As IF Times

link Al Gore: Scott Walker is ‘extreme,’ divisive – Patrick Gavin – POLITICO.com.

One of the biggest hits of the TV season surrounds the blood feud between two bitterly opposing factions.  As it happens, “The Hatfields vs The McCoys” is a good guess, but the better answer is the political right vs the political left in the U.S..  There is no dramatization or fictional story more compelling than the political feud occurring now between an obviously divided American public, at least according to the popular media.

Increasingly, the rhetoric and animosity has escalated to levels of derangement as partisans of the left increasingly show just how nakedly unhinged they really are.  The recent landmark recall elections in Wisconsin will be seen years from now as a pivotal moment in American history.  Unable to convince others of their tenuous positions and claims through laughable maneuvers and tactics over the past 2 years, the union backed left lost a landslide vote over entitlements, not to Scott Walker and the right as has been characterized, but to the long suffering taxpayers.

Some may remember back in 2011, the novel tactic of Wisconsin lawmakers running off and hiding in the next state to avoid voting on a motion they were sure to lose.  This is the equivalent of a 3 year old covering their eyes in order to have a bad thing go bye-bye.  Some may recognize the technique of aggregating union support nationwide for their cause as the equivalent of “everyone else is doing it”.  Finally, we get to the aftermath of the recall vote where a woman actually slaps the losing contestant, Tom Barrett over conceding an obvious loss.  Given the recent stories of cannibalism in the news, Barrett is lucky she didn’t bite him.

Amusingly, the high cretin of hyperbole, Al-the-world-is-ending-Gore chimes in with his thoughts on the issue, as if he and the facts were intimate friends.   If the left is going to make a credible case for anything,  they’ll at least have to get new spokespeople for their causes.  They can’t have Bill Clinton preach about integrity; they can’t have Michael Moore babble about the oppressed, they can’t have Nancy Pelosi cry crocodile tears about poverty and they can’t have Al Gore speak about…well… anything.

In a time when the harsh wave of reality is sweeping all nation states worldwide with respect to untenable debts and related entitlements, there are still those who cling to fantasy world views of what they deserve.  Upon reflection, perhaps this is not so much deranged as it is infantile.   The name calling, the petulant behaviour, the faux demonstrations.  As the grown-ups always say, ‘it’s all fun until someone loses an eye’.

link Kofi Annan’s Legacy Threatened by Syria’s Violence – NYTimes.com.

I’m sure most people in the world didn’t even know that Kofi Annan had a legacy to preserve.  They may vaguely recognize the name as the figurehead secretary general of the U.N. for a number of years.  The article quotes colleagues in describing his main attributes, “…an engaging personality, ability to convey empathy and a forceful advocate of basic human rights…”  In addition, supporters say,

“…He’s a very experienced diplomat and he’s very good at getting on with people,” Mr. Mortimer said in a telephone interview. “He’s somebody who’s difficult to have a row with. He actually had a paperweight on his desk with the slogan: ‘Diplomacy is the art of letting the other guy have it your way… ”

There’s nothing in the promo that says anything about success.  The characteristics used to describe Mr. Annan can as easily be attributed to Mr. Rogers, my 4th grade teacher Miss Klassen or the gal at the Burger King down the street.  I don’t know who is responsible for embellishing the legacy of Mr. Annan, but any pretensions that he has one at all, much less one to be proud of, is pure revisionist fantasy.  A very quick look at the website, www.warsintheworld.com will show that currently, there are dozens if not multiple dozens of armed conflicts with their attendant human rights transgressions going on in the world right now.  (It’s amusing enough that someone keeps track of this stuff).  The record of the U.N.’s success at enforcing human rights worldwide is dubious at best.

So, which part of Annan’s legacy is in danger?   Sure he’s had an improbable climb to his exalted position, from humble beginnings as a tour guide to defender of human rights for the world.   I guess he was the right guy for the job.  We’ll agree that when trying to intervene during armed conflicts, we do need a calming voice to exhort ‘both sides to show restraint’, even when the conflict is laughingly lopsided.  Such is presently the case in Syria now when government forces are cavalierly executing and torturing their own citizens.  The victims have to show some restraint from bleeding and dying  if the conflict can be resolved peacefully.   Or in the case of many African tribal wars, where victims have to be more considerate by not having limbs chopped off.

No rational person can blame Annan,  or the U.N. for that matter,  for their inability to stop wars.  Warfare at some level is part of the human condition from the first time someone figured out how to swing a stick.   But let’s not pretend that Annan, like his successor Ban Ki Moon are anything but bureaucrats who are installed for political reasons to convey some sense of moral authority to the U.N.  They may not actually do anything, but at least they express moral outrage.  Sort of like Gary Bettman.  People such as Annan, Ban Ki Moon  and most all bureaucrats are fortunate that the pay regime at the U.N. is based on effort and not on real results as in most legitimate organizations.  If it was based on results, he’d have been better off in the tour guide business.