Free Frank Warner

Kennedy’s limousine

Superimposed here, on the official drawing of President Kennedy’s Dealey Plaza limousine, is my diagram of the single bullet that went through Kennedy’s neck and Governor Connally’s torso and wrist.

It lines up.

In putting this together, I noticed a few things about how far Connally was sitting from his door. The most important observation is that it appears the governor was about 6 inches from the door, and that put him in the bullet’s path.

A few JFK assassination debates have focused on whether Connally’s seat really was 6 inches inboard. The critics of the single-bullet explanation have pointed to this Warren Commission drawing because it shows Connally’s seat to be just 2.5 inches from the door.

Kennedy snug right. The 2.5 inches from the door appears to be correct. But then two other factors enter the calculations. First, a slight outward taper of the limo interior at Kennedy’s right thigh (because Kennedy had no thick door to his right) put Kennedy’s seat another .5 to 1 inch to Connally’s right. And secondly, unlike Kennedy, Connally was not sitting on the far right edge of his seat. Seated a little to the left, Connally’s torso was about 6 or 6.5 inches to the left of Kennedy’s torso.

The Warren Commission drawing -- the one I've used as the basis for today's illustration -- may have confused some students of the assassination. The original did not show the figures of Kennedy and Connally -- only their empty seats.

Note: Lee Oswald’s non-fatal shot came from a 21-degree downward angle from the rear, relative to flat ground (subtract a 3-degree downward street slope for the angle relative to the car) and from about 7.5 degrees to the rear right, relative to the car's side (as viewed directly from above). The positions align for the single bullet.

The bullet that killed Kennedy was fired 4 seconds later.

Frank Warner

Barney Frank admits he pushed Fannie Mae to give his lover a cushy job

Congressman Barney Frank, the man who destroyed the economy by pressuring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to back $1 trillion in bad home loans, finally has admitted he pressured Fannie Mae in 1991 to give his then-lover Herbie Moses a high-paying job.

That was the beginning of the corruption of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the lending giants who buy and back about half the nation’s mortgage loans. Moses and Frank broke up soon after Moses got the job. But from that moment on, Fannie and Freddie became closely held tools of the Democratic Party.

For decades then, Fannie and Freddie could be counted on to give cushy jobs to Democratic activists and their friends. Remember Rahm Emanuel? And under Democrats’ instructions, Fannie and Freddie made tons of ridiculously risky loans to poor people who obviously could not pay them back.

Dumb Republicans. Weirdly enough, the Republicans let it happen. If you need proof the Republican Party is the stupid party, consider the fact that the Republicans did nothing as the Democrats took possession of Fannie and Freddie (and public broadcasting while they were at it) and totally corrupted these influential institutions.

I suppose the Republicans could say they just didn’t notice the Democrats’ criminally reckless behavior at Freddie and Fannie. Ignorance is a popular excuse. After all, it was Barney Frank who once claimed he could live in a whorehouse and not notice the whores.

Frank Warner

* * *

See also: Barney Frank opposed regulating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2003.

See also: THE HUSHING: In 2004, Democrats told Fannie-Freddie watchdog to shut up about financial risks.

Bill Clinton says Democrats have to end the dishonesty on Medicare

The Democrats won a special congressional election in New York two days ago by claiming the Republicans plan to “end Medicare” and by misrepresenting the Democrats’ do-nothing plan.

It should have been no surprise. Democrats have won lots of elections with dishonesty about the nation’s finances. Trouble is, their demagoguery has taken America to the edge of collapse.

Yesterday, former President Clinton called them on it.

Lose elections. He said the Democrats should consider losing some elections and act courageously -- do something -- to save the country.

Clinton said it at Washington forum of the Pete Peterson Foundation, which is dedicated to bipartisan cooperation to put America’s entitlement spending on a sustainable path.

He said the Republicans’ Medicare plan, drafted by Congressman Paul Ryan, isn’t perfect, but the Democrats’ failure to propose any plan to pay for Medicare is irresponsible.

“I’m afraid that the Democrats will draw the conclusion that because Congressman Ryan’s proposal, I think, is not the best one, that we shouldn’t do anything and I completely disagree with that.”

Excuse for paralysis. Clinton summed up his position in a semi-private conversation with Ryan, who was attending the same Pete Peterson Foundation forum:

“So anyway, I told them before you got here, I said I’m glad we won this race in New York,” Clinton told Ryan, when the two met backstage at a forum on the national debt held by the Pete Peterson Foundation. But he added, “I hope Democrats don't use this as an excuse to do nothing.”

Ryan told Clinton he fears that now nothing will get done in Washington.

“My guess is it’s going to sink into paralysis is what’s going to happen. And you know the math. It’s just, I mean, we knew we were putting ourselves out there. You gotta start this. You gotta get out there. You gotta get this thing moving,” Ryan said.

Clinton told Ryan that if he ever wanted to talk about it, he should “give me a call.” Ryan said he would.

Good for President Clinton.

Meanwhile, Kathy Hochul of New York prepares to take the oath of office in Congress because she deceived voters to get elected. Shame on her.

Frank Warner

U.S. president is not king of Israel

The most obvious mistake President Obama made on his statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was not to run it by Israel’s democratically elected leaders first. Why, in effect, lay out Israel’s future without consulting Israel?

Israel is a nation. It is an ally. It is not the 51st U.S. state, and an American president should not jump in unilaterally to such a complicated and volatile negotiating process shooting from the hip. Who wrote that section of the speech on “pre-1967 borders with land swaps” anyway?

James Fallows, faithful Democrat of The Atlantic magazine, has been running around telling everyone that Obama’s words expressed the position held by all U.S. presidents since Jimmy Carter. The funny thing is, no one can find evidence of any other president saying anything like that.

Even if a U.S. president were willing to settle for “pre-1967 borders with land swaps,” it would be recklessly stupid to announce it. In bargaining with a party that wants you dead, you get nothing but trouble if you reveal the least you need to stay alive. Your adversary simply will offer you much less and play to public opinion for pressure to split the difference. Any split, any compromise, leaves you dead.

These are dangerous times for Israel. They’ve just been made more dangerous.

Frank Warner

Baltic States, Georgia and Ukraine are ‘belt of freedom and democracy’

Russia’s 20th century history of mass murders and totalitarian repression, and its recent drift from its own 1991 democratization have forced its democratic neighbors to prepare again for Russian bullying.

A few Republican U.S. senators are calling the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia), Georgia and Ukraine the “belt of freedom and democracy” buffering free Europe from Vladimir Putin’s Russian menace.

The Baltic States are strongly opposed to the removal of U.S. nuclear weapons from Europe. If states currently hosting these weapons insist on removal from their territory, some have indicated the Baltic States may be willing to host them, especially with thousands of Russian weapons across their borders. And, understandably, they are all deeply concerned about what U.S.-Russia and NATO-Russia missile defense cooperation could mean for their defense.

During a recent visit to these nations, we repeatedly heard what President Reagan’s legacy means to the people and leaders there. One prominent Baltic leader urged the United States to locate “Reagan Centers” in each country, not only to cement the 40th president’s legacy, but to provide an understanding of the political and economic policies that have helped create freedom and prosperity in the United States.

Perhaps the United States also should create centers (They don’t have to be named for one president) to educate Americans on the creative, protective and curative powers of freedom. We are learning a lot about freedom during this economic crisis. The wiser course would be to learn first, then avoid the pain. Perhaps we need our own “belt of freedom.”

Frank Warner

If only our diplomats could celebrate our victories

President Obama's speech yesterday had a built-in applause line on the May 1 killing of Osama bin Laden. Like others, I noticed that no one in the crowded Benjamin Franklin Room at the State Department took the bait. No one applauded.

Here's the president's bin Laden line:

"And after years of war against al Qaeda and its affiliates, we have dealt al Qaeda a huge blow by killing its leader, Osama bin Laden."

[Pause. Silence.]

Now I wonder, what if just one of those State Department diplomats had set aside diplomacy and reacted right there, on the spot, with a loud:

YYYIPPEEEEEE!

That individual would be my hero.

Then again, imagine the whole room going wild with hundreds of joyous foreign service officers chanting "USA! USA!"

OK, OK, that's as likely as the world ending tomorrow.

Frank Warner

* * *

See also: The applause line that bombed in Cairo 2009.

Obama: Oppressed of Middle East and North Africa long for freedom

It's such a pleasure to hear President Obama speak of the right of all people to be free. Here he was today urging the dictators of the Middle East and North Africa to step aside for free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and the right of the people to choose their own leaders.

Obama spoke of the "longing for freedom" of peoples living under tyranny and said the United States will not place superficial stability above universal human rights. He also said that Iraq -- yes, Iraq -- can serve as a model for multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian democracy for Arabs and others in that region.

I was particularly struck by the words the president quoted of Arabs recently demonstrating for democracy as their dictators trembled. They are a stunning testimony of the power of liberty.

In Cairo, we heard the voice of the young mother who said, “It’s like I can finally breathe fresh air for the first time.” 

In Sanaa, we heard the students who chanted, “The night must come to an end.”

In Benghazi, we heard the engineer who said, “Our words are free now.  It’s a feeling you can’t explain.”

In Damascus, we heard the young man who said, “After the first yelling, the first shout, you feel dignity.” 

The final section of Obama's speech -- the controversial part on Israel and Palestine -- may overshadow his case for democracy and freedom. Let's hope not.

Frank Warner

* * *

FREEDOM COUNT in this speech: 14, high (way high for Obama)

Number of times key words used:

Freedom: 5
Liberty: 0
Democracy: 9

Total: 14

Speak of a future of freedom in the Middle East, Mr. President

President Obama should use his speech on the Middle East and North Africa tomorrow as an opportunity to tell the Arabs and Persians they now have a real choice between freedom and continued tyranny.

If the "Arab Spring" is to reach full bloom, the people of the Middle East first will have to complete a series of democratic revolutions that produce new governments dedicated to the permanent protection of liberty.

I'm interested to see what the president advises the enslaved Muslim Middle Easterners to do once their current abusive and illegitimate regimes fall. What will Obama say about freedom?

Frank Warner

‘Stimulus’ 2 years later: 450,000 jobs created or saved; 1,000,000 jobs destroyed

When the Obama administration’s $800 billion “stimulus” program was enacted in February 2009, the unemployment rate was at 7.9 percent.

The president’s Council of Economic Advisors told us in January 2009 that, without all that spending, borrowing and a little tax cutting, we would have 9 percent unemployment before the recession ended. With the “stimulus,” the advisors told us, unemploymenet would peak at 8 percent.

Well, we got the “stimulus” and it didn't work. In May of 2009, the unemployment rate hit 9 percent. Except for February and March of this year, the jobless rate has been at least 9 percent ever since. Even if you give the administration's "experts" a half-percent for wiggle room, they were dead wrong. And they blew a lot of money being wrong.

Government boost. Obama’s economic team also predicted the “stimulus” would “create or save” 3,000,000 jobs by the end of 2010. They said 90 percent of those jobs would be in the private sector. Wrong again.

A study by economists Timoth Conley and Bill Dupor now finds that the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” -- the “stimulus” program -- created and saved about 450,000 state and local government jobs and destroyed or prevented about 1,000,000 private sector jobs.

Even with half a trillion dollars in loans, primarily from China, the “stimulus” killed at least a half million American jobs. The “stimulus” propped up areas of the economy that a free market and common sense would have left alone, kept the productive private sector off balance, and put the United States much deeper in debt to the world’s largest dictatorship.

Multiplying, subtracting. Today, employment in goods-producing -- manufacturing -- is not up. Domestic energy production is not up. The most irresponsible financial institutions are no better regulated. Meanwhile, unproductive and wasteful activities have received big incentives; understandably, they continue being unproductive and wasteful.

I’m still looking for any evidence that huge deficit spending has ever given a boost to anyone but the few favored groups who get it. In this recent experiment, the “multiplier” became a subtractor, and the nation was left with much less wealth and many more bills to pay.

Any way you look at this “stimulus,” it was a monumental work of foolishness.

Frank Warner

Christopher Hitchens on losing his voice to cancer

Please check out Christopher Hitchens’ reflections on losing his voice to esophageal cancer.

He says his writing depended on his ability to speak, though he initially believed the two skills were distinct.

I owe a vast debt to Simon Hoggart of The Guardian (son of the author of “The Uses of Literacy”), who about 35 years ago informed me that an article of mine was well argued but dull, and advised me briskly to write “more like the way that you talk.” At the time, I was near speechless at the charge of being boring and never thanked him properly, but in time I appreciated that my fear of self-indulgence and the personal pronoun was its own form of indulgence.

He’s fighting the cancer, but he’s had several setbacks.

What do I hope for? If not a cure, then a remission. And what do I want back? In the most beautiful apposition of two of the simplest words in our language: the freedom of speech.

It is sad that such an articulate advocate of freedom should be silenced. Fortunately, he still writes with power.

Frank Warner