Politicians lie from time to time...some more than others. We all know that. Some others don't lie...they just don't tell the truth. And others do neither, they are just "equivocal". Yet others make claims and statements that look REALLY, REALLY bad when seen through the lens of history. Whether they are lying, not telling the truth, being equivocal or simply saying things that they don't necessarily agree with, it really doesn't matter. It still is worth a mention when we see one that jumps out with neon lights.

This is very unfair and plain wrong.

For all the talk of "freedom" that the Paulbots claim to believe in, they sure as heck have been silent on the horrible FISA bill we're fighting to fix in the Senate right now. Same for Ron Paul. Why the silence? And the CATO people and the libertarian publications like Reason, where are they?

Via Cato , we are presented a new book about terrorism by Marc Sagerman called Leaderless Jihad , which looks at the mind of a potential Jihadist and what drives him to join groups like Al Qaeda. This is a follow up to his previous book, Understanding Terror Networks .

Yes, I know, this whole angle has gotten a lot of play. But I think it's worth repeating as many times as it takes.

And a hearty hat tip to Roderick Long for continuing to point it out via an article by Tom Woods:

The Case for Realism

A short post which takes (yet another) critical look at the hiring of William Kristol at the NY Times. Links to great Salon piece that rebuts the NY Times' "balance of views" defense for hiring Kristol. The article explains that none of the NYT columnists are very different from Kristol....they only vary in temerity and targets for US assertion.

A choice quote:

srPdJA Wow, great blog post.Really thank you!

NHsKVJ Really appreciate you sharing this article.Much thanks again. Much obliged.

David Frum is is trying to be cool . Yep, he sees other yawning beltway insiders taking silly pokes at Ron Paul that look like they took about 5 minutes of research....from reading other such pieces...and decides to join the fun. After all, other pundits are doing it, right?

Well, some people took notice of Frum's foppishness.

First, Tom Woods has a short piece called David Frum: I'm Smarter than Ron Paul

Woods:

KdLKsY I think this is a real great article.Really looking forward to read more. Keep writing.

xcLreh I loved your post.Thanks Again. Really Great.

In the first part of this three-part examination of sanctions, we looked at the examples of Cuba, Iraq, and North Korea, and reached the (somewhat obvious) conclusion that targeted sanctions with a precise goal can be effective while all-encompassing sanctions with a vague goal of regime change are unlikely to work. Today, we take a closer look at the effectiveness of threatening sanctions and offering incentives. From specific examples involving nuclear testing, conflict diamonds, and knock-off drugs, we will try to abstract some general guidelines.

Any student of humanity should be familiar with these "10 Brilliant Social Psychology Studies ". This list comes from PsyBlog. While I'm generally disappointed with Internet science popularization, this blog seems like it provides a good entry point to psychological studies. Several of these studies are relevant to the topics we discuss here, but three were particularly interesting to me:

SUHXGL I appreciate you sharing this blog post.Really looking forward to read more.

Chris Coyne is a professor of economics at West Virginia University. He is also a Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

I personally became familiar with him via the blog, The Austrian Economists .

This morning's New York Times carries a detailed account of how the U.S. relied on an Iraqi to distribute U.S.-supplied weapons, including AK-47 assault rifles, Glock pistols and heavy machine guns, to Iraqi police forces. Needless to say, the Iraqi "turned the armory into his own private arms bazaar with the seeming approval of some American officials and executives..."

Ron Paul's third NH TV ad is up and ready.

I've heard a lot of grandiose and/or vague claims in campaign ads. And usually the vaguer the ad, the more emotional and grandiose the message.

Here, Paul's message is simple, clear and unique:

This is the first of a three-part series examining the effectiveness of sanctions. Here we will analyze the historical cases of Cuba, Iraq, and North Korea; part II will look at the effectiveness of incentives and of threatening sanctions, while part III will apply the results of the previous work to the current situations in Iran, China, and Israel/Gaza.

Below the fold, a description of the motivating incident, goals, methods, and results of sanctions against Cuba, Iraq, and North Korea, along with general conclusions.

MRPPLh wow, awesome blog. Awesome.

Ron Paul had a GREAT SHOWING on Jay Leno.

(someone can embed the video if they like)

Paul did an excellent job of dispelling some silly ideas that people have about his policies. You either agree with him or you don't. But you should agree or not on his terms...not some BS twisting of views....(See RS and DK for example). With Leno, Paul covered the core issues that make him my only choice to support with a clear conscience.

38NuoX I value the article post.Really looking forward to read more. Keep writing.