We have complained at length about the status of public education in America. We spend far more money on education in America than in most every other country on Earth, yet by every measure American students continuously fail to make the grade, when compared to the rest of the industrialized world. Even in countries with high levels of poverty, students perform far better that their American counterparts. As we have noted, culture plays a major role in the failure of American public education. In America we do not value education, we value the frivolous, we value the Hollywood-rock star culture. We don’t value science or literature and knowledge and as a result our educational system is in the toilet.

Now there is word that another of these brain dead students has gone from pupil to murderer. Judy Jester, a 55 year-old teacher in Alabama, was beaten to death by a 15 year-old 8th grade student. That’s right, beaten to death. The child attacked the teacher, cracking her skull, causing irreparable brain damage, leaving her for dead. Jester was found on the floor of a classroom by a group of teens, who called police. The unnamed15 year-old, has been charged with murder, as well as burglary and robbery. This child clearly represents a growing number of deadbeats who fully embrace the entitlement culture, placing no value in hard work or education, seeking only the path of least resistance, even at the expense of others. Some would argue that making a comparison with this murderer and other deadbeat students is a bit of a stretch…but is it? To what lengths will some people go to get what they want or take what others have? Even if this savage killer had not attacked Judy Jester, his un-appreciation for education is epitomized by the fact that he was a 15 year old in the 8th grade, shouldn’t he be in the 10th grade? Woe and shame for the future of our poor country.
Link to article

Since 2004, ordinary Iraqis have paid a heavy price for their freedom. Over 26,000 people have been injured or killed in insurgent attacks. The vast majority of casualties inflicted by Islamic radicals in Iraq have been at the expense of Iraq’s civilian population. The majority of these attacks have occurred in Sunni dominated provinces in central Iraq. These insurgent groups, including Al Qaeda in Iraq have made it clear that anyone in Iraq is a potential target, regardless of whether they are muslims or not.

Militant Al Qaeda leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has made it clear that his war is not just with the United States. His war is with the very idea of democracy and it is with the Iraqi people, if they embrace the idea of democracy. The insurgents are determined to affect their own version of regime change on the Iraqi landscape. Just as the Bush administration wants Iraq to serve as a model for democracy in the Middle East, the terrorists also want Iraq to serve as a model for Islamic militantism and their twisted vision of the future. They see Iraq as an opportunity to foment revolution, but Iraq isn’t the only battleground in this conflict. These militants have a global agenda, as manifested by the recent terror attacks in India, the words of Iran’s president, and countless recent examples of radical Islam’s march into history.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.casualties/index.html

Hugo Chavez must really be hard up for material; perhaps his writers from the demagogue’s guild are on strike this week. This is clearly evident in Chavez’s latest tirade. Chavez has felt it necessary to criticize the US for Halloween festivities around the nation. Chavez has called on his countrymen not to emulate American families who observe Halloween, noting the custom is foreign to South America. This speaks to Chavez’s mentality, and his aversion to the concept of the individual, because something is strange or foreign to him it must be irradiated. Perhaps what is most telling is Chavez’s latent hypocrisy. Chavez links Halloween celebrations in America to our supposed “culture of fear,” terrorism, and America’s tendency to instill fear into its people.

Chavez's words also speak to his ignorance. Halloween, is recognized in one form or another around the world, including Latin America. In Mexico and many other Latin American countries its called El Dia de los Muertos (the Day of the Dead), in Sweden its Alla Helgons Dag, in China its known as Teng Chieh. And let us not forget Ireland, the birthplace of the custom, where it has been recognized for over 3000 years. Who knew the Irish were cultivating terrorism for all that time. Of all people, Chavez is certainly an expert on putting fear into people. Chavez has frequently told his people an invasion was eminent and of course only Chavez could repel such a threat. Is Chavez so desperate to criticize the US, that he will say and do just about anything, including complaining about a meaningless custom, which has absolutely nothing to do with Chavez and his socialist stronghold? Clearly the answwer is yes. He will do anything to garner media attention.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4391166.stm

This weekend terrorists struck again. No not in Iraq, not in Russia, not in Europe, not in Sudan, not in China, not in Thailand, not in Indonesia and not in the Philippines and not in a dozen other places where they have been on the move, but in India. According to the latest figures from the Indian government, dozens have been killed in the simultaneous bomb blasts, which struck the Indian capital on the eve of a popular Hindu festival. So far no one has claimed responsibility for the savage attacks, but it is certainly safe to say that certain groups can be ruled out in advanced and one group in particular is suspect number 1, that group is the same bunch of individuals who have carried out terror strikes in India before: Islamic extremists. While the left and the Cindy Sheehans of the world would have us believe that Iraq and George Bush are the principle cause for all the world’s terror, the reality is Islamic radicals don’t need a cause or an excuse, their goal has been clear since 622 AD, the destruction of all infidels wherever they may be found. These radical, like others around the world, are determined to live out their credo: submit, convert or die. The evidence is clear, it is epitomized by the statements of Iran’s president, who called for Israel to be wiped out. Israel, however, isn’t the only target,
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/10/29/india.explosion/index.html

If you are a frequent reader of ThePhalanx.com, then you know that we would be remised if we went an entire week without saying something about Latin America’s most famous Mussolini wannabe, Hugo Chavez. This week has been a light week for Chavez, after being on a roll for most of September and October with one outlandish diatribe after another, perhaps Chavez had grown a little tired, or perhaps he felt even the people of Venezuela were growing a bit tired of his nasty habit of diverting attention away from problems at home to focus on imaged threats to his socialist paradise from abroad.

In any case, in spite of the fact that news has been slow from the Chavez camp this week, we were still able to find something interesting to report on the Mussolini of Caracas. You may remember that Chavez recently announced that he was expelling US-based missionaries from Venezuela. What has been Chavez’s gripe with the missionaries? Why they are in cahoots with the CIA of course, after all there is so much to be gained by US intelligence through an intense effort to infiltrate the indigenous tribes of remote Venezuelan rainforests. So much can be gained by providing them with food, medical supplies, clothing and safe drinking water and of course the gospel. Many of the indigenous tribes have openly acknowledged that the missionaries have done more for them than their own government. In light of this fact, hundreds of indigenous Venezuelans took to the streets in protest of Chavez’s plan.

Now we know that Chavez is a socialist and detests capitalism, but what is his gripe with the missionaries, beyond the imaged CIA threat. Is it symbolism or is there more to it? Well that’s quite simple. What is one thing that socialists embrace above all else? The primacy of the state, of course. And what is one thing they oppose above all things? Religion or spirituality of any type. Chavez is seeking to create a subject class of people in Venezuela subservient to the state and dependent upon the state for their very survival. He cannot allow a religious group to conduct charitable work right under his very noise. Chavez cannot allow people to embrace the notion that God, not the state, is supreme. Therefore, Chavez must strike and strike hard.

These missionaries are a threat, not only because of the threat posed by the spread of Christianity but also because their work demonstrates the failure of the government to provide meaningful opportunities for self help and individual achievement. In spite of all of Chavez’s promises, he has done nothing to alleviate poverty or encourage job creation or economic growth in Venezuela. All Chavez can be relied upon to do with any degree of consistency is blame others for his many failures. The missionaries in question are just the latest targets of Chavez blame politics.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1260317

Its hard to keep a good man down and even harder to keep a strong economy down. The US Commerce Dept has announced that the US economy grew by 3.8% during the last quarter, which marks another strong quarter of growth for the US economy. In spite of numerous attempts by the left to continually portray the US economy as languishing in the doldrums, the US economy continues to defy the naysayers, including the American media. Indeed, making in the press, reacted with surprise and silent disappointment at news of the economies continued growth. The left has exhausted a great amount of political capital in its attempts to convince the country that we aren’t on sound economic footing and the president is to blame. Well the president is to blame, but our footing is most certainly sound. Regardless of this, many have fallen for the Democratic spin and have convinced themselves of imagined economic decline. These are the same people, looking to government to make every decision of importance in their lives. Not only is the US economy resilient but has withstood the shock of Hurricane Katrina and the horde of unproductive poor people it unleashed upon many American cities and the economy has withstood the ever increasing price of oil. Why? Because we have lowered taxes and created a climate which favors economic growth. The president’s economic policies are again vindicated, while the leftist pro-European socialist preferences are further denigrated by the continued economic failure of Europe.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/gdp/2005-10-28-gdp-q3_x.htm

Lets say an individual opens a sandwich shop in a small town. He sells a variety of sandwiches to local patrons and tourists. The shop owner sells each sandwich for $3 a piece. The cost to produce each sandwich is about $1.85, which means the shop earns $1.15 profit on the sale of each sandwich. What does the shop owner do with their profit? Whatever they desire. They can expand their business, invest it, save for the children’s college fund, use it to purchase a house in the mountains, etc…Now lets suppose, that a rival sandwich shop closes down, or lets suppose the population doubles in the town, all of a sudden the demand for sandwiches doubles. More and more people are coming in to the sandwich shop, buying more and more sandwiches as lines wrap around the corner. Because demand has doubled, so too have the shop owner’s profits. Now should the shop owner charge less and earn less simply because more people want his product? No…of course not. The same can be said of a person’s labor. Labor, is like a product, we sell that labor to an employer in return, they pay us an agreed upon wage, after cost of living, transportation, food, etc…anything left over can be considered profit. Lets suppose there is a labor shortage at Company X and they simply can’t find enough software programmers or garment makers or crane operators, those they interview demand 25% more in salary. Should these potential employees lower their salary demand simply because there is a labor shortage? No…of course not. By the same token, the oil companies shouldn’t be compelled to lower their prices because demand has increased. Oil prices have increased because of the shear-increased volume in demand from China, India, Eastern Europe and right here in our own backyard. As demand increases oil companies will sell more barrels of oil and thus their profits will inexorably increase. This is known simply as the law of supply and demand. The oil companies, like any businesses are in business to make money, they aren’t charities or governments giving away a product or service. This message, however, is lost on politicians today, who look upon the oil companies as easy targets as they seek to score political points with the voters. No one likes to pay high prices so why not attack the oil companies and thus politicians maneuver to craft proposals that would place caps of profits and other such foolhardy schemes. Make no mistake about it…as soon as we allow the government to dictate what a business (large or small) can charge for its services, its only a matter of time before the same government dictates what salaries we deserve, and how much we can spend on a new car or house or how much we can own or where we can own it. There’s a word for such forms of government, it starts with an “F” and ends with an “ascism.”
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/28/OIL.TMP

We recounted earlier this week, how Wal-Mart is attempting change its image in the court of public opinion, but just as Wal-Mart is trying to revitalize its image, others are trying their best to reinforce negative images of the world’s largest retailer. Critics have produced a documentary entitled: Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. This documentary levels a number of charges against the retailer, though they weren’t able to tie Wal-Mart to the Lincoln and Kennedy Assassinations. Among the assertions leveled critics contend, Wal-Mart pays low-wage and offers limited health benefits. And for this Wal-Mart should be ashamed? Wal-Mart should be praised. There is no legitimate argument for why Wal-Mart should be assailed. Only in a leftist world can a successful business be maligned for doing a good job. There is no justifiable reason for Wal-Mart to pay its workers any more than they do already. Employers should pay their employees based on the value of their work. Frankly, the vast majority of Wal-Mart staff are un-deserving of a higher wage as it would not be justified by the work they perform. Many Wal-Mart employees do not require specialized skills or training. It is conceivable that a trained dog or monkey could perform many of the same tasks now performed by Wal-Mart employees. Wal-Mart is a business not a charity and should not be expected to pay people what they want simply because they lacked the skills that are in demand to secure a higher paying job. Wal-Mart is not the reason these people earn such paltry salaries. The employees themselves are to blame for the lifestyle choices they have made, by disregarding education, by raising children they couldn’t afford, by cultivating self-destructive and poverty enhancing habits. If anything, Wal-Mart and other retailers should be praised for giving these people a job at all.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2005-10-26-wal-mart-film-usat_x.htm

While we haven’t spent more than a sentence covering the CIA leak case, we recognize that some frequent visitors have a great deal of interest in the subject, many of whom are either die hard Republicans opposed to anything that damages the president, while others are Democrats who want nothing more than to harm the GOP. Who are we kidding? No leftist visits The Phalanx. Frankly this whole case has done nothing for us and is about as interesting as watching grass grow on a cold winter’s day. For those of you, however, who seek a better understanding of this case, the good folks at the Christian Science Monitor have compiled an FAQ on the CIA leak case.

It looks like White House Counsel, Harriet Miers has thrown in the towel. Oh well, we didn’t know much about her except for the fact that she ran a lottery in Texas and went to church…sounds like a stellar candidate to us. Perhaps the President has finally lost it, or perhaps he knew something we didn’t. I guess we’ll never know, but then again, could we have afforded to take such a risk? Now the president has an opportunity to get it right the second time. Hopefully, the President will choose someone with constitutional experience. That person by no means has to be a judge, but they certainly should be a constitutional expert, which Miers clearly was not. With her legal expertise, Bush could have done no worse had he called Jacoby and Myers. After all if trial experience is the only requirement why should the president limit his choices to friends from Texas.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/27/miers.nominations/index.html

Recently Iran “elected” a new president. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the former mayor of Tehran, was known as a hard-line conservative. The former mayor assured his countrymen and the foreign press he would govern as a moderate…well….so much for that nonsense. Ahmadinejad let the cat out of the bag this week. At the “The World without Zionism” Conference the new Iranian president made his position clear. In unmistakable words, Ahmadinejad said the state of Israel should be wiped off the map. Ahmadinejad also condemned fellow Muslim states that made peace or recognized Israel. The president vowed that he would not let up in the hostility toward Israel. With these simple words, the Islamic radicals of the world have their rallying cry and truth is revealed. The Phalanx is no great fan of Israel, but even the Jewish state’s harshest critics must recognize that Israel has bent over backwards to accommodate its enemies and to what avail? Withdraw…and they attack. Offer a host of concessions…and they attack. No matter what Israel does it will never be good enough. Why? Because they are Jewish!!! The Islamic radicals of the world, of which Iran is a principle component are governed by that familiar credo: submit, convert or die. Iran, however, won’t dare embark on a direct confrontation with Israel, as Israel would be the ones doing the “wiping out.” Instead these murderous cowards will lurk in the shadows and attack under cover of darkness, as that is their specialty. Even the appeasers of Europe were quick to recognize the savagery exposed in Iran’s statement. Perhaps, they will recognize that there is no reasoning with these terrorists.
Link to London Telegraph article

Recently we noted how Democratic efforts to raise the minimum wage had failed in Congress. Ted Kennedy and fellow leftists, sought to enact legislation that would raise the minimum wage from $5.15/hr to $7.25/hr. Leftists argued such an increase was warranted as the cost of living had increased significantly since the last increase in 1997. They also noted that it was becoming increasingly difficult to raise a family on minimum wage. Minimum wage, however, should not be used to raise a family in the first place. Only the most selfish among us, would knowingly raise children, with such a paltry income. People must accept responsibility for their actions, anyone other than a teenager or college student earning minimum wage, should consider themselves a failure, as they have clearly squared life’s opportunities in choosing the path of least resistance. America’s businesses, many of which are small businesses, cannot afford to keep making such unwarranted adjustments. Like any other product or service, the value of a person’s labor is determined by its worth to the purchaser, in this case the employer. A person with specialized skills and abilities (such as a doctor, fireman, welder, carpenter, or truck driver), can demand higher wages because of the expertise they bring. A person earning minimum wage, by definition has few skills and should not expect a particularly high wage as their skills are a dime a dozen. Now Wal-Mart, who has been under fire for the wages it pays its lowest skilled workers is attempting to pull a Mussolini and cast itself as a champion of the so-called “working poor” by urging Congress to increase the minimum wage. Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott recently said the minimum wage "is out of date with the times.” If Scott is so interested in raising the wages for his employees, why not simply raise the wage? It doesn’t take an act of Congress to compel Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, to take action on any issue. Scott’s position is not only detrimental to the economy, especially small business, but will do nothing to raise families out of poverty. If someone is truly interested in improving their lot in life, they will take the initiation first through education and then through hard work. Minimum wage is nothing more than a handout for the least productive among us.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2005-10-25-walmart_x.htm

If there ever were a reason to support gay marriage, this is it. The world’s oldest continuously operational terrorists organization, the Ku Klux Klan is planning an anti-gay marriage rally in Austin, Texas this Saturday. The rally will take place on the steps of city hall. The KKK wants to rally support for a proposition on the November ballot in Texas that would outlaw, the already outlawed practice of gay marriage. One has to wonder if they are on the right side of an issue , when one of the most notorious terrorist organizations, responsible for the deaths of thousands, comes out in support of your cause. We are all for free speech, but how can this country’s government justify arresting US citizens who are members of Al Qaeda, while leaving Klan membership unmolested.

Not all opponents of gay marriage welcome the support of the Klan and their murderous followers and admirers. Ryan Rush, Pastor of the Bannockburn Baptist Church and a chief supporter of the gay marriage amendment, has gone out of his way to distance himself and the movement from the Klan, noting they aren’t welcome in Austin. Nor should they be, the good people of Texas should come out in force to let these sheet wearing murderers and terrorists know that just as we stand against Al Qaeda and the forces of Islamic fascism, so too must we stand against domestic fascists as well.
http://www.click2houston.com/news/5171783/detail.html?rss=hou&psp=news

Frequent readers of the Phalanx are quite familiar with the Westboro Baptist Church, the so called Christian congregation has developed a name for themselves spreading hatred everywhere they go, an inversion of the “great commission” given to all true Christians. The Westboro Hate Mongers are led by “Reverend” Fred Phelps. Phelps and his “congregation” of hate frequently travel to the site of Iraqi war funerals to cheer and deride the mourners. Phelps and his cronies call these deaths (as well as the 9/11 terror attacks) God’s retribution upon a country that tolerates Gays. Phelps’ perversion of the scriptures would be laughable if not for the fact that he has corrupted dozens to his twisted view of Christianity. Britain’s Sky News, the sister station of America’s Fox News, secretly conducted a sweeping investigation into Phelps and his Westboro Hate Fest. They also filmed a hate filled speech by Phelps, in which he praised the London terror attacks and lamented that only a few dozen died rather than millions. Phelps also noted that America was deserving of such a fate. Phelps’ bigotry and hatred apparently knows no bounds and it is offensive that he calls himself Christian. Somehow, we find it hard to believe that Christ would approve of Phelps’ message. Regardless of one’s position of homosexuality, they are quite a few sins that Phelps is clearly guilty of. Rather than spreading a message of hate, Phelps should be down on his knees begging forgiveness or he may wake up to find that the fate he seeks for others has become his.
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91136-1200311,00.html
http://www.godhatesfags.com/ (Westboro Baptist Church website)

Countries trade because it is to their advantage, from a cost standpoint, to produce such goods and services, which it can produce most cheaply and trade for the rest, thus reducing total production costs. This concept, known as comparative advantage, explains why nations like the United States, no longer specialize in producing textiles or other labor intensive, products as other nations have a comparative advantage for labor intensive production, the US and other developed countries (like Japan), however, have a comparative advantage for the production of goods and services which require a high degree of technical expertise. It is for this reason that much of the world’s software development is centered in Silicon Valley and not in Mexico. Comparative advantage works best with limited government interference, especially with regard to protectionism, which only results in higher costs for consumers and reduced efficiency. For decades, nations like France (and to a lesser extent, the United States), have violated the tenets of comparative advantage by subsidizing domestic agriculture. In fact, many countries are guilty of this practice, but none more so than France, who funnel billions to farmers with such reckless abandon. French farmers are notoriously inefficient, when compared with agriculture in the US, Canada, Australia and Brazil. This inefficiency leads to higher prices for French consumers and a waste of government resources. It is no surprise that Europeans spend a much larger percentage of their income on food than Americans. What the French farmers lack in productive efficiency they make up for in political clout. The French government wouldn’t dare of offending this powerful political voice in France. As a result, France has continued to throw up roadblocks in to the EU effort to negotiate a trade deal in Hong Kong in the coming weeks. France, it must be remembered is a socialist nation at heart and therefore efficiency and lower prices are less important than the power of the state and its control over the economy, such a power is a drug for French politicians, who are no more inclined to give that up than they are to give up philandering and cheating on their wives.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4369778.stm

So it seems the Iraqis have approved the new federal constitution. With this hurdle now apparently cleared the people of Iraq are now free to form a new government. Elections are now slated for December. According to Iraq’s election commission, over 70% of Iraqis voted in favor of the constitution. Those who opposed it were largely Sunnis, but apparently Sunnis didn’t vote “No” in large enough margins to derail the constitutional process. The new Iraqi government, however, will have a tough job ahead of it. The vast majority of the minority Sunni population opposed the constitution and it is the Sunnis who make up a large portion of the insurgent terrorists operating in Iraq. The new government will have to be creative in their efforts to placate and re-assure the Sunnis, so as not to foment further violence and possibly civil war. What the vote does tell us is that most of the rest of Iraq are ready to put the past behind them and embrace democracy. There is no doubt that Al Qaeda and the Islamic radicals will do everything in their power to destroy that goal. The Sunnis’ however, should be pleased. Under a federal system, they will have a large degree of autonomy over their local and regional issues, giving them the freedom to choose their own destiny. To the radicals however, autonomy is not the goal, expansion and subjugation is. Their victory is won when representative government is defeated and Islamism is predominant. Only time will tell who will win, one thing is for certain, however, this is no longer America’s war, this is the Iraqi people’s war, they must bear the burdens and endure the hardships or this experiment will forever be foreign to the Iraqi people.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1841803,00.html

Over the weekend, millions of Brazilians went to the polls, no not to elect a new member of Congress or choose a new president, they were voting on a national referendum to determine whether the government should ban the sale of firearms. The referendum was soundly defeated with over 60% of the electorate voting to keep their firearms or at least in favor of the right to posses them should they desire to do so. Brazil is without question one of the most violent countries on Earth. For all the talk about crime in America, there were twice as many murders in Brazil (a country whose population equals half that of the United States). Why then, with so much violence, didn’t the people of Brazil vote in favor of the ban? The left and outside observers, especially in Europe, will the dismiss the result as the byproduct of a skilled “No” campaign that manipulated the electorate, in reality the Brazilians are keenly aware that such a ban would leave law abiding citizens defenseless as the criminals would in no way be inhibited by such an embargo. Gun bans have never been linked to a reduction in crime. Indeed, in Europe where firearms are virtually unknown, violent crime is at an all time high. The existence of firearms does not create a criminal, anymore than the existence of rope will drive someone to hang themselves. Once again, politicians looked for the quick fix, the window dressing to solve a deep rotted problem. Violence and murder in Brazil is a serious problem, rooted in poverty and culture, not it in the existence of guns. If the mere existence of guns influenced the crime rate, then it would stand to reason that in every country from the US to Brazil to Britain, violent crime would have been higher decades ago when firearms were more prevalent. No such statistics exist, for the simple reason that no such correlation exists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4371120.stm

Recently, leftist leaders including, , Ted Kennedy, attempted to enact legislation that would bring about an increase in the minimum wage. The last time this wage floor was increased was in 1997. Currently, the minimum wage stands at $5.15/hr., had this bill passed Congress, the wage would have risen to $7.25/hr. Leftists complain that since the economy is performing well and is expected to do so for the foreseeable future, a change is warranted…wait a minute, did anyone catch that? These are the same Democrats, who have charged since 2001, that our economy is continuing to slide further into the toilet, now, when it suits them, they recognize that the economy is not in the toilet after all. Leftists further note, that the cost of living (including gas and housing) have all increased since the last change in 1997. Minimum wage advocate, Ted Kennedy, argued a 40-hour-a-week minimum wage job would leave a family of three nearly $5,000 below the poverty line. And that’s exactly the point! Minimum wage, shouldn’t exist in the first place, but since it does, those who earn this wage, shouldn’t expect to be able to raise a family on such wages. To do so is foolhardy at best and downright selfish at worst. This reality highlights something we have been saying for a while. Those who are poor, by and large, are in that predicament, because of their own personal failures. There is no excuse for anyone attempting to raise a family on minimum wage. Minimum wage is an appropriate wage for a minimum skill job. It is not the responsibility of the state to ensure, that those who lack initiative and lack resourcefulness should be rewarded for failure. Whether earning minimum wage or 100K per year, people must realize that in life there are priorities. From birth those priorities begin with education, then financial stability and then raising a family, not the other way around. The left continues to complain that the cost of living has increased, yet the left says nothing as the people they are attempting to further subjugate, continue to practice self-destructive (and poverty inducing) behavior.
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/1005/24edwages.html

We’ve already made it abundantly clear that the CIA leak, Rove, Plame, etc...makes no never mind to us. This subject generates about as much interest as a Confederate War bond. The fact of the matter is, however, Bush has a real problem. It really doesn’t matter if anyone in the White House is indicted, it really doesn’t matter about guilt or innocence. There is a perception of impropriety, and this perception is making it increasingly difficult to govern. It is understood, that loyalty is an issue of grave importance to the President, but at what costs? Is loyalty more important than fulfilling one’s duty? The president now finds it difficult to push through any programs or proposals (remember Social Security reform), they are tainted on arrival, making his presidency a lame duck, less than a year into his second term. So what should the president do? First the president has to decide, whether its more important to have people close to him who are loyal but are also constant distractions or if its more important to push through his agenda in the time he has remaining. Bush should clean house. His staff should be composed of individuals who are beyond reproach. The collection of yes men in Bush’s White House only lend credence the Democratic arguments. Albeit true, by dismissing Rove and others, Bush would be giving the Democrats what they want, but it would also stun their criticism, freeing Bush from meaningless distractions.

For all intents and purposes, it can be safely argued that modern free market economics, began in Europe, Britain to be exact, after all Britain is the birthplace of Adam Smith, who ushered in a new ear of thinking with his treatise, “the Wealth of Nations.” Smith and a growing number of philosophers, politicians, economists and ordinary businessmen saw the mercantilist system of the 1700s as an inferior system that inhibited innovation and growth. The crucible upon which mercantilism is founded is protectionism. This economic principle is fundamentally flawed and had fallen largely out of favor by the 19th century, during this era modern capitalism emerged as a major force. Capitalism, like all human endeavors, can be equally harmful if left to excess. Fundamental is the rule of law. Today, nations in Western Europe, Latin America and elsewhere have given to excess again and have begun to re-embrace the failed system of socialism. Socialism, like Fascism and Mercantilism, requires an active and dominant role for the state. Socialism inhibits the free exchange of goods and services. Today, Europe is again the battle ground for economic theory as the forces of socialism are pitted against the advocates of the free market system. The players, however, aren’t easily identifiable. The socialist countries are nations like France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, while the capitalists are represented by the former Soviet bloc (Poland, Hungary, Romania, etc…). The nations of Western Europe have attempted to solve their country’s ills through increasing social economic and political control. This constant intervention, however, has failed to produce the heaven on earth its advocates have championed. Indeed, in the countries where such heavy-handed socialism is practiced, the results are far from encouraging. The nations of Western Europe are plagued by an increasingly stagnant economy, low birth rates, unemployment, growing crime, and social unrest. Meanwhile, the Eastern Bloc has learned from the failures of the west. They have adopted a model, quite similar to that of the United States, one that limits government intervention, providing individuals with incentives to create, rather than depend upon the state. The governments of Poland, Romania, Slovakia, the Baltic states, etc…have all taken this lessen to heart by lowering taxes, reducing government expenditures, loosening bureaucratic red tape and encouraging growth. The results are unquestionable. Today, growth in Eastern Europe far exceeds that in the west. Regardless of the facts, the western states, cannot and will not change. Their populations have grown far to slothful and dependent upon the government trough. So much so that the mere mention of “reform” sparks protests and strikes.

In America approximately half of the country’s population attends church services of a regular basis, though about 80% of the population claim to be Christian. The rest of the population is made up of Muslims, Jews and Hindu, with a small number of Buddhists and various smaller sects. A sizeable portion of the US population is composed of atheists, agnostics, secular humanists and even some Satanists. The beauty of America lies in the first Amendment to the US Constitution, which clearly maintains a freedom of worship as a basic right of all citizens. Nominally Egypt has a freedom of religion as well, in fact roughly 10% of Egyptians (approximately 8 million) are Coptic Christians. Coptics are a sect of Christianity separate from the Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox traditions, but sharing the same fundamental beliefs. The Coptic Church was founded by the Apostle Mark in the years after Christ’s death. For centuries Coptics accounted for the majority of Egypt’s population, that is until Muslims marauders from Arabia embarked on armed conquest of the Middle East and Mediterranean world, since that time relations between Muslims and Christians have been tenuous at best. Islamic fundamentalists regard the very existence of a Christian church in the heart of their country as an offense, especially one that stands by its faith and does not kow-tow to the all-knowing mullahs of Islam. This week Muslims have taken offense to a DVD, no doubt freely distributed by Islamists, which depicts a play conducted at a local Coptic Church. The play shows the deprivation and misery a local boy experiences upon his conversion to Islam. To the Mullahs, this is unacceptable, how dare Christians re-enforce a message to their own people, after all Christians are supposed to be spreading the message of Islam or teaching that Christianity is not the answer, right? One must remember that a Muslim can never be “offended” to do so is apparently to invite death. Islamic radicals have sparked rioting and caused the deaths of three people, including a nun who was stabbed, all in the name of a religion of peace. Even the Egyptian government, no friend to the Christians of Egypt, recognized that the radicals were to blame for stirring up trouble. The reaction of Islamists further demonstrates the inescapable truth in the Coptic production. These Islamists can’t even live in peace with their own countrymen, who are of the same ethnicity, who speak the same language, yet happen to be Christian. They are governed by a credo, which draws no distinction between Arab and Westerner, the credo is simple: submit, convert or die. Wherever there is radical Islam, this credo shall be enforced.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4366232.stm

Yes we admit it, when it comes to material, today is a lackluster day at best. We have scanned the headlines from several major cities in America. We have perused the news in Britain , Canada, the Middle East, Asia and even Australia and still nothing. There simply isn’t anything going on today, that raises even an eyebrow at the Phalanx. Sure…we could write about Tom Delay, but frankly it is such a non-issue, our hearts just wouldn’t be in it. Does anyone really care what kind of mug shot Delay posed for? If you do then keep looking on the Google blogsearch, I’m sure there are plenty of sites that will provide great detail on such a captivating subject, but the Phalanx isn’t one of them. Then there’s the ongoing saga about Karl Rove and the leak in the White House and somebody named Plame and so on and so forth. Generally we pride ourselves on being knowledgeable about current events, but this whole issue is so unimportant to us, that we would be at a loss even to identify the key players, let alone present a position of the issues. Now we aren’t saying that this issue doesn’t have some far reaching implications, no doubt it does, but it just doesn’t interest us, like studies on poverty, tirades from Hugo Chavez, nuclear confrontations with North Korea or public schools. Call us narrow in our focus if you like, but backroom politics just never was our thing and given that we aren’t Republicans its hard to get too worked up over their plight.

AIDS is one of those subjects that often spark vocal debate. Dare we say it, however, but the AIDS “crisis” needn’t be. AIDS, it should be noted is 100% preventable. If people acted responsibility, both here and abroad, AIDS could be easily brought under control. To hear AIDS advocates, however, one would In reality, AIDS kills on average 14000 people per year in America. This accounts for ½ of 1% of all the deaths in the US in a given year. By contrast Cancer kills over half a million people every single year, accounting for 23% of all US deaths. Yet AIDS research amounts to $3 billion per year and Cancer research $6 billion. For those with limited math skills, the proportion of aids to Cancer funding, clearly favors AIDS. Much has been made of the fact that AIDS numbers in America exceed 1 million, which is apparently the highest number since the 1980s, when much less was known about the HIV virus. The US population in December 1989, was just over 248 million people. By contrast the US Census bureau estimates the current US population at 296.3 million people. Using such statistics, we can deduce that 1 out of every 248 people in America had AIDS in the late 1980s. And by today’s estimates 1 out of every 296 Americans have AIDS. In other words .4% of the US population was living with AIDS in the 1980s versus .3% today. As you can obviously see, the numbers have fallen, but MTV foolishly reports these numbers as reaching epic proportions. This is further evidence of an agenda with many members of the press. The fact that our population today is nearly 300 million compared with 250 million in 1990, is largely ignored. Earlier, this year a report from the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) added a new dimension to the equation. As noted by the ACSH, the number of people living with AIDS is a good thing, because it means the number dieing as a proportion of those living with the disease is in decline. In other words, more and more people with AIDS are living longer, and more productive lives, thanks to advances in treatment. Treatment that can be largely attributed to the huge amount invested by the US in AIDS research. What’s disheartening about this study is that 250,000 of those living with AIDS today have no idea. Many of these people are continuing to live their lives and possibly spreading the disease. This isn’t a failure of research and a lack of commitment by those seeking a cure. This is a sign of ignorance and laziness, America’s biggest enemy. People living reckless and loose lives are the primary cause for the steady progress of this disease. If people weren’t taking such cavalier attitudes toward sex and promiscuity then AIDS could be more easily contained.
Terje Anderson, of the National Association of People with AIDS, stated earlier this year that: "One million people are more than enough, and our country has got to respond." Exactly how are we supposed to respond? The Bush administration has increased AIDS funding every year. Currently the US is spending $3 billion on AIDS research every year, for a virus, which has infected less than ½ of 1% of the US population. By contrast Heart disease is the biggest killer of Americans, followed by Cancer. AIDS isn’t even in the top 10. In fact Diabetes kills more than AIDS, as well as Alzheimer’s and a little known ailment called Septicemia (blood poisoning). How much money do you suppose is spent on eradicating Diabetes, the 6th biggest killer in America? Less than $800 million, that’s how much, yet diabetes is the 6th largest killer in America and these critics argue the US isn’t doing enough? Based on the numbers one could argue, the US is doing too much for AIDS.
http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.566/news_detail.asp
http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/nat-total.txt
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1504124/20050614/index.jhtml?headlines=true
http://www.cancer.org/downloads/PRO/Cancer%20Statistics%202004.ppt
http://plan.cancer.gov/foldouts.shtml

In politics, just as in life there must be priorities. One must decide what is more important given limited resources, time, manpower, etc. In politics priorities are often reversed, pressing and important issues, like Social Security, Crime and National Security must share the stage with unimportant or less pressing issues like baseball steroid use, immigration and Karl Rove. Very often politicians choose to focus on these non-issues because they generate media attention, while not requiring any degree of political skill or intellectual capacity to solve. Politicians in Georgia are not immune to this. Indeed, politicians feed on these non-issues as a means of demonstrating effectiveness to their constituents. Recently politicians in Georgia staged a rally at the state capitol to protest the scourges of illegal immigration. Now don’t get us wrong, illegal immigration is a problem and the nation would be well advised to get serious with regard to our porous borders. Before the likes of Al Qaeda use them to devastating affect. Illegal immigration, however, is largely a federal issue, not something that should be of paramount concern to state legislators in Georgia. Nonetheless, these GOP legislators railed against the use of tax payer dollars to fund public assistance programs for illegals, which is a rather moot point considering public assistance is only available to US citizens and resident aliens in the first place. There are a host of pressing issues before state governments, not least of which is the Supreme Court sanctioned effort to steal private property (i.e., eminent domain) for developers, something the state GOP was in favor of until the populace caught wind. We have since learned that organizers of the immigration rally paid homeless people to hold up signs and protest for the cameras, further demonstrating how unimportant this issue is. It’s a sad day when legislators are so desperate for attention that they will urge passage of bills to make illegal practices that are already illegal and pay bums to chant and carry on, just to boost their already over inflated egos.
Link to AJC article
Link to follow-up AJC article

No government is perfect; in fact every country on Earth suffers from bureaucratic inertia and political infighting. The US is no exception. The framers of the US Constitution and those that have followed have crafted a government that has stood the test of time. Our constitution has functioned well with only minor alterations over the past 230 years. Nonetheless, we at the Phalanx would like to suggest some modifications.

For the Executive Branch, the Phalanx would like to suggest that we lengthen the term of the president to 6 years and limit presidents to one term. Furthermore, we should abolish the winner-take all, electoral system and assign electoral votes proportionally based on the popular vote in each state. The president should be given a line item veto, just as many governors have, enabling them to better combat pork barrel politics.

The executive departments should also be streamlined, eliminating such bastions of bureaucracy like the Departments of Education, Labor, HHS, and HUD, to include only: Defense, Justice, State, Treasury and Commerce. The federal government should not be involved in administering social service programs, such efforts should be relegated to the states, if at all (any national norms or federal mandates would be administered by the states, with the Justice Department charged with overseeing compliance).

The Legislative Branch should also undergo some changes, beginning with term limits. Elected representatives to the House and Senate should be restricted to 12 years in office (6 terms for the House and 2 terms for the Senate). The Congress should also be brought into compliance with the 27th Amendment, which expressly forbids pay increases, without an intervening election. At present, Congress gets around this restriction by calling them “cost of living adjustments.” Any subsequent adjustments in pay should not apply to current members of Congress.

A strict limit should be imposed on the amount time Congress sits in active session. Congress should convene for no more than 100 calendar days in a given year (barring special legislative sessions convened by the president).

With regard to the Judicial Branch, federal judges (including the Supreme Court) should be restricted to a 20-year term. Anyone over age 65, should be limited to 10-year term and justices must be forbidden from citing foreign law in any court rulings.

Beyond these structural changes, Congress would be required to pass a balanced budget unless a 2/3 majority of Congress authorizes otherwise.

Finally with regard to federal elections, no one should be allowed to vote in federal elections without passing a written competency test. Just as we prohibit the criminally insane and those who are mentally deficient from participating in the electoral process, those who are ignorant of our democratic process should also be excluded, as they are easily manipulated and are a threat to our republic. Such a competency test would be similar in scope to a citizenship test and would include similar questions such as:

How many states are there in the Union (the United States)?
What do we celebrate on the 4th of July?
Independence Day celebrates independence from whom?
What country did we fight during the Revolutionary War?
Who was the first president of the United States?
Who is the President of the United States today?
Who is the Vice President of the United States today?
Who elects the President of the United States?
Who becomes our President if the President dies?
What do we call changes to the Constitution?
What are the three branches of our Government?
What is the legislative branch of our Government?
How many Senators are there in Congress?
Name the two Senators from your state.
How many voting members are in the House of Representatives?
Who is the head of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government?
Name the highest part of the Judiciary Branch of our Government?
What is the supreme law of the United States?
What is the Bill of Rights?
What is the capital of the state you live in?
Who is the current governor of the state you live in?
Who becomes President if both the President and Vice President die?
Who is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?
What were the 13 original states?
Name some countries that were our enemies during World War II?
What was the 49th state added to our Union (the United States)?
How many full terms can a President serve?
What are the requirements to be eligible to become President?
Who nominates judges for the Supreme Court?
How many Supreme Court justices are there?
What is the head executive of a state government called?
What is the head executive of a city government called?
When was the Declaration of Independence adopted?
What is the minimum voting age in the United States?
Who signs bills into law?
What is the highest court in the United States?
Who was President during the Civil War?
What was the 50th state added to our Union (the United States)?
What branch of government has the power to declare war?
What is the introduction to the Constitution called?
Name one right or freedom guaranteed by the first amendment?
Who is the Commander-in-Chief of the United States military?
In what month do we vote for the President?
In what month is the new President inaugurated?
How many times may a senator or Congressman be reelected?
What are the two major political parties in the United States today?

Frankly, anyone who can’t answer each and every one of the above questions (correctly) should forfeit their voting privilege, until such time as they can demonstrate mastery of the material and the larger concepts.

Hugo Chavez, a topic of frequent discussion at the Phalanx, has captured the spotlight again, but then again isn’t that what he’s all about? Chavez, who no doubt, jumped at the chance to grant an interview to the BBC, lashed out at the United States and George Bush and repeated a claim that he has made rather frequently, the delusion that the US is planning to invade Venezuela to gain access to its oil wealth. Chavez has milked this fantasy for all it’s worth, using it as a rallying cry in his home country to ensure that the people will see him as their savior and ignore his tyrannical ways. Chavez asserted that the US is a terrorist nation and his hostile to Latin America; though his arguments lacked specifics and the all-accommodating BBC wasn’t about to actually press the South American strongman on any points of fact. Chavez also stated that George Bush should have no reason to fear him or his country, Chavez, however, is mistaken, Bush isn’t the one trying to foment a climate of fear, that is Chavez. Chavez is the one who makes wild, baseless accusations against the US, to instill fear into the hearts of his people. There in lies the essence of his power, his ability to distract and draw attention away from the plight of his people is legendary. In reality, Chavez has done nothing to help his people, with unemployment quickly approaching 20% (when Chavez took power unemployment hovered around 12%, now it exceeds 17% and still climbing) and nearly half the population is living below the poverty line. If anything, Chavez’s “reforms” have only made the situation worse. His socialist land grabs have discouraged foreign investment and limited job opportunities, while his failure to confront the organized drug cartels and other criminals have led to a murder rate which is 8x higher that of the United States, yet Chavez calls himself a champion of the people. Under his leadership, Venezuela’s economy remains woefully dependent upon the volatile oil market, accounting for nearly 80% of the country’s revenues. Given the fact that the nation’s oil revenue is controlled by the state, do you think Chavez would use that money to invest in his country, improving infrastructure and encouraging the development of industry and leading his people to self-sufficiency? No…of course not. Quite the contrary, Chavez’s efforts are destined to lead his people to greater dependency. To distract from this inescapable reality Chavez continues to pull one Mussolini after another, hoping to convince people the US is a boogey man hiding behind every door. The real enemy of Venezuela, however, resides in Caracas, not Washington.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4359386.stm

More recently we have been scanning the leftist forums to gain an understanding into the mind of today’s modern socialists. One would be amazed with the delusional, mind-numbing drivel and conspiracy theories that ooze from their leftist keyboards. One interesting blogger on the “Democratic Underground” posted a speech from perennial socialist Ted Kennedy. The speech was delivered at the 1980 Democratic Convention.

President Reagan was right then and Kennedy was wrong then (and now). The fact of the matter is there are two kinds of people in America: those who expect the fruits of life to be handed to them and those who develop the skills to plant and harvest those fruits themselves. Today those two groups of people are locked in a pitched battle for the destiny of this great country. The left and their political allies within the Democratic Party are represented in the aforementioned words of Ted Kennedy. Kennedy’s words exalt the belief that the state is a parent, the state must care for its people, as if we are automatons incapable of making decisions for ourselves. Reagan was right, Social Security should be voluntary...but as we have seen some people have been so conditioned by leftist propaganda, they believe that the state should make those decisions.

People, who harbor such sentiments are already lost, they are drags on society, they can never be expected to innovate or create or to lead, only to follow, only to take, never to give, only to squander, never to save. Kennedy’s words are indeed prophetic and the battle is going his way.
www.democraticunderground.com

In the past we have written at length about the inadequacies in our educational system. The simple fact that the US spends more per pupil than all but two nations, yet ranks at the bottom of every academic survey is telling in and of itself. Now a report from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) proves what we have been saying. In spite of all the grandiose schemes and in spite of all the efforts to pump more money into education, American students still languish in the doldrums of academic incompetence. According to NAEP, there has been almost no improvement in reading scores in well over a decade and improvement in mathematical ability is “sluggish” at best. These tests also give us the first clear sign of how the country is doing since the adoption of the No Child Left Behind Act. And indeed no child has been left behind, because they are ALL stuck at the starting gate. President Bush and his Democratic and Republican allies pushed this nonsensical bill through Congress early in his administration. Among other things the bill promised rigorous testing to ensure that students are proficient in their areas of study. Exactly, whose brainchild was it to contend that more testing is how you improve education in America? If anything all these tests do is waste more time as students prepare for exams, while educators “teach the test.” Meanwhile Johnny is just as stupid as ever. Naturally, some educators are quick to make excuses for America’s lackluster performance. Tom Loveless with the Brookings Institution argued that over the past decade the Hispanic population has doubled and that may have contributed to poor performance in reading. This implies that prior to this population doubling, US reading scores were stellar. On the contrary US scores in reading, math, science, etc…have languished for years, not just the last decade. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said the country is on the right track, but only if the track leads to the unemployment line. How can America hope to sustain its position as the world’s preeminent economic power with such mediocrity? Whether a child attends a public or private school, parents must become more personally involved in their child’s education. That doesn’t mean attending football games and renting limos for the prom. That means ensuring that they perform well academically. Education is an investment for the future and right now education is not generating a return on that investment, much like Social Security.
Link to Washinton Times article

If you are a regular visitor to ThePhalanx.com, then you are undoubtedly familiar with our position on the Democratic Party and race. While the Democrats have portrayed themselves as champions of the poor and advocates for racial equality. The reality is Democrats, like most politicians, seek only to enhance and maintain their political power. Indeed, Democratic policies don’t improve opportunities for the poor or lead people to live self-sufficient lives, Democratic policies create subservience and foment dependence upon government, creating a subject class of citizens who “owe” the Democratic party and can be relied upon to sustain their power. It is for this reason that Democrats oppose true education reform, as educated citizens needn’t be dependent upon politicians for their survival. Not only are Democrats no friends of the poor, but their record on racial equality is also a sham. Why do you suppose that minorities lack any leadership positions within the Democratic Party? Why do you suppose that neither Party Chairman, Howard Dean have nor Presidential Candidate John Kerry had Blacks on their staff. Indeed, Dean has been credited with quite a number of off the cuff racially offensive remarks, yet has never been called on it. How is it that a Klansman can rise to a leadership position within the Democratic Party in the 21st century, but a minority cannot? The answer is simple. The Democrats are all about distraction. The one time a person of color, Maynard Jackson, vied for a position as party leader, the good ole boys in the party from Clinton on down, closed ranks and made certain the position went to the incompetent Terry Mcauliffe, that was not by accident, it was by design. Democratic policy is based on paternalism, the belief that they know best, which is an attitude we liken to a slave owner. Slaveowners claimed that their slaves were better off under their control. They too claimed that they were acting in the best interests of their slaves and were better prepared to make decisions for them. Now we see an overt effort by Democrats to undermine those minorities who refuse to tow the Democratic Party line. In other words, those who are refusing to become subservient to Democratic Paternalistic politicians. Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele is one such example. Steele is a Republican and possible candidate for US Senate, as such he is persona no grata to the Democrats. It seems the Democrats are so determined to undermione the upstart Steele, that they have been illegally snooping into Steele’s financial and credit reports. Several prominent Black leaders in Maryland, have recognized this Democratic attack for what it is and have critized the Democratic effort as clearly racist. Some political activists have wondered alloud why their has been no outcry from the Congressional Black Caucus. Well that’s a simple answer as well: for the same reason their were no complaints from house slaves when the foremen beat and shackeled the fieldhands. They are happy to have some small meausre of influence, however insignifant that may be, and will turn a blind eye to injustice when it doesn’t suit their political ends.
http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20051017-104359-6198r.htm

Earlier this year, the State of Georgia passed a new law requiring a valid photo id before a person could cast a ballot. From the moment the bill was proposed, advocates for the “poor” (ie, the lazy) and minority rights groups complained that the law reeked of Jim Crow. These groups which included: AARP, the NAACP, ACLU, Common Cause and others, argued that the Photo ID amounted to nothing more than a poll tax, which were made unconstitutional with the ratification of the 24th Amendment in 1964. In the state of Georgia a driver’s license or state id costs $20 for 5 years or $35 for 10 years. Are we to believe that $4 per year is an undue burden for the populace? Opponents argue the bill was designed to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor because the legislature is under GOP control and the poor generally vote Democratic. It seems preposterous to fathom that GOP leaders could envision that requiring a Photo ID would result in a suppression of democratic votes. What the Photo ID commotion really is is another Mussolini-esque non-issue, designed simply to garner media attention and prove to their core Democratic constituents that their leaders are acting in their best interests.

Further demonstrating that Photo ID circus is a non-issue is the fact that those who find it cost prohibitive to acquire a state id, will be provided with one FREE OF CHARGE. So essentially it is a poll tax of zero dollars and zero cents, but apparently even zero is too high for the poor and the elderly. In most every other developed nation on Earth a Photo ID is required to cast a vote, yet in Georgia such a requirement is considered a political attack. Regardless of this, a Federal Judge in Rome, Georgia sided with the ACLU and its partners, arguing that the photo ID "unduly burdens the right to vote.” Generally, one can expect the state will appeal the decision and it will likely end up before the Supreme Court. Regular Phalanx readers are no doubt confused, as the Phalanx generally takes a libertarian view on such government intrusions and today will be no exception. The Photo ID requirement IS a government intrusion and if mandated by law, tramples on our established right to privacy. It is NOT, however, a burden on minorities and the poor and because ID opponents do not object to use on civil libertarian grounds, one must take exception with their reasoning and naturally conclude that their objections are tantamount to smoke and mirrors, designed to draw attention away from genuine issues that should be of concern to their constituents. Voting is not a right and the state has an obligation to ensure that elections are devoid of fraud. A birth certificate or another non-photo document, does not prove categorically that a person is who they say they are. Unless someone can offer another suggestion, which satisfies the need for electoral fairness, with established privacy concerns, then we argue some privacy must be relinquished in order to exercise the privilege of voting.
Link to AJC news article
Link to Georgia Dept. of Driver Services

Yet another report from yet another Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), this time Transparency International (TI), an anti-corruption NGO has released a report ranking the world’s most corrupt nations. The US is ranked 17 out of over 160 countries, not bad considering we have pockets of corruption like New Orleans to contend with. The list, however, should come as no-surprise. Those countries with the highest levels of abject poverty are among the most corrupt. Countries like Chad, Bangladesh, Haiti, Angola and Turkmenistan ranked at the bottom of the survey. These countries and several others also rank at the bottom as far as poverty, with well over 70% of their respective populations living in absolute squalor. Corruption, however, is not limited to the poorest of the poor, nations like Russia continue to show and inclination for underhandedness. The implications for such rampant corruption are clear. "Corruption is a major cause of poverty as well as a barrier to overcoming it," said TI chairman Peter Eigen. “The two scourges feed off each other, locking their populations into a cycle of misery." This fact is inescapable, a fact many poor countries ignore in their quest to blame the evil and hated rich countries for their own failures. Poverty needn’t be an endless cycle. Many countries have emerged from war, colonization, oppression, high levels of poverty and dictatorship to become vibrant and prosperous economies. All of these countries have had one thing in come, they all did it themselves, they didn’t wait for others to solve their problems for them, they didn’t insist on playing the blame game and they embrace democracy and the rule of law. Central and South Asia along with Sub Saharan Africa are two regions most plagued by the dual menace of corruption and poverty. These are also two regions also plagued by endless wars and ethnic strife, perhaps when these nations embrace the inescapable reality that they are the masters of their own fate, they will be able to make the necessary decisions that will end the grip of poverty in their country. Taiwan, for example, has the lowest percentage of its population living below the poverty line (1%), yet only a generation ago Taiwan was one of the poorest nations in the world. Taiwan, however, bet on its people and won. That story is echoed in other countries including Ireland, Singapore and South Korea. More recently, several Sub-Saharan African nations have also seen the light, including: Ghana, Uganda and Mauritius. Mauritius is a model for Sub-Saharan Africa (and every other developing nation) the island nation near Madagascar, has been a stable democracy since gaining independence in the 1960s. The country has the highest per capita income and lowest poverty rate in all of Africa. In fact, at 10%, its poverty rate is lower than the United States or the United Kingdom.
Link to TI report
Link to BBC article

The FBI recently issued a report on violent crime in America. According to the report the murder rate in this country has dropped to a low not seen since 1965. Before we uncork the Champaign, one must realize, that there were well over 16000 murders in this country last year. That’s 16 THOUSAND, in terms of wars that would rank 2004 after the Civil War, WWI& II, Vietnam and Korea but ahead of both Gulf Wars, the Spanish-American war, the Mexican War, the War of 1812 and the American Revolution. To be fair the US doesn’t have the highest murder rate in the world. That distinction belongs to Columbia, but our murder rate is far higher than every other industrialized country on earth. That rate is also higher than quite a few developing countries, including: Armenia, Yemen, India, Dominica, Azerbaijan, Slovakia, Romania and Malaysia, just to name a few. So one must ask, where’s the outrage? The left has worked themselves into a frenzy, protesting and complaining about the Iraq war, but is virtually silent about the war going on right here at home. Those leftist that do speak, use their same tired arguments that the reason for the high crime rate in this country is poverty. They argue the US government should do more (naturally). Generally, “do more” means spend more money to fight poverty, but is poverty the cause of crime? If so then why are there so many countries with much higher poverty rates, yet much lower crime rates (including those mentioned earlier)? If poverty is the cause of crime, then why have crime rates soared in the 20th century, as the poverty rate plummeted? Wouldn’t it stand to reason that crime rates would have been significantly higher in 1900, 1920, 1940 and 1960 than they are today? The reality is poverty has little to do with crime. Conservatives argue it’s a breakdown in the family, but is it? Several industrialized countries have high teenage birthrates, including Britain, New Zealand and Canada. And many industrialized countries have a high prevalence of single parent homes, including: Canada (1), New Zealand, Finland, Norway, Ireland and South Korea. None of these countries, however, are plagued with the type of depravity that occurs everyday on many of America’s streets. We can be happy that murder rates are down in this country, but anyone who can cheer at 16000 murders should have their head examined. In truth there is no simple solution to account for what has happened to America in the last century, but truth be told it is a national shame.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/18/politics/18crime.html

There is certainly one good thing about demagogues, they are consistent and stay on message. One never has to wonder what they are going to say next. Perhaps no one is more grateful for this than the media, they can write a story, file it on their computer and just wait for the next diatribe, then change the dates and maybe the location and release the story. No two demagogues are more consistent than Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe. Both leaders are fanatical tyrants who rule under the guise of democracy and both are demagogues who see America as the root of all the world’s troubles.

Speaking of troubles, guess who’s to blame for all the world’s poverty, wars and pollution. Well according to Chavez and Mugabe, America is to blame, who else. In fact, not only are we the cause for all the world’s problems, but the US, according to Chavez