This post looks at an editorial in the Wall Street Journal.

A trip to the supermarket is instructive. For some time, everyday food has groaned with every sort of moral sentiment: all-natural, sustainable, cage-free, free-range, organic, organic, organic. Foods like these are more than mere sustenance: They commodify values, making them real — material — in the world. They are virtuous goods. To consume a virtuous good is to make a statement. It is not only to do right, whatever that might mean, but to announce that you are doing so.

New comic over at Smith and Engels.

Update: Posted yet another comic. This one only took about 3 and half hours. A new record for me.

As a state why would you ever give into the demands of a terrorists group. It strikes me as incredibly unwise to set a precedent that threats and harm to your citizenry will bring concessions. It makes no sense to me.

I really feel like this is a cultural difference between the US and many other countries. The majority of Americans refuse to concede simply on principle when terrorists make demands while the majority of people in other countries, like Italy and Spain find ways to rationalize their capitulation. During the 2004 election democrats called this nuance, but the current term is ‘tactical redeployment’. Makes no sense to me, but then I foolishly believe that those hell bent on killing for concessions will continue to do so even when their demands have been granted. There is something about the mind set ‘I will blow you up if you don’t give me your bubble gum’ that indicates a lack of the rational faculties needed to have restraint once you receive the bubble gum.

But I probably just lack the nuance to understand how tactical redeployment encourages moderation and restraint in those that pack bombs with nails and bits of metal to insure maximum death and carnage when detonated in a crowded marketplace.

Look at this CNN headline.

One might construe this as CNN reporting good news in Iraq. I will take it as such. Beggars can’t be choosers.

Score Update:

CNN’s Coverage of Bad News Iraq: 7,847

CNN’s Coverage of Good News Iraq: 2

Don’t call it a comeback.

According to this story, because there are so many millionaires in the US the value of being a millionaire has diminished. It no longer is considered the status symbol it once was. Great, thanks capitalism, by making everyone rich you make it so no one can be better than anyone else simply be being rich. Bring back the days of wealth redistribution when just a few bureaucrats at the top were able to redistribute enough money to be rich.

In regards to Iraq I must ask the question what side is CNN on. When CNN acquired was given propaganda film of our enemies sniping our soldiers it was produced and turned into a news story which was featured as the top story for the full day.

However, when our top general discusses how children were used to hide a bomb to get past a checkpoint, and then detonate the bomb with children still in the car its simply given a smaller text headline on the side.

On what level do those two stories differ such that one is the top story while the other is only placed on the side.

I simply believe that the editors at CNN want the US to lose this war. I think this illustrates this fact perfectly. I would like to hear other’s thoughts on this matter. Do you think such differential treatment of stories indicates a willful desire to see the US fail in Iraq? If not, then I would really like to hear your argument why not.

According to this article, animal rights activist advocate for the killing of a baby polar bear. They give this reason:

Frank Albrecht, an animal rights activist, said: “The hand rearing of Knut is in itself a breach of the animal protection code. He will be reliant on humans forever and this cannot be right.”

Aachen zoo director Wolfram Ludwig said: “I don’t think it is right that he should grow up fixated on his keeper and reliant on him for everything. He will not be a proper Polar bear.

I am not libertarian when it comes to killing cute baby polar bears because they had to be reared by man.

I have already sent a cease and desist to Proctor and Gamble for this blatant trademark violation.

As typical this has already been extensively covered by the MSM. Its almost sickening how pro war the MSM is. Iraq can’t possibly be all good news.

Mmmmmm. Lemony fresh.

PS you might have to refresh your browser if you can’t see the change.