As IF Times

link  Russian spy ring: 11th suspect arrested in Cyprus; Moscow calls spy claims ‘baseless and improper’.

Interesting story about how a number of ‘deep’ cover Russian spies have been living in the United States for years, under the guise of very innocuous citizens.  Obviously surprised by the discovery of their ‘alleged’ agents, the Russians employ the classic “did not!” response.  In the case of the gal pictured in the article, Anna Chapman, she went as far as to get a divorce and drive minivans, the ingenious melding into mainstream society.  Some of the spies even had kids.  Talk about method acting.

So far, it’s unclear what kind of surveillance they have been up to, but given the state of American culture, I’m sure they weren’t exactly on the verge of government overthrow.  You can imagine the reports back to KGB headquarters that the Americans have elected a socialist leaning government, have cratered their banking and industrial system, have rampant corruption in the administration and the influential people in culture are the likes of Michael Moore and Sean Pean, both avowed anti capitalists.  Why spy when they could have got the same reports off MSNBC? An ex VP is now a world statesman who wishes to have people drive around on bicycles to save penguins.  Why bother to undermine or sabotage the government when the liberal press already does it?  Rolling Stone magazine is the best anti military weapon the Taliban ever had.

In any event, the article says that the woman, Anna Chapman actually founded an on line real estate company worth 2 million dollars.  Two things jump out here.  First, if she has built a company worth 2 million dollars, why would she want to go back to Russia to work for mere rubles?  Secondly, if Russian spies can be so successful and industrious, the U.S. should actually recruit them to jumpstart the economy.  The question the U.S. government should be posing to these spies is, are there any more of you and how soon can they come?

link Consumer group targets McDonald’s Happy Meal toys | Reuters.

In ways that make you want to scream, self appointed guardians of correct and acceptable behavior are constantly eroding people’s rights to live lives free from regulatory intrusion.  According to the story, this group, The Center for Science in the Public Interest is leaning on McDonald’s for their devious practice of linking toys to food.  Apparently the evil corporation is causing Pavlovian behaviour among innocent kids while parents stand by helplessly.

Does The Center for Science in the Public Interest not sound like some socialist government big brother agency you would find in an Orwell novel?  Or in China? or North Korea? Or in the old USSR? Who funds these guys? Does the government provide financial support for this group in order to manipulate acceptable behaviour by its own citizens?  You would have to think so given the clout they seem to have.  If this group is self funded, McDonald’s and others should tell them to go eat rice cakes.  

Frankly, if I was the parent of toddlers, I’d be insulted that these geniuses think that they know how to better rear my kids than I do.  Either they don’t  have kids or the ones they have are so spoiled rotten that they think the world needs regulation.  Bribery and inducement have always been the standard operating procedures for liberal parents.  This as opposed to the other, arguably more effective model of beating and berating practiced by most Asian families.  We know what happens to those poor kids: they wind up being doctors, dentists and scientists as revenge on their abusive parents.

But getting back to the bribery model so popular in modern society, eliminating this technique could incur consequences in unexpected ways.  For instance, the unemployment rate among Santa Clauses would spike in December.  The time honored deception of exhorting kids to be nice for fear of incurring Santa’s wrath would be disallowed if this group had their way.  Kids will have to be good for goodness’ sake.  As if.

Doing something in order to get something is the basis for life and is the standard operating procedure in all societies.  It is the basis for all advertising.  It is the basis for all human interaction.  That’s why we buy deodorant, cosmetics, clothes, cars and even homes.  Determining  which incentives are bad and which are good should not be for the government or any quasi government agency to decide in any free society.

What exactly is this consumer groups’ end game?  To bankrupt McDonald’s? To extort money from them for nutrition awareness? To push people off hamburgers?  If the food is so bad for you, why not just make it illegal?  Why not just put warning labels on the food wrappers as they do on cigarette packages?   I suggest perhaps pictures of very fat people on burger wrappers to scare off consumers.  WARNING, EATING THIS BURGER CAN TURN YOU INTO MICHAEL MOORE.  My guess is that at some point, the lure of Shrek toys to buy hamburgers will wane once the toddler gets to oh, say 25 years of age and they develop brain cells and some taste buds.  At some point, he will figure out that the toy isn’t worth eating the burger for.  This is a useful life skill.  At the very least it will prepare them for dating.