Tuesday, June 06, 2006


Bush vs. Kerry
During the September 30, 2004 Presidential debate, Presidential candidate John Kerry said the following:
KERRY: With respect to Iran, the British, French, and Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran. I believe we could have done better. I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together. The president did nothing. [emphasis added]
Headline today: U.S. to give Iran nuclear technology. From the article:
A package of incentives presented Tuesday to Iran includes a provision for the United States to supply Tehran with some nuclear technology if it stops enriching uranium — a major concession by Washington, diplomats said.
The package was agreed on last week by the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia — the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council, plus Germany, in a bid to resolve the nuclear standoff with Iran.
No comment necessary.

Brian Simpson's Markets Don't Fail!
My review of this useful book is posted at Nick Provenzo's Rule of Reason.

Tara Smith's Ayn Rand's Normative Ethics: The Virtuous Egoist
Last week I completed my reading of this excellent book which covers the Objectivist virtues including rationality, honesty, independence, integrity, justice, productiveness, and pride in detail. Despite the steep price for the hard cover, the book is well worth it since it covers material otherwise only available in far more expensive audio lectures. Among the more interesting topics covered are discussions of temperance, charity, kindness, and generosity, and their relationship to the usual Objectivist virtues, as well as to why the subject of individual rights does not fall under the purview of the virtue of justice (hint -- individual rights are not a matter of desert).


Anonymous said...

Does this make Kerry right, or does this make Bush as wrong as Kerry? Regardless of who endorses it, putting nuclear materials in a dangerous non-free country's hands is not in our self interest.

Gideon said...

It means that as far as fighting this war is concerned, there is little difference between the two. Those, like myself, who voted for Bush in the hope that he would fight the war better than Kerry were wrong. The apparent difference during the elections now looks to be primarily in rhetoric, not in actions.

One might also recall that during the 2000 elections Bush spoke out against national building during the debates, yet that's exactly what we are doing now in Iraq and Afghanistan.