market rises, did so today though the Dow was up 175 points yesterday. Will wonders never cease?

LAT's further take on subprimes

In the business section today, the LAT says "mortgage relief program a slap in the face to some." No good deed goes unpunished at the LAT.

LAT on subprime mortgage plan

The LAT's front page report on the plan announced yesterday to stall subprime mortgage resets beginning in 2008 is captioned "No silver bullet for borrowers." The subcaption reads "The Bush plan helps only a subset of struggling homeowners." It seems the LAT's message was "Don't read this. This plan won't help."

LAT on Romney's speech

The LAT's description of Mitt Romney's speech yesterday in College Station, Texas doesn't describe the actual words of the speech or the apparent meaning of those words in any adequate way. It does, however, include quotes from people the LAT chose, apparently because they reflected poorly on the speech.

In truth, the speech was extremely well written and at times was elegant. Romney deserves credit for the quality of the speech but he will not get it from the LAT.

Separately, the LAT attempts to explain the Mormon faith and how it differs from Christianity. The explanation does not enlighten much.

Petruno missing

The Dow was up yesterday by nearly 200 points. Where is Petruno of the LAT?

LAT editorializes on NIE

LAT editorial writers can't decide what to say about the NIE and Iran except that Bush and Cheney are bad. The LAT takes all sides on the issue and at one point says Bush is correct, but that was both before and after they said he was wrong.

NIE on Iran

The LAT has a piece in today's newspaper, by lined Greg Miller, on the intelligence agencies' flip flop on Iran. It's based mostly on anonymous sources so it's any one's guess how reliable it is. Still, it doesn't appear to be biased in any particular direction. It does leave the impression that the intelligence agencies don't know which end is up. One source in the piece said the recent report may be an indication of a pendulum swing, from overstatement of threats during the lead up to the Iraq war to understatement now. If that's the case, the NIE may be worthless. Whatever happened within the agencies, the flip flop does not inspire confidence in the NIE.

Levey is back

The LAT's Noam Levey, Democrat propagandist-in-chief, absent recently, alleges this morning in the newspaper that Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility while Republicans are the party of tax cuts. True in part but mostly untrue. Democrats hardly ever reduce spending and, in fact, consistently argue for government to do more, which means that government under Democrats has a constant need to raise taxes. Republicans, historically, have pushed for government to do less, to leave people alone, to stay out of there lives as much as possible. Republicans believe that government takes too big a chunk of people's income. It naturally follows that Republicans would push for lower taxes.

Negotiations on the AMT triggered Levey's piece. The AMT should never have been in the tax statutes. Most people agree with that. It could be argued that the federal government has been collecting an unlawful tax since 1969 -- well, perhaps not unlawful but surely mistaken. It should simply stop doing that -- collecting the AMT. If that means that expenditures must be reduced to prevent further increasing the deficit then Congress should get busy. The Democrats always argue for increases in taxes to offset the reduced revenue after AMT reform. Stalemate results and the AMT lives on.

LAT pro-Obama, anti-Giuliani

The LAT editorializes this morning about a supposed e-mail campaign that charges Barack Obama is a closet Muslim. It claims that Fox News repeated a false report that Obama once attended for four years in Indonesia a madrasa, or Islamic school. The LAT claims it knows the report is false because CNN said it is. But CNN has a reputation for false reporting.

In a separate editorial, the LAT argues that Rudolph Giuliani stretches the truth. The LAT knows this because the NYT said so. But the NYT is just as biased as CNN and the LAT.

On bloggers

The O.C. Register's Commentary section today has a piece by a guest columnist named Peter Sheer that argues bloggers ought to reveal themselves instead of posting anonymously. The writer has a point but misses another: It's dangerous to reveal yourself. Who's to say an angry reader won't hunt you down and try to kill you? Many years ago that might have been unthinkable. Nowadays, it's a reality.

LAT on Huckabee

In an apparent shift in tactics, the LAT reports today on Mike Huckabee, another GOP presidential candidate, and has some good words about him, like he's not a real Republican because some of his ideas are not reactionary.

LAT praises GOP presidential candidate, finally

Today, the LAT finally has some good things to say about a GOP presidential candidate. But it's Ron Paul, the candidate least likely to win the GOP nomination. The LAT must have felt safe.

LAT evaluates GOP debaters

In an editorial today, the LAT proclaims the GOP debaters as hardhearted scoundrels undeserving of consideration for the presidency. But the LAT is biased. It hardly ever agrees with anything Republicans say or do. The LAT will nearly always view the debaters' remarks as wrongheaded. That doesn't make it so, however.

You Tube and presidential debates

CNN has a reputation to overcome. In recent years, it has demonstrated a leaning to the left. So it's no surprise that conservatives would question CNN's selection of questioners and questions for this week's Republican candidate debate.

Those who choose not to watch these debates -- because they are farce more than serious debating -- rely mainly on descriptions of the debates supplied by media outlets like the LAT, WaPo, WSJ, Fox News, Lehrer's NewsHour, etc. Therefore, these non-watchers lack first hand knowledge of questions and questioners. However, from the descriptions provided it seems clear that video questioners are selected based on how ridiculous they appear. You must munch on a corn cob or do something similarly stupid to get selected as a questioner, it seems. Given that, it's hard to get excited about whether the questions and questioners are biased, which they clearly are

Petruno AWOL

The Dow is up more that 500 points since the LAT's Tom Petruno last had a piece in the newspaper. Where is Petruno?

Petruno of the LAT

LAT columnist Tom Petruno appears in the newspaper nearly every time the market drops. Yesterday, the Dow was up more than 200 points. No Petruno this morning.

LAT targets McCain

This morning the LAT's target is John McCain, and this continues the LAT's practice of publishing negatives on Republican presidential candidates but positive, even glowing, news about Democrats.

LAT fails to report Congress' failure to act on AMT

The IRS Oversight Board sent a letter to Congress yesterday urging action on an AMT patch and explaining the consequences of further delays, which include IRS's inability to process returns. You would think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi would sense the urgency and get the work done. But Harry is off on a junket to South America and Nancy may be babysitting her grandchildren. Not wanting to embarrass Congressional Democrats, the LAT shows no interest in reporting this fiasco.

LAT reads Lott's mind

In an editorial today, the LAT criticizes Trent Lott for resigning from the Senate before year end, then looks into his mind and concludes it's because Lott wants to become a lobbyist. Well, maybe. But Lott's resignation might have something to do with having to deal regularly with Democrat Harry Reid, the incompetent and petulant Senate majority leader, not to mention the  several other irrational Democrat senators who are in leadership positions.

LAT: propaganda machine

The LAT today publishes a piece on the front page by Stephen Braun that can only be described as Hillary propaganda. In it, Braun claims Hillary was the brains behind Bill in the Clinton White House, always prepared for meetings or negotiations, "armed with an exhaustively researched grasp of the issues at hand." According to the LAT, her "all-access pass into the West Wing gave her an intimate education in presidential decision-making that none of her opponents can claim." Obviously, that makes her an experienced candidate and clearly qualified to be president -- if you believe the LAT.

The LAT is not a newspaper. It's a propaganda machine.

LAT promotes government healthcare

On the front page today, the LAT shows a picture of a Dana Point, CA family who claim they've been priced out of the health insurance market, although in other ways they have a decent lifestyle. There will always be people who choose to self insure. That shouldn't mean that other people are obligated to pay their health care bills.

LAT's Petruno is repetitive

The LAT's Tom Petruno reports today that "bears are becoming hard to ignore." Relentless bears are ignored and should be, Petruno among them.

LAT calls Romney too perfect

Consistent with past practice, the LAT this morning bashes Mitt Romney by calling him too perfect. It seems an act of desperation.

Petruno of the LAT

LAT reporter Tom Petruno writes today that the "bull run" is over. At least he's consistent. He's been predicting a bear market for six years.

LAT on Supremes

The LAT editorializes this morning on Supreme Court justices, arguing, among other things, that Sam Alito is stridently conservative. Apparently, The LAT bases this partly on Alito's vote this year to prevent public schools from discriminating in order to end discrimination in public schools.

The LAT also argues that Democrat presidential candidates have been clearer on promising to appoint justices that will uphold Roe v Wade than Rudy Guiliani has been on promising not to. But the LAT's arguments are unpersuasive.

Concerning TSA

The LAT editorializes today on TSA, arguing for more tests and better screening. The O.C. Register argued the other day that TSA was so ineffective that it ought to be disbanded. Which is right?

If another 9/11 should happen, there would be hell to pay if the government had not at least tried to improve airport security. Therefore, something like TSA is necessary even if ineffective because it makes it appear that the government is trying to do something. With better people, better training and better management, TSA could be effective, but that isn't likely.

Hopeful sign from the LAT?

Not likely. Today the LAT publishes a positive story on Iraq -- on the front page above the fold. If only this were a sign of a change in policy.

LAT on Obama

While the LAT regularly reports negatively on Republican presidential candidates, it reports positively today on Obama, continuing a pattern.

LAT on working gays

The LAT argues today for a federal bill that would outlaw discrimination against gays in the workplace. Arguments against the measure are spurious, according to the LAT.

Do we need this? How big a problem is this? The LAT doesn't say. It only says that arguments against are invalid, illegitimate, false -- because the LAT says so.

LAT instructs the pope

In an editorial this morning, the LAT instructs the pope to listen more, when he comes to New York and Washington next year, and teach less. The pope needs to know about separation of church and state in the U.S. and ought to listen, even to Muslims, according to the LAT.

Who writes these pompous editorials?

LAT ignores Dow rise -- almost

When the market rises, that's not news -- to the LAT. When it falls, that's front page news and it prompts predictions of recession from the LAT. Yesterday's more-than-300-point rise in the Dow was not entirely ignored by the LAT. It was reported in the Business section.

Ticking time bombs

In an editorial today, the LAT instructs everyone to stop talking about ticking time bombs. The LAT as censor does not inspire, it depresses.

The subject of the editorial is torture, something that has captured liberals' attention like nothing since ... what? Taxing the rich? Beating up on Bush?

Liberals are certain that the the U.S. has tortured but they have no proof. They can't even define torture. They were not concerned about torture when Slick Willie was president. Chances are, they'll forget about it if Hillary or Obama gets elected.

LAT on Romney

Once more, the LAT publishes this morning a critical piece on a Republican presidential candidate, this time Gov. Mitt Romney. The LAT doesn't claim to be either fair or balanced and in this they're accurate.

LAT reports honorably on Bush and Vets

The LAT today publishes a rare piece by reporter James Gerstenzang that describes a Veterans Day ceremony in Waco, Texas which President Bush attended. Gerstenzang's description is so vivid that this reader is able to imagine being there and sensing the emotions of those present. Then Gerstenzang quotes from Bush's speech words that are as elegant as those Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg. The only negative is that this appears on page A9 and few will read it.

LAT repeats Thompson mantra

Consistent with prior practice, the LAT this morning publishes an uncomplimentary piece on a Republican presidential candidate, Fred Thompson, repeating the mantra that Fred is lazy.

LAT annoints Giuliani

Apparently having decided that Rudolph Giuliani will be the Republican nominee for president, the LAT attacks him again this morning, the third morning in a row, arguing that Bernard Kerik's indictment reflects on Rudy and makes him a poor choice for president. Presumably, this is gratuitous. Presumably, no presidential candidate or other opponent has paid for this anti-Giuliani propaganda.

LAT on Giuliani/Robertson

In another editorial today, the LAT quotes from a conversation between the late Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson that took place shortly after 9/11, according to the LAT. In the conversation, the two Protestant ministers argued that 9/11 was partly or wholly God's punishment for Americans' failure to lead a chaste and virtuous life. The LAT paints that as loony and suggests that Giuliani might be better off without supporters like Pat Robertson.

Giuliani likely didn't ask LAT editors for advice and probably wouldn't listen to them. Were they offering advice? Not likely. Most likely, they were painting Robertson as a kook and Giuliani as desperate for his support.

LAT on Blackwater, again

The LAT editorializes on Blackwater again this morning, lamenting that Blackwater personnel who were involved in the shootout in Baghdad in September may not be prosecutable under either U.S. or Iraqi law. The LAT closes by calling the shootout a Blackwater debacle. But what if the Blackwater people were defending themselves and the State Department official they were protecting? What if they did nothing wrong or committed only minor errors in judgment that didn't affect the outcome? Would the LAT then defend them and say they were being railroaded? Not a chance. The LAT obviously has an agenda and justice isn't on that agenda.

LAT anticipates recession

Following on the heals of a favorable GDP report (3.9 percent growth) only two weeks ago, and with unemployment at near record low levels, the LAT this morning, in a front page piece by Peter Nicholas, anticipates a recession, hopeful it will help to elect Democrats next fall.

LAT on Giuliani

Consistent with past practice of never reporting anything good about a Republican, the LAT reports today on Rudolph Giuliani, saying he has a combative style.

LAT highlights Dow drop

As usual, when the market goes down its front page news to the LAT. When it goes up, the LAT ignores it. Today's reporting of the market decrease is by Tom Petruno, which was predictable. Petruno has predicted recession since the last one. One day he'll be right.

Patrick Leahy lies

According to the LAT, Senator Pat Leahy said yesterday that "we ... already have laws and treaty obligations against waterboarding." Leahy knows that's untrue. It would be true if we had a court case holding that waterboarding is illegal but there isn't one. Otherwise, Leahy would have cited it.

If Congress wants to outlaw waterboarding it can. If the president vetoes they can override. Leahy and company can't legitimately insist on enforcement of laws that Congress hasn't passed.

Another House hearing

The LAT reports today that the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing yesterday to bash Yahoo and its CEO. This is their specialty: holding hearings in order to chastise or embarrass someone. It beats legislating responsibly, apparently. Somebody ought to hold a hearing and tell the Democrat Congress to do their job, which includes passing appropriation bills before each fiscal year begins.

LAT's shrill editorials

LAT editorials are nothing if not shrill. Today, they're excited about Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona's failure to resign after being indicted by a federal grand jury. Carona is no prize, and he ought to take a leave of absence while defending himself, but the LAT has him convicted already and demands that the county Board of Supervisors perform an illegal act: dismiss him. Carona is an elected official and can't be removed that way. The voters can recall him and should. That's what the LAT should be arguing.

LAT says loyalty to GOP tested

Consistent with past practice (publish bad news about Republicans, good about Democrats,) the LAT publishes today a piece by Maura Reynolds about how former Republicans are deserting the party because the housing market is in decline. The piece is based entirely on a few anecdotes from a single county in a single state. It almost seems the LAT had a quota to fill (of GOP bad news) and couldn't come up with anything better.

LAT says utilities need more money

In a front page piece this morning, the LAT suggests that downed power lines, which cause forest fires, are the fault of rate-payers (power customers) who, the LAT suggests, aren't paying enough to allow utilities to maintain their facilities. The utilities don't need anything so much as they need competition. Then, instead of blaming their customers they might start pleasing customers in order not to lose them.

LAT shows its bias, again

The LAT, which hardly ever has anything good to say about a Republican, today publishes a puff piece about Northern California Democratic lawmaker Jerry McNerney, on the front page. Why? Presumably to showcase a Democrat who risks losing his seat next November after only one term in Washington.

Enriching the enemy

That's the title of an LAT editorial today that argues that the next president will need a global energy strategy, one that transcends ideology, to cope with rising oil prices. Well, yes, but such a strategy would involve nuclear power, more reliance on coal and drilling -- in ANWR, along the Pacific coast and in the Gulf of Mexico. But these are things liberals can't stomach, which means no energy policy can transcend ideology. Being liberals, the LAT editors can't see that. Their idea of a global energy strategy would involve more stringent controls on cars, more reliance on wind and solar power and kissing up to Caesar Chavez, Putin and Ahmadinejad.

LAT hides good GDP report

The 3.9 percent growth rate for GDP in the 3rd quarter is reported by the LAT on page C4 of the Business Section from an AP dispatch. The LAT abhors good news.

LAT convicts Carona

In an editorial today, the LAT argues that Orange County Sheriff Michael S. Carona is guilty and should resign, this before his trial has begun. Sentence first, verdict afterwards.

Karen Hughes

LAT reporter Paul Richter this morning reports that Karen Hughes is resigning her position at the State Department and returning to her home state of Texas. In reporting that, however, most of Richter's words are about Hughes' failures, as Richter perceives them, and America's image overseas, which Richter describes as bad and getting worse. Reading Richter's piece, it's hard not to conclude that he took the Hughes resignation as an opportunity to take a few swipes at the Bush administration, something that seems compulsive at the LAT.

Damning with faint praise

The LAT's lead front page story today concerns the reduction in civilian deaths in Iraq in the last 60 days. The LAT acknowledges that "the surge" may have contributed to the decrease but highlights other factors, one of which, the LAT says, is that the sectarian fighting has accomplished it's goal: the separation of Sunnis and Shias. According to that analysis, it seems the "civil war" is over.

Anonymous sources

Despite promises to curtail it, the LAT published this morning a front page Halloween scare story based on anonymous sources about the danger of an unintentional clash between U.S. and Iranian forces in Iraq, and the potential danger that such a clash could escalate into full fledged war. It could be a true story, but then it could be a figment of a reporter's imagination. The sources might be high level people with knowledge of the subject. Then again, they could be clerks or secretaries or mid-level people anxious to get in the newspaper. If the newspaper had named its sources, readers could evaluate the sources and decide whether or not to believe the story. The LAT would surely argue that they should be trusted. If the newspaper did not have a bias, that might be possible.

Choices are easy for LAT

In testimony before the Senate judiciary panel, the nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, said that if water-boarding is torture then it is illegal, but he also said he didn't know if it's torture. Seems reasonable. He's a judge who sits behind a desk most of the time. What could he know about water-boarding. That doesn't bother LAT editorial writers though, who also mostly sit around. They think they're experts on water-boarding -- after all, they've read all the blogs. Mukasey was right to withhold judgement until he learns more about the subject, perhaps by observing it.

LAT on Christian right

The LAT editorializes this morning, arguing that the Christian right is shooting itself in the foot by insisting that it can only support anti-abortion presidential candidates. You wonder what the purpose of this editorial was. Was the LAT trying to help these Christians by giving them good advice? Nah. The LAT says it's pleased that these Christians are taking that position. Maybe the LAT sees the Christian right as an easy target, like President Bush and Blackwater.

O. C. Register found a smoking gun, sort of

In an editorial today, the Orange County Register says it found something in court documents of a case involving Quest Communications that suggests the government may have pressured Quest to provide customer call records to the NSA before 9/11. The problem is, the "something" was a mere allegation which the government denied. The Register admits it may mean nothing. So why base an editorial on it?

The Register is anxious to prove that the Bush administration violated the law or the constitution when it authorized the NSA's electronic surveillance program and claims that Americans' telephone calls and e-mail messages may have been intercepted without a warrant. But no American has thus far said his or her calls or messages have been intercepted. Until that happens and is proven to have happened, the Register and others are tilting at windmills.

LAT sop to Turks

Apparently to take the pressure off the lunatic congressional Democrats, who propose to stick their collective finger in the collective eye of our allies the Turks, the LAT this morning chastises President Bush and General Petraeus for not doing more to help Turkey wipe out the PKK in northern Iraq. The LAT wants the U.S. to join Turkey in a military adventure under a NATO umbrella aimed at eliminating the PKK. In other words, go ahead with the finger but put some American lives at risk so the Turks won't get mad. Makes sense if it's not your life and you have no qualms about risking others for a political purpose.

LAT's Levey returns

LAT reporter Noam Levey, a Democrat propagandist, hasn't had a byline piece in the newspaper recently, thankfully, but he's back today with a piece about a Republican congressman from North Carolina who is about to lose his seat because he no longer votes with his party on national security issues. Levey seems to think that the congressman is being treated unfairly and the LAT seems to think it's front page news. Both are twisted views of routine reactions by constituents to votes the congressman has taken.

Levey also laments the decision of Chuck Hagel not to seek reelection to the Senate. Hagel has lost the confidence of the people he represents. Why should he return to the Senate?

LAT applauds divorce

The LAT argues today in an editorial that Americans should be more like the French, a sentiment that appeals to the left. Today's subject is the divorce of Nicholas and Cecilia Sarkozy,which the LAT claims is a good thing, about which the French people seem to be unconcerned. Why the LAT should feel the need to applaud divorce isn't clear.

The law of the land

The LAT, in an editorial today titled as above, argues that the U.S. Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the meaning of the "law of the land." Well, duh. Who is arguing otherwise?

The LAT editorial refers to a court case concerning capital punishment for a Mexican national in which the State of Texas and the Bush administration are on opposite sides. The LAT agrees with the Bush administration but you wouldn't know it from reading the editorial.

LAT on SCHIP

Lacking confidence in arguments based on the merits of the Democrats' efforts to expand SCHIP, the LAT today devotes its editorial to denigrating opponents of the Democrats' plan. The LAT stoops to name calling (saying President Bush is bullheaded,) ridiculing (saying the GOP presidential candidates offer only "facile bromides about 'free markets,'") and threatening (against Republican congressmen who oppose the Democrat bill,) hardly an honorable or fair way to debate a serious issue.

LAT aims both barrels at Mukasey

The LAT's editorial writers join the news staff in suggesting questions for Judge Mukasey. In theory, there is a Chinese fire wall between news and opinion, but not at the LAT.

LAT on Mukasey

LAT reporter Richard Schmitt today offers senators on the judiciary committee a series of question to ask Judge Mukasey in confirmation hearings that are scheduled to begin today. You'd think it isn't a reporter's job to suggest questions but instead to report on questions asked and answers given. But LAT reporters see their duty differently.

LAT wrong on facts

In an editorial today, the LAT states unequivocally that the NSA has wiretapped Americans. Which American has been wiretapped by NSA? No one has stepped forward to say that his or her phone or e-mail has been tapped. The LAT ought to be more careful about what it asserts without proof.

O. C. Register poor-mouths the military

The Orange County Register whines today about (a) the use of reserves and National Guard in Iraq, (2) stop loss orders, (3) wear and tear on equipment and (4) a shortage of firing range bullets -- all because of the Iraq war. Poor babies. What if it was World War II and people had to give up tires, gasoline and beef and all the healthy men between ages 18 and 39 were in the military. Then whining would be justified.

Arnold's veto pen

The LAT reports today that Arnold vetoed 22 percent of the 965 bills that the legislature presented to him. Incredible.

Credit to the LAT, today only

Today's opinion pages include a piece by Niall Ferguson arguing that the House's resolution on Armenian genocide amounts to posturing and is irresponsible, and a piece by James Kirchick claiming liberals ought to give Clarence Thomas a break. If only this were a trend.

LAT: Pollution on the hoof

According to the LAT today, livestock emissions are a leading source of greenhouse gasses. Is the LAT serious? Surely this editorial is a spoof. Nah, the LAT editors don't have that kind of humor, or any at all.

LAT on unlawful combatants

LAT reporter Julian Barnes writes today that Blackwater and other civilian security firms operating in Iraq may be considered unlawful combatants under international law, the same as suicide bombers, roadside bombers and snipers. The issue is unresolved according to an anonymous official within the Defense Department, the LAT says.

Practically speaking, there is an enormous difference between a man or several men (or women) engaged in protecting a State Department official and a roadside or suicide bomber. But there can be no doubt that someone will argue that they are the same. Such an argument shouldn't be allowed to carry the day.

And, the LAT shouldn't quote an anonymous official except in unusual circumstances. In this case, the anonymous official likely has a motive for speaking with a LAT reporter. Likely, that motive isn't a positive one.

Terrorist surveillance or eavesdropping

The LAT argues this morning that Bush must "come clean" about how much privacy Americans are sacrificing in the war on terror. The phrase itself suggests something nefarious has happened. The LAT and most liberals undoubtedly believe that's the case but so far no American has come forward to report that his or her private communications have been intercepted by NSA.

The LAT ignores that for the NSA terrorist surveillance program to be effective it must be secret. It should be obvious that if a terrorist knows his phone calls or e-mails are being intercepted by NSA that he will stop communicating in that way. It should be obvious that if what the NSA is doing is revealed to all Americans that it also will be revealed to terrorists.

A way must be found to continue the NSA's critical program -- the object of which is to protect Americans and America's allies -- without revealing the program's details. (Too much already has been revealed, thanks to the NYT.) The administration has revealed to the intelligence committees and Congressional leadership the details of the program. That should be sufficient.

Arnold's sore arm

The Orange County Register reports today in an editorial that California's governator has so far signed 454 bills and vetoed 41. He has 470 additional bills to consider before Sunday night or they automatically become law. That's a total of 965 bills and that's ridiculous.

The House v Turkey

Congressman Tom Lantos appeared on the NewsHour tonight and tried to explain his committee's action in accusing Turkey of Armenian genocide nearly 100 years ago. It didn't help. He had no coherent explanation. His committee was just meddling. Pelosi is responsible because she could have blocked it but chose not to, again demonstrating poor judgment.

Grassley on the AMT

Senator Chuck Grassley has a piece in today's Wall Street Journal arguing that the AMT ought to be repealed regardless of the Democrat "paygo" rules. All he says is true. The income that the AMT produces for the federal government is like booze to an alcoholic. The alcoholic thinks he can't do without the booze. Congress thinks the government can't do without the AMT. Both are wrong. The cure for both is to quit cold turkey.

Democrat meddlers

Democrats seem to be compulsive meddlers. A Democrat legislature in California puts more than 900 bills on the governor's desk in one year. But they couldn't pass a budget on time. In Washington, a Democrat House proposes an anti-Turkey resolution concerning events that happened 90 years ago. It serves only to antagonize an ally in the war on terror. But the Democrat Congress has yet to pass a budget for the fiscal year that began October 1. Instead of doing the work they are paid to do, Democrats are meddling.

Michael Gerson: Why Fight For Anyone's Freedom?

Michael Gerson has a piece in today's WaPo that shouldn't be missed. It's a superb defense of Bush's democracy agenda.

Larry Sabato on the constitution

Larry Sabato says we need a new constitution but the reasons he gives in an opinion piece in today's LAT aren't sufficient to make the sale. In fact, of the four ideas he mentions none seem likely to gain majority support. Sabato needs something better if he expects people to agree to a constitutional convention, where anything could happen and probably would.

California's prolific legislature

The LAT says in an editorial today that the governator has 900 bills on his desk to either sign or not sign by Oct 14th. It's time the legislature had a time out, maybe for a year, maybe two. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they stayed home instead of going to Sacramento. It's a reasonable bet that California would be just fine without them.

Republican debate

Some Republican presidential candidates seem to think the U.S. has an awful lot of problems. Those candidates don't deserve to be nominated and can't be elected. The Gipper must be turning over in his grave.

LAT applauds Brits drawdown

The LAT argues today in an editorial that the U.K. decision to withdraw 2,500 of its troops from southern Iraq is proof that the U.S. should withdraw all of its. It makes a lot of sense if you think like LAT editors. According to the LAT, Bush's coalition of the willing, which once totaled 34 countries, has collapsed. They once said it wasn't a real coalition because it didn't include France and Germany. The facts change or the LAT reinterprets them. That way, they prove whatever the LAT wants them to prove.

LAT promotes Hillary, trashes Blackwater, again

The theme of today's newspaper seems to be: elect Hill, convict Blackwater. A story by Janet Hook and Mark Barabak seems to suggest that Hill's election is inevitable. Stories by Tina Susman offer testimony by Iraqis that Blackwater SUVs force other vehicles off roads and Blackwater troops fire indiscriminately into crowds, killing innocent Iraqis. The question is whether this testimony is reliable. For five or six years, U.S. military reports of terrorists killed or captured in Iraq have differed from Iraqi reporting on the same incidents. U.S. military reporting has generally been good in other parts of the world -- at home, in Germany, Japan, South Korea, Kosovo, etc. That suggests that Iraqi reporting may be substandard.

The FBI has been sent to Iraq to investigate the September 16th incident in which 11 (Iraqis now say 17) were killed by Blackwater security guards in a shootout following explosion of a roadside bomb. People should wait until the FBI has finished that investigation before drawing conclusions about whether Blackwater was at fault.

And tries to rehabiltate Che

A front page piece by Patrick McDonnell in the LAT tells of the legend of Che and his rehabilitation in Bolivia and Cuba and other parts of the world. Why a piece on Che? Leftist still love him, irrationally so.

LAT trashes Blackwater again

LAT reporter Paul Richter writes this morning that everybody always knew Blackwater was bad but they took the easy way out and ignored the problem. The story is based partly on anonymous or fictitious sources and partly on the testimony of a woman named Janessa Gans who Richter describes as an official in Iraq for two years. What that means is any one's guess. However, a little Googling indicates that she was a political officer in the U. S. embassy in Baghdad from 2003 to 2005, apparently a relatively low-level position. It also indicates that she is an activist, an opponent of U.S. policy in Iraq, an opponent of Israel and a proponent of Jimmy Carter's views on Israel, Palestine and perhaps everything else. A news article based on testimony of a partisan like Janessa Gans ought to include testimony of equal weight from a partisan on the opposite side of the issue. Otherwise, the article must be considered opinion instead of news and should appear in the opinion pages of the newspaper.

Peggy Noonan on presidential candidates

In this week's column, Peggy Noonan says she likes the look on Barack Obama's face when he's thinking, which is unlike the look on Hillary Clinton and President Bush when they're speaking lines written for them by staff. She likes Joe Biden because he's been ahead of his peers recently on Iraq, she says, specifically mentioning his tripartite thinking (which set off demonstrations against the concept in Iraq by Iraqis, who believe Iraq is theirs to screw up if anybody does.) She likes Chris Dodd because he's sophisticated. Her main point though, is she's tired of Bushes and Clintons and wants a change.

Of her points, the last is the only one that makes much sense. Offering ideas extemporaneously is good in classroom debates and Toastmasters meetings. In presidential campaigns, offering ideas that have been debated and considered and tested is better. Joe Biden has offered the same tripartite idea nobody has been buying for five years or more. But his principal failing is that he can't just stop talking. Silence is golden sometimes in debates and negotiations. Chris Dodd is an empty suit but he looks good.

WaPo's lack of class

It's one thing for a left-wing blogger or a communist street demonstrator to charge the president with lying without supporting evidence or facts. It's another for a major newspaper, supposedly respectable, or a columnist of such a newspaper, to do the same. WaPo columnist Eugene Robinson did that in a column yesterday about SCHIP. WaPo not only published it but promoted it.

WaPo, NYT and LAT could be helping to raise the level of discourse. Instead, they're wallowing in the trough with the rest of the swine.

LAT tells Apple how to do business

In an editorial today, the LAT offers Apple some unsolicited advise. Apple ought to be like Nokia, says the LAT. Next thing you know, the LAT will be urging Henry Waxman to investigate Apple.

Morrison on Blackwater

In an irrational and emotional piece in today's opinion pages, LAT columnist Patt Morrison attacks Blackwater for, among other things, soliciting work from the office of California's governator. She says she was "stopped cold" when she learned that contractors sometimes do work for governments that she always thought was done by police officers and citizen-soldiers.

It's just guard duty. There have always been privately employed guards. They free soldiers to fight wars and police to pursue and arrest criminals and enforce laws. Liberals are losing it over Blackwater.

LAT: Bush insane

In an editorial today, the LAT argues that the Bush administration should be offering asylum to more Iraqis, and that its failure to do so up to now is insane. The LAT closes with: "If Bush won't end this cynical, heartless and self-defeating U.S. policy of delay, Congress should." This is the LAT's interpretation of Carnegie's "How to win friends and influence people."

Eugene Robinson on NewsHour

On tonight's NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson offered his interpretation of Justice Clarence Thomas's new autobiography. Mostly by innuendo and insinuation, Robinson suggested, without saying it, that Thomas is a little off balance mentally, a little confused. This, in Robinson's view, explains why Thomas is such a poor fit on the Supreme Court and is such a disaster for blacks generally. But Robinson, too, has a history and his history makes him an inappropriate analyst for Clarence Thomas.

LAT does journalism

Today on page one, column one, the LAT prints a story by reporter Robyn Dixon about a white Zimbabwean farmer who is trying to exist in a country run by a totalitarian socialist dictator named Robert Mugabe. It's a compelling piece written by an obviously talented writer and it's enlightening in two ways. First, it demonstrates what the LAT could be if it would ween itself off publishing left-wing political propaganda and instead were to concentrate on being a first class journalistic enterprise dedicated to impartial enlightenment. Second, it shows what happens when a government strips people of their property rights. Zimbabwe, once the breadbasket of Africa, is bankrupt, its money worthless and its people desperate, all because of an English educated African socialist who became Zimbabwe's dictator. There's a lesson there for American socialist in the academy, journalism, environmentalism and politics who believe that they can improve on free market private enterprise capitalism.

Applebaum worries about America's image

Ann Applebaum writes today in the Washington Post expressing concern about other countries and other peoples not liking either Americans or America's government or both. And, she claims it matters because we may need other countries to help us in the event of another war and they may not help us if they don't like us. America isn't liked, she says, because of incompetence, especially in Iraq but also in Afghanistan and Pakistan. She says America isn't liked because people don't like losers.

Unlike most journalists and columnists, she admits that America had a coalition of the willing when it invaded Iraq. She says we couldn't gather such a coalition now.

It's necessary to make a lot of assumptions to go along with her conclusions. First, it must be assumed that America is a loser. Plenty of people in America would take issue with that. Harry Reid would agree but many people would not. America has lost only one war, the war in Vietnam, and isn't losing in Iraq or Afghanistan, despite what Reid might say and has said. Reid is simply wrong.

Then it must be assumed that America is incompetent. This is easier to argue. Mistakes have been made in Iraq, plenty of them. Bush's biggest mistake was in trusting certain generals and a defense secretary too long. But he was smart enough to change course. If you fix your own mistakes are you still incompetent? If you succeed in Iraq, are you still incompetent? Presumably, the jury is still out on the question of competence.

Further, it must be assumed that Applebaum is right in saying that other countries wont help you if they don't like you. But don't other countries do what is in their own interests? Would any country join a losing battle because it liked the losing country, even if it knew it was going to get its butt kicked? Not likely. So Applebaum's assumption is highly doubtful.

Finally, it must be assumed that being liked matters, whatever the reason. The question seems moot because being liked or not liked isn't anything America can control. It shouldn't try.

America, in its history, has done more for the other countries of the world than any other country that ever existed. (World Wars I and II are sufficient proof of that, not to mention the Cold War.) If people still dislike us in spite of that then that is proof of the assertion in the previous paragraph.

Waxman v Blackwater

On the front page of today's LAT, reporter Peter Spiegel writes that investigators working for Congressman Henry Waxman believe that Blackwater has misbehaved in Iraq, threatening or killing Iraqis without justification and then paying off them or their families in order to avoid difficulties with the Iraqi government. The reporter suggests that Waxman's investigators found that the State Department serves as Blackwater's political protector in Iraq.

In a separate LAT article, reporter Alexandra Zavis writes that an Iraqi investigation concluded that Blackwater guards fired without provocation in the September 16th shoot-out that resulted in 11 Iraqi deaths following the explosion of a roadside bomb. But a roadside bomb is a provocation isn't it?

Who are Waxman's investigators and how did they get involved in investigating Blackwater? Isn't that a job for the FBI or the GAO? Who pays Waxman's investigators? Does each congressional committee chairman have a staff of investigators? Isn't the GAO Congress's investigative staff?

LAT equates Petraeus, Swift boat ads

In an editorial today, the LAT claims that Moveon.org's "General Betray Us" ad was no worse than the Swift boat ads during the 2004 presidential election campaign. Here are some differences:

The "General Betray Us" ad denigrated a general, a commander of 160,000 troops fighting a war in a foreign country. The general served in the military for many years, is highly respected and is non-political. And he came home from Iraq to give a Democratic controlled Congress a report they had demanded. No one has provided a fact-based reason why he should not have been received and heard respectfully.

The Swift boat ads concerned a junior officer who served in the Navy only a few months and then denigrated his own service. Many years later, he touted that service in a speech at a political convention with a ridiculous salute and a "reporting for duty" remark. The facts concerning his service are disputed but some aspects are highly suspicious. For example, he received three Purple Heart medals for injuries that occurred in a short time-frame but he was never hospitalized for any of these injuries. This raises questions about the severity of the injuries and the justification for the Purple Heart awards. These three Purple Heart medals got him home early after serving only a minor part of his planned tour of duty in Vietnam. It was hardly a basis for a presidential campaign.

LAT on Bush, et al, at the U. N.

In today's editorial, the LAT takes on President Bush's speech at the U. N. yesterday, saying the U.S. "must not only articulate but implement a global anti-poverty, anti-warming policy that compels the respect and admiration of its intended beneficiaries." Let's assume the LAT is not just cranky but really has some ideas about how to make the world better. What do they have in mind? Give money to third world countries? We already do that. Provide technical assistance? We already do that. Trade with them? We do that already. Protect them from aggressors? We've done that. Make everyone love us? That's not within our power.

Someone said recently that the U.S. has contributed more in blood and treasure to the countries of the world than any other nation in history. It's never enough. People forget. They're ungrateful. It's human nature. But the LAT editors should know better.

Government efficiency

Seattle's airport yesterday was chaotic. Potential airline passengers had to stand in a queue perhaps three football fields long to have their luggage and their bodies scanned for weapons and banned substances. This was your federal government at work. Government health care will be equally efficient if it ever comes to pass.

O. C. Register and the Orange Diocese

The Orange County Register's opinion pages today contains lots of criticism, in an opinion piece by opinion writer Steve Greenhut and in letters to the editor, of the local diocese of the Roman Catholic Church and Bishop Tod D. Brown. Greenhut and some letter writers chastise the diocese and Brown over lack of openness. In particular, they argue that Bishop Brown should have disclosed earlier that he once was accused of abusing a child in the 1970s.

Fair enough but the bishop's and the diocese's critics ought to be even handed. Greenhut ought to reveal his relationship with the Catholic Church and the identity of his sources. A principal Greenhut source is plaintiff attorney John Manley. Manley ought to disclose how much he has been paid representing plaintiffs in lawsuits against the church. Criticizing the church has become a cottage industry. Those who are making a living doing this ought to come clean.

News reporting

Reporters report what they want to hear or hear what they want to report -- and perhaps see what they want to see, and then report that. The newsmaker has a minor role -- and actual events and facts about those events have a minor role too.

That's this old fool's conclusion after seeing Petreaus and Crocker testify and seeing Bob Gates talk to Jim Lehrer last night -- and then reading the LAT reporting on same.

LAT reporter Julian Barnes reports this morning that Bob Gates hopes to reduce U.S. forces in Iraq to half present strength by the end of 2008 and says that's a more dramatic reduction than Bush has spoken of. That, Barnes says, means that Gates and Bush are not on the same page.

Everybody hopes what Gates hopes, except those who hope for a political bump from our defeat. The president probably hopes we can bring the troops home the day after tomorrow. But he and Gates and Petraeus and Crocker and everyone else who loves this country must be realistic. Half strength by the end of 2008 may not be possible.

It's risky to say what you hope if you're president of the U.S. or commander in Iraq. If what you hope doesn't happen then reporters, talking heads and political opponents will say you mislead them. Some may accuse Gates of that if troop strength in Iraq isn't down to one-half by January 2009. But he clearly expressed to Lehrer a hope, not an expectation.

Lexington

In the Sept 15th issue of The Economist, Lexington admits joining other media outlets, the Duke faculty and Duke's president in taking the wrong side in the Duke rape case. Good. But the Duke faculty has never admitted to guilt in the fiasco, according to The Economist, demonstrating the accuracy of the consensus view of university faculties, which is that they are hot-beds of political correctness gone berserk.

The Economist on Petraeus/Crocker

In its Sept. 15th issue, The Economist says Petraeus and Crocker did not wow them, Petraeus was spinning and Crocker was unconvincing except when he said that removing U.S. troops now would be disastrous for Iraq. For that reason alone, U.S. troops should remain in Iraq for now, according to The Economist.

Whatever. Wouldn't want to be optimistic. Best to be cynical and protect your rep.

Chemerinsky v Drake

In the LAT's opinion pages today, both Chemerisky and UCI's Chancellor Drake speak. Chemerinsky says the controversy is all about academic freedom and free speech. Drake says it's about an excellent university and a world-class law school. Drake is right. Chemerinsky's interests and objectives are not compatible with UCI's

LAT reporting on week's events

The LAT's reporting all this week has been about troop pullouts. Today is no exception. It's as if that's all Petraeus, Crocker and Bush have talked about all week. The WSJ picked up on that earlier this week and wrote about it in an editorial.