5/17/2004

 

Finishing Thoughts…


I don't know about that Tom DeLay piece below. Tom DeLay has been a staunch supporter of the state of Israel for many years, yet that reporter… well, he reported an ulterior motive where none existed. That kind of press is more damaging than the outlandish freak tales about top secret interrogation outfits terrorism Iraq.

The homosexual marriages in Massachusetts are getting good press, but nothing vitally important for gays has changed. Remember, they have to change hearts and minds in society to a condition of acceptance. That, if possible, would enact real change.

What they have is a couple of myopic judges with a perverse view of the Constitution. It will harden opposition, and their battle will ultimately lost. In a free society, unpopular paper is bound to burn in the fires of public will, stoked by those judges.

It's a dumb idea all around.

The other thing on my mind is the Sarin gas found in Iraq. The stuff found today is said to have dated back to Iraq's war with Iran, so it's old. It could easily be argued that a few shells from the initial stockpiles escaped destruction, wound up in an old ammo dump, and were uncovered and used by the resistance. It was not part of an imminent danger per se "justifying invasion," if that's what the war's opponents are demanding.

It does, however, further bolster my already solid opinion that Saddam Hussein had to go when he did. If the theory I gave is true, then Saddam was sloppy with his WMD. However, it doesn't reopen the question of Saddam's stockpiles. (But don't forget, that question has never been authoritatively answers. And the authorities keep dying.)

And Zarkawi was an invited guest.

1 comments
 

Vilsack moving to abortion extreme


JF Kerry short-lister Governor Tom Vilsack of Iowa is seen by the Des Moines Register as having moved decidedly pro-abort, after Friday's veto of a State bill which would have legally defined unborn human beings as "persons."
However, Vilsack, a Roman Catholic who was adopted as an infant, now holds a position more favorable to abortion rights than he did when he was a state senator in the 1990s. Today, his views are more in line with Kerry's.
By jove, he has waffled on the issue! Flip and flop.

Yes, he's down with that nuance thaang.

0 comments
 

DeLay: "It's one war." Reporter: "He's not serious."


The Hammer says:
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said Monday the war in Iraq and Israel's battle against Palestinian terrorists are two fronts in the same global conflict, "and we will win it."
The AP "special correspondent" David Espo, who wrote the piece, attributes the statement to a GOP efforts "to increase its share of the Jewish vote in the November elections."

Representative Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) intoned: ""Israel's fight is our fight." His remarks are attributed to his work, with DeLay, "on bipartisan legislation" on the matter.

Espo's the AP guy who allegedly stole and publicized that little Republican campaign primer a few years back, the one with the answers politicians and candidates were advised by some strategists to give.

If the Hammer says it's one war to him, he means it.

0 comments
 

New Judson Cox column on the RSN site


A new column by Judson Cox, MICHAEL BERG IS INSANE!, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
Few people take Michael Savage seriously when he claims "liberalism is a mental disease." But, how else would you describe a man who, after watching al Qaida cut off his son's head, blames President Bush and describes his son's murderers as "sick people" who have "some good in them"?
[Read the rest here.]


0 comments
 

Kucinich Still Running


A NYTimes article Monday quotes Dennis:
"The reason I have not dropped out of the race is that we may have a nominee, but the future direction of the Democratic Party has not yet been determined."
If JF Kerry is the nominee, the hardcore Dennis-heads will probably vote Nader. Our friend Dennis is nicely dividing the party, albeit in Kucinich's small way

Does Dennis want to be the fallback if the party brass decide the better of Kerry? He's not a president, but he would motivate the ABB crowd AND the anti-war crowd. He also just might make Nader back off, as Ralph at one time said he would if Dennis received the nomination. It won't happen, though -- but one wonders…

0 comments
 

Pentagon: "Hersh made it up"


Symour Hersh is a legend amongst other reporters for a story he wrote in the late '60s. Since then, he's dealt his conspiracy theory: Flight 007, Israel's hidden nukes, Gulf War Syndrome, etc. Now he's touting a tale about a super-secret commando force, played in film by Sylvester Stalone, which Don Rumsfeld turned loose on Abu Ghraib.

The Pentagon and the CIA say: "Nonsense." [CNN link]
"This is the most hysterical piece of journalist malpractice I have ever observed," said Lawrence DiRita, spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in response to Hersh's report.
A senior intelligence official said the article contains "fantasy," adding, "I haven't found any truth in it."

The unit described simply does not exist, the intelligence official said.

[ . . . ]
DiRita, responding Monday, called Hersh "one of history's great conspiracy theorists."

And the intelligence official told CNN there is no such thing as "Copper Green." The official said there is no joint interrogation program between the Defense Department and the CIA approved by the Secretary of Defense.

It is "incorrect" to suggest that the CIA withdrew from interrogations at Abu Ghraib, the intelligence official added.
Hersh claims to have had fewer than six but more than two sources. On CBS's Face the Nation Sunday, he told Senators Carl Levin and Lindsey Graham: "Some senior officers will tell you [Congress] some things which will really knock your socks off if you give them adequate protection." It seems to me, then, that Hersh hyperbolized from a disgruntled source.

0 comments
 

More Kerry/McCain…


In Monday's NRO, Jim Geraghty writes more about a Kerry/McCain ticket.

Kerry could always ask… and be turned down:
"Kerry will be much better off if it's refused," [Dr. Larry] Sabato says. "He gets to look bipartisan, and McCain will undoubtedly say glowing things about his best Vietnam buddy, and Kerry won't have the burden of actually running and serving with McCain. I don't mean just the policy differences, but McCain's personality. He's got a terrible temper and is virtually incapable of stepping aside from the spotlight, or yielding it even to a president. Kerry would regret it a hundred times over, even though he would never able to admit it publicly."
McCain does relinquish his spotlight to Biden, as mentioned below, but JF Kerry's no Joe Biden. (Might be a good thing.)

0 comments
 

Joe Biden and John McCain


Biden and McCain talked to host Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press yesterday [see this: Political Annotation] and my friend Jim McCaffrey missed it. He somehow managed, however, to describe it perfectly; to wit:

Didn't see MTP, but I love the image of the ubiquitous, and oh so tedious McCain playing Tonto, to Biden's Lone Ranger. Joey Plugs says something idiotic or blatantly self-serving, and then Sen. McCain's biggest fan [the "great" Senator himself] says: "Yes kemo sabe. You are the most learned one in all of the Senate."

That ain't sayin' much of course, but Tonto always says these things about Lone, and other members of his posse.

These oily masters of double-speak, and self-promotion expound in profound terms on our "serious mistakes", which have alienated those bastions of liberty: The Islamic Republique de France [surrender monkeys extraordinaire], Germany [formerly the proud Third Reich], and Russia, [the Workers Paradise, Gulags for fun and profit].

So the fact that these crime syndicates, posing as governments have been stealing from the starving people of Iraq for a decade; that doesn't matter. Does it, Tonto boy?
And their crooked dealings with Saddam leading right up to our invasion, that doesn't matter either.

Does it, Joey?

And after the most devastating attack on our shores, in our history, we still need to go on bended knee to these anti-American swine, these thieves, these slick thugs, these cheerleaders for "the new Holocaust". Don't we Johnnie and Joey?

But why must it always be us who bends the knee? We must because there is an Administration to sabotage or embarrass. We must because they did nothing when they had the power, and now they must criticize Bush for doing too much. We must because they desperately thirst for power.
We must because Joey Plugs says it, while Tonto moves his head up and down.

Biden, usually wrong, but never in doubt.
McCain, the arbitrary Republican, courageously doing the work of the DNC.
HA!

0 comments
 

Comments?


We've ditched the old Haloscan comments and implemented the new Blogger comments feature. I needed to look up the code to do this, but it was no thaang, and I really liked how they looked on the Viking Pundit weblog.

To use them, click on the comments, scroll to the end of my post, and add what you have to say. These will better enable a conversation…

This, of course, means that the Haloscan comments were lost. There were a few concerning Republican serial killers below, and there was a nice conversation going on the President's recent poll numbers.

A closing thought. What with the new interrogation rules in Iraq, forced largely by Democrat political outrage, we may never find out where are or what happened to the WMD. This is important in an election year. If WMD are found in October…

1 comments
 

The New Al Gore flick


Waterworld was a 1995 movie about global warming melting the polar ice caps and Kevin Costner having to travel about on a raft. It cost $175-million to make -- plus $36-million in print ads -- and bombed ($88-million) at the U.S. box office. A far-fetched disaster movie inadvertently became a parody of the global warming disaster theorists.

Now, Al Gore is shilling for the latest Hollywood global warming disaster pic, The Day after Tomorrow (private screening with RFK, Jr. and comedian Al Franken):
"The Bush-Cheney administration has worked very hard to create a false impression that the scientific community is uncertain about whether this [global warming as depicted in the film] is a serious problem or not — not unlike the misleading impression that we were given in the run-up to the Iraq war," Mr. Gore said.
Misleading impressions?

MoveOn.org is with it, as well:
"The right wing has already cranked up its PR machine to discredit the movie as a 'fright flick,' propaganda cooked up by climate change conspiracy theorists," MoveOn.org noted, adding that the movie is "making the Bush administration very nervous."
Progpaganda?

Try this:
[S]pecial effects… include collapsing ice caps, a 290-foot-tall tidal wave, dueling tornadoes over Los Angeles, and Manhattan encased in ice.
This is nothing but over-alarmist fancy. It cost 20th Century Fox only about $125-million to make, so it is safe from at least that Waterworld comparison, but they seem to line up pretty well otherwise.

Let's hope the American public remains too inherently sophisticated for the nonstop blather.

0 comments
 

The morning…


You know, that Seymour Hersch story in the New Yorker bothers me. There almost certainly has to be something to it, but was there a top-secret program with its own rules, violative of standard US code and international law, brought into that damned prison?

For practical reasons, I hope there was, and I am all for such measures being taken in this war which we absolutely must win. Politically, I have visions of Carl Levin dancing in my head. (Not Kennedy or Byrd, as they've proven to be mean old men. Lautenberg is a World War II vet, so he is given a pass. Rangel served with maximum distinction in Korea, the story goes, but to his credit, he doesn't use his service as much for such partisan things.)

Then again, like Saxby Chambliss said yesterday, these weren't exactly Zarkawi and Khalid Sheik in that Baghdad complex.

The other thing on my mind this morning is that many in the political press are beginning to portray the Kerry campaign as irrelevant and this campaign as George Bush running against himself. What an epiphany that must have been! I've been saying for month that Kerry's only support was actually that against Bush, the A.B.B. crowd. It's the President versus those who oppose him.

I also have noted that as the President's numbers were once high, they have the potential to reach that level again. The opposition is not that hardcore, and a few turns of events could swing everything back his way.

Unlike some in the political media, I think how the President campaigns is very important. He needs to manipulate public perception of the upcoming events, whatever they may be, which involves working around an unusually hostile election year political press. President Reagan was able to do this, and no press was more angry than ours during the President's second term. George Bush is no Ronald Reagan, but he doesn't have to be. Bush has a lot more happening than did Reagan, a lot more events to go well.

Oh, and in a bit, I'm going to talk about Al Gore's new movie. The man is pitiable.

0 comments

5/16/2004

 

New "Media Fund" web site


What does Harold Ickes do with George Soros's money, besides donate it to Arlen Specter? Ickes, still with the Bill Clinton's fingerprints metaphorically all over him, and his Media Fund have a new web site: www.questionstoaskbush.com/. Right now, it's the "Top 12 Questions West Virginians Should Ask President Bush."

Lesse:
5. Dick Cheney collected a $20 million dollar bonus when he left Halliburton to run for Vice-President in 2000. Since then, he’s been paid $488,408 more from Halliburton on top of his government salary. Why should Halliburton get no-bid government contracts?
It performs the best services for the price. Next question:
8. You flip-flopped your position and removed steel tariffs, do you know how much that hurt West Virginians?
No. Let's see some figures.
11. Why have you spent over a third of your time in office on vacation?
He never takes a true vacation.
12. You have visited Pennsylvania 29 times and West Virginia only 8 times since taking office. Why do you like Pennsylvanians so much more than us?
It is not a question of like vrs. dislike. Pennsylvania has 21 electoral votes while West Virginia has 5. And Pennsylvania does not have a Senator liked Robert Byrd who gets lost in his own senile vitriol.

0 comments
 

France Salivating at Potential Loss of US Prestige


The French wire AFP reports:
Jordan's King Abdullah II told US television that he worried about the impact of a decline in US stature around the world, particularly in the Middle East.
Although they mention what the king sees as the United States' perception problem, they skipped the direct link made by Abdullah:
"The perception is that the United States is not fair and balanced on the core issue in the Middle East, which is the Israeli-Palestinian problem," Abdullah continued.
The United States' prestige problem, as Abdullah sees it, is related directly to the global perception of how we treat Israel versus the Palestinians. It's not because the President is perceived as a "unilateralist cowboy" or because he hurt Chirac's feelings. It is Israel-Palestine; to wit:
"Then you compound that with Iraq, so you get, unfortunately, the visions of Israeli tanks with Palestinians and American tanks with Iraqis," said Abdullah.
Joe Biden wants us to beg.

0 comments
 

Colin Powell this morning


The Secretary of State hit the air thrice this morning, and the first two interviews were by satellite: Meet the Press and Fox News Sunday. At least the MTP interview was taped before the show, but the scene was identical in both: Powell, seated in a wooden chair with a square back, with the red sea as a backdrop. A few palm trees swayed moved in the immediate background.

Here's this from the Rightsided Newsletter:

Seated in a wooden chair on a hill overlooking the Dead Sea in Jordan for an economic summit, Secretary of State Colin Powell was interviewed by FNS host Chris Wallace. Abu Ghraib "has been damaging," he said. "There is no doubt about it." The Arab leaders at the summit, he said, were "disappointed in the U.S." However, he asserted, "our value system is intact. The United States is a moral nation."

Wallace asked him if, when speaking to the Arab leaders about this, he mentions the daily torture taking place in their prisons. Powell sidetracked somewhat about the outrage of the beheading of Nicholas Berg should be equal to that over Abu Ghraib. Wallace repeated the question about the Arab prisons, and the Secretary said: "Arab leaders need to take a look at what's happening in their own societies… torture is torture is torture." A curious remark: "They [humane rules against torture] apply to all civilized countries, or at least those claiming to be civilized." He could have been referring to any of a number of hypercritical nations in that region and their harsh criticisms.

It was the same background for the taped interview on MTP, on which host Russert grilled him almost solely about Abu Ghraib. How high up the chain of command? Who thought to bring dog leashes for the guards to use? Russert's final question was about his February of 2003 presentation to the United Nations Security Council. I'm paraphrasing from notes: "How do you feel now that much of that information has been discredited?" One of Powell's press aids attempted to end the interview, but Powell answered. He said that he had used the best intelligence available. Some of the "sourcing" was outdated and inaccurate he said. He also said that some was "deliberately misleading." Who deliberately mislead whom, in the Secretary's view? Was it the CIA deliberately misleading the Administration? Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld deliberately misleading him? I hope someone picks that up.

On FNS, he talked of the transition to Iraq sovereignty as well, saying that "Ambassador Bremer is going home. Ambassador Negroponte is not replacing him; the Iraqi interim government will replace him."
The Secretary's appearance on This Week was taped in the same spot, but Steph himself was seated in a wooden chair across from Powell. ABC evidently flew the dude to Jordan Saturday.

Here's this from the same RSN:

[Stephanopoulos] interviewed Secretary Powell when he was there, and the backdrop was the Dead Sea like with MTP and FNS, save for the fact that the interview was a day or so old and was conducted by Steph in person with the Secretary.

Steph accused the Pentagon of being indifferent to evidence of the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. Powell pointed out that the Pentagon had taken Major General Taguba "out of a command position to investigate" the matter. This was a general who was performing other duties when the Pentagon deemed it important enough to call him in to run the investigation.

Steph accused the Pentagon of ignoring complaints of prisoner abuse by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Powell pointed out that they began investigations immediately upon learning of the complaints. He said that he had talked to the president of the ICRC last week, and he had reminded the secretary to point out that the ICRC complaints had been acted upon in a timely manner.

Steph asked how Powell could be so certain that the Iraq government would not order the U.S. to remove its troops after June 30, when it could not if it were, as promised, "truly representative." Most Iraqis surveyed say they want rid of the United States. Powell explained that the United States would no longer be an occupying power after the 30t, and that the Iraqi government would want us there for financial and for security reasons. I'm not sure if he meant that U.S. aid would stop if we were asked to leave, but we know that the military would not be spending money in Iraq if it were withdrawn.


0 comments
 

King Abdullah Speaks


The World Economic Forum is going down at the Dead Sea in Jordan, and ABC's This Week host George Stephanopoulos sat down Saturday and spoke to the kingdom's King Abdullah II. Educated Stateside, Abdullah is not your father's unelected Middle Eastern potentate. Steph was Steph.

Steph asked if if the United States had "ever been more hated in the Middle East." It's a mindless question based on several abstractions, but it must've just seemed like the kind of thing to ask if you're making a point. Steph was.

It's not Abu Ghraib. The United States is "hated" in the Middle East because of our support for Israel over the Palestinian terrorists. Abdullah stressed the primacy of the Israel-Palestine issue to the Arabs, noting that the perception if that the United States is not "fair and balanced in the Middle East about Israel." (It seems to be a case of "Al Jazeera reports, the mullahs decide," to take his FOX News reference -- on ABC, no less -- a little further.)

Abdullah told Steph that he's afraid that the Iraqis will have a civil war.

Abdullah wants a complete "de-Ba'athification" of Iraq, including lists made public of the possibly hundreds of thousands of people who belonged to Saddam's Ba'ath Party. This sentiment would prove unpopular with America's Democrats, many of whom have vilified the President for disbanding Saddam's Army.

Steph asked Abdullah how an unelected interim government can be seen as legitimate, since the United States will have a hand in selecting it and the US is universally hatred in the region. Abdullah noted that UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi (the Algerian anti-Semite) will be selecting the government, and he stressed the need for a strong prime minister. Not a president, he said, as that office will be largely symbolic. The prime minister will have to be, he said, "a tough individual…. You're going to need a powerhouse in there."

Abdullah told Steph that he'd like to contribute troops to the effort to maintain order in Iraq, but he can't -- "Because I won't be as transparent as I should be fore the people of Iraq." None of the countries which border Iraq should, he argued, as they'll be seen as having a personal interest in shaping Iraq.

And he again stressed the anger and resentment over Israel-Palestine and the need for a solution.

0 comments
 

Saxby Chambliss on LE


After Seymour Hersch told his tale on Late Edition -- almost word-for-word what he said on Face the Nation -- host Blitzer had on Chambliss and Joe Lieberman as guests. Chambliss, who is in a position to know, confirmed my thoughts on Hersch's wild story. This is from today's Rightsided Newsletter:

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) is a member of both the Senate Intelligence and the Senate Armed Services Committees. He told LE host Wolfgang Blitzer that the Hersch piece relied on "anonymous sources," thus its credibility could be doubted. He added that it "flies in the face" of what Army Specialist Jeremy Sivits is pleading for his court martial trial, at which he will plead guilty and cooperate. Sivits, Chambliss decided, is "the one individual" who was there.

He further doubts the accuracy of the story because he thinks "we would contentrate on high-value prisoners, not the foot-soldiers" like those incarcerated at Abu Ghraib. If the prisoners cannot tell you much, his reasoning goes, why bother with the intense humiliation?

He said we have Special Forces units which could be used for interrogation purposes, and perhaps Hersch is referring to one of them, but there was no special super secret setup.

Joe Lieberman was with Chambliss for the LE segment, and he suggested that we'd have to use any means possible to extract information which might prevent a September 11, but he noted that "this is a long way from Abu Ghraib." He might have been referring to the techniques used against the top al Qaeda operatives, like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, as reported in the New York Times last week.

Finally, Chambliss asked where were the sergeants and the 1st lieutenants when this abuse was occurring.

3 comments
 

McCain and Biden on Russert


On Meet the Press, McCain insisted that he is a loyal Republican campaigning for President Bush. He does not want to be on Kerry's ticket. Etc.

But this is the substance of their appearance on MTP, taken from today's Rightsided Newsletter:

Senators Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) and John McCain (R-Arizona) were next up on MTP, where Biden disclosed that Ahmed Chalabi was on the United States payroll at $400,000/month. (Whoever conceived of paying that clown a penny should be made to answer a bunch of questions from rabid senators.) Biden declared that we have to make this about the Iraqis, which requires "Presidential leadership." President Bush, he insisted, should be on a plain, meeting with France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, and Russia's Vlad Putin. It seems he wants to see a contrite President on bended knee before the world.

McCain doesn't think any amount of begging will convince those three governments to involve themselves in Iraq, "because of many of the errors of the past." By that statement, John McCain is agreeing that the President made mistakes in the past: of not groveling, of not doing things France's way, of not showing the requisite humility. He did not specify, of course, but those are the things of which Biden speaks when he intones the "mistakes of the past," so it is reasonable to assume that McCain adopted Biden's list when using Biden's phrase.

Biden does not foresee a "western-style democracy" for Iraq, but he does see something more liberal than they have had. Again, he insisted: "Mr. President, you have to lead." In fact, accusing the President of a failure of leadership is another Democrat tack taken in this election year. Biden accused the president of taking a "walk and react" stance to the problems in Iraq, with no sense of urgency. McCain interjected that the Administration was "starting to" develop that sense of urgency.

Biden posited, Teddy Kennedy's rants not withstanding, that Abu Ghraib was not comparable to the tortures which took place under Saddam Hussein. (Kennedy had insisted that Saddam's old "torture chambers" at Abu Ghraib had reopened under U.S. management. Even candidate JF Kerry backed away from that one.) Biden did allow his colleague an out, though, by insisting that the damage done to the United States' reputation by Abu Ghraib was as serious as the damage done to Saddam's reputation by his tortures. Nonsense.

Russert played a clip of Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) saying at the Armed Services hearing last week that he was more "outraged by the outrage" than by the abuse itself. He asked McCain if, as a former POW tortured by the Vietnamese, he were outraged at the torture. It was a shot at Inhofe, and attempt to manipulate McCain into doing the same. McCain said he was outraged, but not because he was a POW thirty years ago; his opinion, he said, is shaped more by his idealism. He is "saddened by… America's image in the world."

0 comments
 

The Rightsided Newsletter


The Sunday RSN, a review and analysis of the Sunday shows, has been delivered to the sundry global inboxes and is online for your perusal right HERE. I'll put parts of it on the blog, and I have some stuff about Steph's interview with Jordan's King Abdullah II exclusive to Political Annotation later this afternoon.

0 comments
 

The Seymour Hersch Show


This is from today's Rightsided Newsletter, dealing with Seymour Hersch's appearance on FTN and LE:

FTN: Seymour Hersch show. He is now being portrayed as the most esteemed and eminent journalist this side of Bob Woodward, is Seymour Hersch of The New Yorker. His new thesis is that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld approved of taking an interrogation system created to gather intelligence from Al Qaeda prisoners and putting it to use in Iraq. Rumsfeld and Undersecretary of Defense Stephen Cambone, On FTN, Hersch insisted to host Schieffer, brought in the super-secret until, with its own prison system, to abuse the Iraq POWs. He pointed out, however, that Rumsfeld merely authorized the until coming in; he did not authorize the specific abuse.

Schieffer then asserted that these high level agents came in and did these things, and the low level "thought there were no rules." Hersch added: "Kids do dumb things, and you need officers to supervise them." (This reminds me of something my uncle asserted when I was about sixteen.)

The Pentagon, however, rejected the assertions as "outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with anonymous conjecture." This might have been mentioned in passing on FTN.

Hersch talked about the photographs being ordered by the higher-ups, as in the Arab culture, one could threaten to show the photographs to a prisoner's neighbors. There is nothing new here.

Hersch demanded that Congress insist on "getting to the bottom of this." He later added that "some senior officers will tell you [Congress] some things which will really knock your socks off if you give them adequate protection. So go for it."

Congress was represented on the show by Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan), who also appeared on FNS, and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina). Levin was predictable, insisting that Hersch's story, "if accurate, brings it up to a whole new level." The abuse, he said, would then have been "a policy," not the actions of a few bad apples. Levin insisted that we have to blame the "civilian leadership" for a "massive failure here of military leadership and civilian leadership." He added that "the people who were abused [in Abu Ghraib] is our nation." So Levin was merely preaching about other, random things with no connection to the real problem or actual solutions.

To Senator Graham, Schieffer insisted that a group of military JAGs were forced to ask a civilian bar association for help in dealing with interrogation problems. He did not explain. Graham asked what exactly did they seek help in doing. He also pointed out that this signifies that the military, the JAGs, want to "get to the bottom of this."

He put the blame on the people running the prison.

In his "Final Word" segment at the end of FTN, host Schieffer blamed the problems on "too few troops to do the job" and allowing civilians in to run the prison.

Hersch repeated his story on Late Edition, where it was not even disclosed that the Pentagon had denied the story. My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is that there is almost always at least a kernel of truth to these stories. It has probably been exaggerated and distorted, but there was probably a decision taken to allow some expert unit to help with interrogations.

0 comments
 

It Takes All Kinds


Good morning. As I prep for the Sunday shows, I'm watching C-SPAN's Washington Journal, where I get to hear the shock troops from each side of the aisle freelancing. Some, on both sides, fit into the "With Friends Like That…" category. ("We gotta wipe out all them Arabs and Michael Moore" and "Yeah, well George Bush is a drunken cowboy who burned his draft card and flew jets into the buildings for his oil buddies at Halliburton!") The interesting thing is: the Democrat absurdities sound more like the mainstream Dems than the Republican absurdities to the mainstream Republicans.

Anyway, the Detroit Free Press reports this morning that the late Jon Benet Ramsey's father is running for State office. While I had heard this somewhere, I did not know with which political party he was registered:
He is a Republican, a fan of President George W. Bush. He said he will fight for jobs. He said he will use his experience as a successful businessman to promote northern Michigan's way of life.
That is nice to know.

The Ramsey story was one of those things which so fascinated the media in the Clinton-era.

Is O.J. Simpson also a Republican? I had read that Jeffrey Dahmer was a registered Democrat, but I somehow do not see him as a citizen concerned enough to vote.

0 comments

5/15/2004

 

The Sunday Morning Talk Shows



KEY:
MTP: NBC’s Meet the Press with Tim Russert
FNS: FOX’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace
FTN: CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer
TW: ABC’s This Week with former Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos
LE: CNN’s Late Edition with Wolfgang Blitzer

And that's the KEY I use for my Sunday review and analysis of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, mercifully inimitable, for the free Rightsided Newsletter. If you are interested, please visit our web site or send a blank e-mail to rsn-subscribe [AT] tripod.com.


Last Sunday was Abu-Ghraib Day on the Sunday shows, while this week, we hear from Secretary of State Colin Powell. He will be hitting MTP, FNS, and TW. It looks like host Schieffer on FTN has decided to do Abu Ghraib yet again, talking to Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and the sour Carl Levin (D-Michigan). Levin will also be a guest on FNS.

Russert's other two guest on MTP will be, if all goes as scheduled, Senators Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and John McCain (R-Arizona). Steph's other guest on TW will be King Abdullah of Jordan. He'll give the western-educated Arab perspective on Abu Ghraib and the war, no doubt.

Jordan is also a British model named Katie Price, but we'll have none of that on the Sunday shows.

Blitzer, on LE, will speak with Adnan Pachachi, of the Iraqi Governing Council, and the tag team of Senators Joe Lieberman (D-Connecticut) and Saxby Chambliss (D-Georgia).

This is the schedule. If something really big goes down between now and then, like Abu Mussab al-Zarkawi is captured or Dick Clarke has something to say about Abu Ghraib, they'll adapt.

We'll take care of that tomorrow…

0 comments
 

Kerry/McCain?


A wise friend of mine remarked to me in late 2002 that JF Kerry and John McCain were linked: "Kerry/McCain, McCain/Kerry." I've heard some additional talk about the possibility of such a ticket this year, but I suspect that is just the media piddling like they do. So far, Kerry has vetted Senators John Edwards of North Carolina and Bob Graham of Florida, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, and Representative Dick Gephardt of Michigan Missouri. The only one who could give him what he needs, gravitas and possibly some Blue States, is Gephardt.

Kerry/McCain. Eric Lindholm, the Viking Pundit, asks with Captain Ed and Poliblog: "what does this say about the Kerry candidacy [that he'd sacrifice party loyalty on the alter of electoral victory]?" Once again, we don't know that Kerry or his team is considering any such thing, but evidently some Democrats are talking about it.

I have their answer. The goal of the party is to elect the president; anything else would be disloyal; thus if Democrats perceive that McCain on the undercard would help their candidate win, such talk is perfectly in keeping with party loyalty. Remember, they're not considering a conservative.

This consideration says absolutely nothing about the weakness of Kerry or his campaign. (The campaign itself cannot be faulted, as it can be only as strong as its candidate.) However, it speaks to the weakness of the Democrat Party itself.

It's falderal anyway.

0 comments
 

Questions about Berg Video


Not by me. But some of the dead end radicals and Middle Eastern governments have come up with theories. An Al Jazeera.net article discusses various things along this line, and I mention it only because they attribute these theories to bloggers. According the public access for terrorists, these bloggers hold that the incident was manufactured by the Bush Administration.

Dean blog? Eschaton? Daily Kos? Kerry blog? Electablog?

The only way to analyze this story is that Al Jazzeera invented the blogs to which to attribute their theories, the way some reporters invent "Republican sources" and political strategists.

0 comments
 

Sharpton told to Pay Up


Former Democrat primary candidate Al Sharpton has been ordered to return $100,000 to the F.E.C. because he gave his campaign more than $50,000 of his own money. He broke the rules.
"We expected this. They've been under pressure from these right-wing hate groups for months now," said Sharpton campaign manager Charles Halloran.
At least he didn't blame mythical racists for his disregard for public financing regulations.

0 comments
 

New Jan Ireland column


The latest column by Jan Ireland, New Dick Morris Book Corrects the Lies of Hillary's Biography is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site: "'Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire.' Dweeb. Acquisitor. Celebrity-fawner. Revenge-seeker. Motive-hider. Dirt-spreader. Bill Clinton-protector. Bill Clinton-enabler. Bill Clinton-mess-cleaner-upper. Inveterate liar." [MORE]


0 comments
 

JF Kerry is the American Idol


I think the premise of the show American Idol is a bunch of people sing then anyone can call in and vote them off the island. Last month, a singer named Jennifer Hudson was voted off the Island even though she was considered (by someone) to be the best of the lot. Recently, a singer named La Toya London was voted off the island by callers even though she was considered the best.

The people who call American Idol might be chastised by Peter Jennings, as were the American voters in 1994, for having "a temper tantrum last week."

Or maybe they're just weird.

Why did a slight majority of Democrat voters recently select JF Kerry to be their nominee? They might be better off right now with Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich. In fact, they would be, better America would not. Both Dean and Kucinich would be busy stirring up anti-war sentiment when our soldiers least neat it.

Call now and vote.

0 comments
 

No Coercion of Prisoners


A waste of time.

Can we tickle them?


0 comments
 

Cameron Kerry


According to James Burnett of Boston Magazine [April piece], "He's not Robert Kennedy." He's Cameron Forbes "Cam" Kerry, 53, the candidate's little brother:



Burnett plays up Cam's similarities to the late Bobby Kennedy -- sooooo trite! -- then reveals that Cam gives JF all sorts of secret advice:
Only the Kerrys know what counsel Cam gives during those private deliberations.
We learn that Cam is a "champion listener." And that "[m]aybe he's just shy. But then, Bobby Kennedy was shy, too." He's also a Boston Lawyer and a convert to Judaism.

According to The Hill newspaper:
The younger Kerry’s role as the campaign’s kibitzer-without-portfolio was evident in the firing of campaign manager Jim Jordan and replacement by Mary Beth Cahill, top aide to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), according to Kerry insiders.

[ . . . ]
So should John Kerry win in November, don’t look for another presidential sibling who has to be kept out of sight by the Secret Service, as were Lyndon Johnson’s hard-drinking brother Sam Houston Johnson, Richard Nixon’s influence peddling brother, Donald Nixon; Jimmy Carter’s beer-swilling brother Billy Carter; Bill Clinton’s free-spirited, cocaine-peddling half-brother, Roger Clinton; or even George W. Bush’s messily divorced brother Neil Bush.
So he's no Bobby Kennedy and he's not George Clinton.

He's something. He's not constrained by a desire to be politically clean and electable.
0 comments
 

A Collective Iraqi "Now What?"


Saddam Hussein is long gone from power. The Secretary of State has told the world that the United States would be willing to call our troops home if asked to do so after June 30 by the Iraqi government. Now Newsday reports that pollsters have found that more in Iraq want a multi-party democracy than a group of angry mullahs, but that they have only the vaguest of clues of how such a government is selected and would operate.
Iraqis have identified some successful areas in post-Saddam Iraq, the pollsters found.

"One of the things that comes up again and again as a success in the transition so far is education," Sahm said. He also mentioned increasing trust in the Iraqi police and the new Iraqi army.

"When we see the images of war and terror on the TV screen," Sahm said, "it's hard to believe that behind all of this, many Iraqis are leading normal lives and going about their business."
They are pleased with the education system now being built. Perhaps we could send them some high school civics teachers and freshman political science professors to teach the adults what their newfound political freedom can do for them, how it works, and what their responsibilities are.

1 comments

5/14/2004

 

The President's Polls…


Three polls reveal that more Americans surveyed feel that the war in Iraq is going in the wrong direction rather than that it is going in the right direction. It is about time, as the press and the high profile Dems have been telling them that for almost a year.

The CNN poll poll has the President trailing Kerry, were the election held today, 51% for Kerry to 46% for Bush. Toss in Nader, and it is 49 to 44, with Nader taking 6.

I got the other poll data from the New York Times.

CNN/Time poll put the President's approval rating at 46-percent. That one was probably conducted by Harris, though the story did not indicate.

A Pew Research poll put it at 44-percent.

A Gallup poll put him at 46-percent.

These polls were taken while the Abu Ghraib nonsense was all over media and when the anguished cries of Nicholas Berg were reverberating in Americans' ears. (They still are.) This could be a temporary leap for Kerry, as Abu Ghraib is another scandal-of-the week, albeit made very grandiose.

I find myself thinking: "Things will get better when the situation in Iraq improves." If they do not, this race could well be ABB's to lose. (Kerry will not beat the President. Only the President -- in the form of Anybody But Bush (ABB) -- can do that.

0 comments
 

JF Kerry on Abu Ghraib vrs. Kerry on Vietnam


Candidate JF Kerry held a press conference Friday after actually setting foot near the Senate, to look at the pictures from Abu Ghraib. He blamed the incidents therein depicted on "a group of people run amok," stressing that "I don't believe they represent our country, they don't represent our values, I know they don't represent the vast majority, the 99.9 percent of our courageous soldiers who are serving our nation with distinction."

In 1971, Kerry did not speak so kindly of the "vast majority of our fighting men and women" in Vietnam, accusing them of having "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside." He blamed all that on those in command, all the way up to the White House.

This time, he blames the White House as well:
Kerry faulted Bush administration's policies for contributing to the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers, including poor training for prison guards, extended tours for servicemembers and the failure to grant rights to detainees consistent with the Geneva Conventions.
Let's straighten this out.

In 1971, Kerry blamed the officers and the civilian leadership for atrocities which the soldiers may or may not have committed. He claimed that the atrocities were committed by almost every soldier in Vietnam, not "a few people run amok."

In 2004, Kerry blamed "a few people run amok" and the Bush Administration for some sophomoric abuse.

The soldiers when Kerry was in 'Nam were monstrous victims of an evil Administration. To Kerry, the soldiers today are "courageous soldiers… serving our nation with distinction."

According to Kerry, then, both the soldiers and the leadership have improved incredibly since he served in Vietnam.

The man has stepped in some more nuance.

0 comments
 

JF Kerry: A Senator from Massachusetts?


JF Kerry does not vote on legislations or nominations. He does not take part in floor debate.

JF Kerry is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Small Business Committee. He sits on the Commerce, Finance, and Foreign Relations Committees. He does not attend the meetings.

JF Kerry does not participate in the US Senate.

That being said, Kerry opted to return to the Senate to see the dirty pictures from Abu Ghraib. Campaign fodder.

0 comments
 

No Eucharist for Voters


Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colorado, has sent a missive to his diocese on the first of the month declaring that Catholics who vote for politicians in favor of abortion rights, stem-cell research, euthanasia or gay marriage may not receive Holy Communion unless and until they confess the sin to a priest and repent.

Roman Catholics believe that the Eucharist in the physical body, blood, and divine being of Christ, thus it is not something they take lightly.

In the latter, Sheridan noted that some Catholics had told him that, to avoid hypocrisy, he should extend the ban to cover those in disagreement with other church teachings, such as the Death Penalty and the War in Iraq. She said that these are not equitable, and they obviously cannot be. Only abortion deals with the deliberate taking of innocent human life.

The Denver District Attorney, a Catholic named Bill Ritter, objected to Bishop Sheridan's ruling, say that the church would lose members because of it.

Does the Church want to keep Catholics who do not accept the teaching of the Church?

1 comments
 

From the Defense of Sgt. Davis


Army Sergeant Javal Davis is one of those facing charges in connection with the photographs taken at Abu Ghraib. I pulled this out of a CNN.com story about the court martial of Corporal Charles Graner:
Paul Bergrin, attorney for Davis, said his client was ordered to do what he did, but denied Davis "committed any criminal acts."

"He went to his chain of command. He questioned some of the interrogation techniques, and he was told as a soldier he was to follow orders and that intelligence wants additional information," Bergrin told CNN's American Morning.

Davis' superiors, Bergrin said, told the specialist it was important to "break the prisoners" in order to "save the lives of innocent soldiers on the outside and civilians and individuals like Nicholas Berg."
I put the last paragraph quoted in a bold font, because it is operative to the point.

Prisoners of war often need to be "broken" in order to extract information regarding actions and operatives, locations and plans. This sometimes or often requires that unusual and unpleasant measures be taken.

It is too bad if Jack Reed doesn't get it, but this might include putting a bag over someone's head for 72-hours (see post below).


0 comments
 

A Bag Over your Head


I got this one from the French wire, AFP. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz was harassed by Senator Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island) about a bag one someone's head for three days:
Mr. Secretary, do you think crouching naked for 45 minutes is humane?" Reed asked.

"Not naked, absolutely not," Wolfowitz replied.

"So if he's dressed up, that's fine. But this also has other environmental manipulation," Reed said.

"Let me put it this way: Seventy-two hours without regular sleep, sensory deprivation, which would be a bag over your head for 72 hours -- do you think that's humane, putting a -- and that's what this is, a bag over your head for 72 hours? Is that humane?"

"Let me come back to what you said the word ...."

"No, no. Answer the question, Mr. Secretary. Is that humane?"

"I don't know whether it means a bag over your head for 72 hours, Senator. I don't know," Wolfowitz said.

"Mr. Secretary, you're dissembling, nonresponsive!" Reed boomed. "Anybody would say putting a bag over someone's head for 72 hours, which is ...."

"I believe it's not humane," Wolfowitz said quietly.
Reed was playing to the crowd, seeking blood. His use of the argument "anybody would say," which I've italicized in the quote above, is a deliberate use of a logical fallacy, an appeal to popularity (argumentum a populum).

When the lives of American soldiers are in danger, there are more important concerns than whether or not a bag can be placed over someone's head for three days. The primary focus should be enabling the Administration and the military to win the war.

Maybe Reed would have us videotape the guy with the bag on his head and put it up on the internet where his family can witness their son with a bag on his head.

0 comments
 

$50-million for Iraq/Afghanistan


Good morning. Last week, President Bush said he planned to ask for $25-billion in emergency funding for Iraq and Afghanistan which could be used beginning in October if needed.
Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, argued that the Administration had not requested enough money.

Now we learn that the Administration will seek double that, $50-million, for the war efforts. Some Democrats have stated that they are willing to support the new request but that they are going to have more direct oversight over the actual spending. Senator Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) insisted that "we're going to put limitations on it." (Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) objected to the Democrats' line of thinking.)

The Democrats now purpose to micromanage the war effort, and the Vietnam parallels now apply in that sense.

0 comments

5/13/2004

 

The PRC and Senate Democrats


The web site of the government-produced China Daily, out of the People's Republic of China, posted a Friday editorial demanding that the Sec Def resign.

The government of the PRC is the least humane institution on the non-Islamic face of the Earth.
Since the pictures were made public in late April that Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison were mistreated by US soldiers, including being stacked naked in a pyramid, attacked by a dog and forced into simulated sex acts, the US military has been a target of condemnation worldwide, especially in Arab countries.
The PRC has been the target of worldwide condemnation for decades, and the United States has led the charge. Now their defense is clumsily become offense.
Prisoners of war (POWs), just like civilians, should enjoy deserved dignity. That is clearly set out in the Geneva Convention.
Hopelessly hollow words.
Not only at the grassroots level, but also the top military leaders should be held directly accountable for the astonishing systematic abuses of prisoners.

It would be awkward for Bush to discharge Rumsfeld. Firing him is equal to admitting wrongdoing in the way the Iraq War has been handled.

But Bush's unmasked praise of Rumsfeld amidst the prisoner abuse scandal is indeed distasteful, just as he feels distaste over the exposed pictures of abuses.

[ . . .]
Bush's words not only appeared faint in the face of the current US predicament in Iraq, but also trivialized his apologies to the abused victims.
The words are part of a charade designed to deflect the criticism the United States and international organizations have directed at the PRC.

Nearly identical words have been used by such as Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, and Frank Lautenberg. Their words are part of a charade designed to hurt the President's public standing and help their lost cause candidate find some traction.

The People Republic of China and Senate Democrats are playing the same game using the same tactics.

0 comments
 

Prisoner's T-Shirt


It's simple to figure. Newsday.com ran a piece early this evening (ET) telling of Secretary Rumsfeld visiting the scene of his crime, Abu Ghraib, and facing the very prisoners he tortured. (It's between the lines. Trust me.)

Some prisoners waved at his passing bus, others didn't.

Here's something dramatic:
One prisoner wore a T-shirt with the question, "Why are we here?" in English.
From that, I'm sure we are to take that the plight of the prisoners is to be for no reason at the unmerciful mercy to their brute jailors.

Where did he get the T-Shirt?

JF Kerry can afford to keep quiet about this. He has little voices whispering to people.

0 comments
 

The latest Jan Ireland column


Jan's latest, God, Allah Akhbar, and the Unspeakable Murder of Nicholas Berg in Iraq, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site: "Unspeakable. Muslim extremists in the Middle East use "Allah Akhbar" (God is Great) as the phrase of choice when beheading in the name of God in public - as in the recent murder of innocent American citizen Nicholas Berg in Iraq." [MORE]

0 comments
 

Lautenberg is being used


If Bob Torricelli had not been caught, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-New Jersey) would still be former Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-New Jersey). But Lautenberg stepped in and beat Republican businessman Doug Forrester for the seat back in 2002, and here we have it.

On C-SPAN2 late this afternoon (ET), one could hear Lautenberg stand up and talk about the disgrace, the depths of human depravity, which has been aired in the past few days. (His word was "degradation.") I thought this was good, that he would speak of the mutant Zarkawi's slaughter of Nicholas Berg. He did not mention Berg by name.

Rather, he quickly added: "Unfortunately, some of it ["degradation"] comes from us, and he launched into how depraved the new pics were. For those pictures, which Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania) today called more "sophomoric than anything else," Lautenberg said that Americans were "sick, embarrassed, humiliated." He referred to Donald Rumsfeld as "a shell of a man."

He then called on the "trio of civilian leadership at the Pentagon" to resign: Rumsfeld, Deputy Sec Paul Wolfowitz, and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith. They were, in his words, the "discredited team of advisors."

This brought to mind the media-driven feud between Rumsfeld's Pentagon and Secretary Powell's State Department. He's living is a media-created universe.

The Democrat leadership should be ashamed of itself for using an old man in this way, if this is indeed what is happening. Why would they use Lautenberg? It's simple. He is a doddering old man who is a WW II veteran. He can us his service -- cheapening it at this late date -- for political reasons to buffet those who did not serve (Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc.) and to at strength to JF Kerry's buffer: His 4 1/2 months of brave service in Vietnam is supposed to exempt him from charges against his votes against our national security interests.
0 comments
 

The Catholic Church on Abu Ghraib


We have discussed the Catholic Church and its position on regarding politicians pledged to supporting abortion and participating in the Holy Eucharist. (To Catholics, the Eucharist involves consuming the physical body and blood of Jesus Christ. The process is called transubstantiation.) That position of the Vatican is inconsistent with candidate JF Kerry's version of Catholicism.

On Wednesday, Vatican Foreign Minister Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo told the Italian newspaper La Reppublica that the abuse an Abu Ghraib was "a more serious blow to the United States than Sept. 11. Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by Americans against themselves."

Representative Peter King (R-New York) fired back:
``Whatever the United States has done to prisoners in Iraq is nothing compared to what priests and nuns did to Catholic kids for decades while the Catholic hierarchy covered it up,'' King said. ``Think of the thousands of kids in the U.S. and Ireland who were abused by priests and nuns -- you wonder where the Vatican's moral compass is.''
The President has an audience with Pope John Paul II on June 4.

0 comments
 

Kerry's Campaign Struggles


In response to a comment below, I just wrote: "My take is that Kerry has no definition. He has no core constituency unto himself, counting on the ABB people for his votes. Kerry's a nothing candidate -- the Ultimate Null -- and that's why the Democrats have been unable to leap with the mega-doses of bad press they've been heaping on the President."

Mark Noonan of Blogs for Bush has a sharp post on that blog with a few examples indicative of just how badly JF Kerry is peforming.
Now, remember, this guy Kerry - he's the smart one. President Bush, as our Democrats have it, he's the dumb one. Tell ya what, if Kerry is smart, then I thank God I'm with stupid.
Check out his post.

0 comments
 

New column on the RSN site


The latest from Isaiah Z. Sterrett, Since When Do Liberals Oppose Torture?, is ive on the web site of the Rightsided Newsletter: "IF THERE'S ONE positive aspect of the Abu Ghraib atrocities, it's that liberals have finally found torture that they don't support." [MORE]

0 comments
 

Qaeda abuse


According to the NYTimes, the United States is using some tough technics in interrogating the upper-echelon al Qaeda types in their custody.
In the case of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a high-level detainee who is believed to have helped plan the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, C.I.A. interrogators used graduated levels of force, including a technique known as "water boarding," in which a prisoner is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe he might drown.
The techniques were approved by the DOJ and the CIA, and defenders say that they do not violate America's anti-torture statutes.

I doubt Congress will hold hearings on this, as it would be politically asinine to quibble about the civil rights of the mutant al Qaeda freaks. This then lays bare a level of hypocrisy on the part of those making noise about Abu Ghraib.

0 comments
 

JF Kerry: Delay the Trials


JF Kerry, whose opinion matters only because he is the presupposed Democrat nominee to run against President Bush this autumn, thinks the court martial trials of the seven soldiers of Abu Ghraib should be delayed. He opines that the "inadequate" trials are being "rushed" in order to "display to the Arab world and others that we're going to do things immediately."

He forgets the importance of displaying for the Arab world that our system, unlike Saddam's, punishes those guilty of such offenses. Our entire image over in Iraq, to some extent, is at stake.

This is another case of his objecting merely to be contrary to the man he has to defeat in the election.

He will continue making such statements as the campaign progresses.


0 comments
 

Rummy and Myers in Iraq


On Thursday, the Sec Def and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs flew into Baghdad on Friday [Reuters].
"If anybody thinks that I'm (in Iraq) to throw water on a fire, they're wrong," Rumsfeld told reporters on board. "We care about the detainees being treated right. We care about soldiers behaving right. We are about command systems working."

Critics are calling for Rumsfeld, one of the architects of last year's invasion of Iraq, to resign.

Other U.S. defense officials said the sudden trip by Rumsfeld and Myers was triggered by the photographs.
Despite its headline -- Rumsfeld Swoops Into Baghdad, Addresses Abuse Row -- the story deals mainly with the abuse pics seen by Congress and the battle being fought in Najaf and Karbala by the punk Moqtada al-Sadr. And they quote new French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier in the Paris daily Le Monde: "It all gives the impression of a total lack of direction."

Abuse Row?

0 comments

5/12/2004

 

The President's Poll Numbers


According to the polls, the President is in trouble if the Democrats nominate someone other than JF Kerry. It will strike me as very strange if they do stick with him, in that their goal is to expel the President from office.

The President has been hit with non-stop bad news for several months going, and it seems to be taking its toll. These national polls are unrealiable snapshots six months prior to an election. They are inaccurate snapshots of popularity, not of votes. They are being hyped right now, because if they are taken seriously, the create the nifty story of: "WHY ISN'T KERRY CLEANING HIS CLOCK?"

Look at the most recent one term Presidents. Bush #41 seemed to lack strong political convictions. Jimmy Carter seemed to lack just about everything which dignifies a President. Gerald Ford was an unelected caretaker foisted on the nation by the GOP bosses. George Bush has clearly defined and memorable convictions. His actions have built a momentum which has been keeping his head well above water despite the press he gets and the snapshots they overanalyze. It is that momentum which should eventually increase as the negativeity falls aside.

Remember, these people thought Howard Dean had a lock on the Democrat nomination in a perverse political revolution of sorts. I think they are wrong again.
0 comments
 

9-11 Commission to Question Al Qaeda


The ten-member often-partisan 9-11 Commission is nearing an agreement with the Bush Administration through which they can question such Al Qaeda mutants as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah.

We are fortunate that this will not be on camera for the American public to see, when the questions would have to be ultra-partisan

0 comments
 

I've Been Remiss


Back in February, a fellow named Luke Y. Thompson -- "writer/critic/actor/director/pundit" -- linked to my description of Bob Dornan on his weblog, LYT's Online Journal. As far as I can tell, from what he says, he's a popular cultural icon on the west coast.

I still occasionally receive hits from his link to me:
“Luke, pleased to meet you. I’m Bob Dornan, and this is my wife Sally.”
Yes, he sat next to Bob and Sally Dornan at a private screening of Mel Gibson's Last Temptation of Christ. It sounded like a unique experience.

It's my turn to link to LYT. He posted today that Disney's refusal to distribute Mike Moore's Fahrenheit 911 had little to do with Jeb Bush and Florida taxes. According to FAIR, the actual story is that the same Saudi businessman whom Moore said is tight with #41 is a "major investor in Disney's Eurodisney theme park when it was in financial trouble, and may be asked to bail out the troubled project again."

Check out LYT's blog for the link to the conspiracy theory.

0 comments
 

Senators don't get Geneva Conventions


Secretary Rumsfeld appeared before the Defense subcommittee of Senate Appropriations, where he told those holding the purse that Pentagon attorneys had stipulated that sleep deprivation, stress positions, and dietary changes were acceptable, not violative of the Geneva Conventions.

Showing what must surely be partisan indignation, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) declared that these techniques "go far beyond the Geneva Convention." He does not understand the Geneva Convention. Changing meals, keep prisoners awake, and seating them awkwardly is not torture in the Convention sense. In any realistic sense, for that matter.

Here is the text of the Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War; August 12, 1949, broken into sections: LINK.

Here is a table of contents, from a completely different site. Have each site open while perusing: LINK.

Methinks the Democrats are portraying Geneva Convention to say whatever they think it should say according to their standards; the text of the convention itself has no meaning to them. Please note that they treat the U.S. Constitution in the same way.

0 comments
 

Moving Forward


Tuesday after General Taguba's testimony before Senate Armed Services, I caught a tape of a news conference with Major General Martin Dempsey, First Armored Division, in Iraq.. It had been held earlier in the day, while the world according to many stateside was slated to end with Abu Ghraib. I was taken most by how he was talking about the ongoing and future operations in Iraq, mentioning Abu Ghraib only briefly when asked.

He spoke of a peaceful demonstration against Moqtada al-Sadr earlier in Najaf, and how the shop keepers in the Iraq city complained that he was hurting their business.

He introduced a concept called "Stakeholders," built on the premise that Najaf was THEIR holy city, not the US Army's. These Stakeholders would be Iraqis who provide security for Najaf after being trained by US personnel then working alongside our soldiers. They have a stake in the outcome, in the security.

He made clear that Sadr's soldiers could join if their records were clean. (Most of them, he said, were doing Sadr's work merely for a paycheck.) Sadr himself could sign up, excepting that he has several Iraqi indictments hanging over his head.

Dempsey did not that he has been there longer than was initially planned, signifying that even the Army did not have accurate plans for what was going to happen in Iraq after Saddam was ousted. I'm not faulting the Army, by any means; rather, it's darn near impossible to plan for events which cannot be adequately gamed.

0 comments
 

Reform Party 4 Nader


It is not 1996, but the Reform Party that H. Ross Perot founded the year before and to which Patrick J. Buchanan added an additional punch line in 2000, has lent its mantle to Ralph Nader. The big news for Ralph is that this gives him automatic ballot access in Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, South Carolina, and Wisconsin.

Michigan has 17 electoral votes and presumably could tilt for the President with Nader on the ballot. Florida, with 27 such votes, could, theoretically at least, go with JF Kerry without him.

What would Perot say to Larry King if he were paying attention?

0 comments
 

Mutants' Vid


If you haven't seen it yet, don't. There is no honor in it. There is no humanity in it. Five hooded ghouls -- from left to right, the first with gray, the next with white, the speaker with black, the mutant to his right with black, and the last with gray -- stand in a line between a seated Nicholas Berg. Berg appears to be dressed in a prison jumpsuit.

The ghoul in the middle reads from a few pieces of paper, Arabic babble. After this monotone, endless droning, the knock Berg on his side, the camera zooms and loses focus, and they take an awfully long time removing the man's head. As graphic as I have to be, it's as if they have trouble with the spinal cord.

Finally, they hold the severed head aloft.

This is what they do.

0 comments
 

Three New Columns


There are three no columns with a mutual sense of outrage now on the Rightsided Newsletter web site.

Justin Darr's Outraged for the Wrong Reasons: "The world has been shocked by the wanton brutality of the treatment of Iraqi prisoners of war at the hands of American soldiers." [MORE]

Barbara J. Stock's An Apology to the Pigs of the World: "Last week I was outraged at the behavior of a handful of reservists and disgusted by the pictures that have been plastered all over every media source around the world. I am no longer outraged." [MORE]

and

Dennis Campbell's Gen. Sherman Never Said War is Heck: "As he relentlessly marched through Georgia during the Civil War, Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman is famously said to have proclaimed, 'War is hell.'" [MORE]

Enjoy the insight.

0 comments
 

Wictory Wednesday


Candidate JF Kerry is exploiting Abu Ghraib for partisan political purposes, as are the Democrats and the press.


Let's counter that.

Click RIGHT HERE to be directed to the page where you can become a Bush Team Leader, an official part of the campaign. You can also join by donating at the campaign's SECURE SERVER.

This effort is undersigned by WW founder PoliBundit and the entire cast of Wictory Wednesday bloggers (page down to #3).


0 comments
 

Nick Berg


I am not going to waste my first morning blogging after a forced hiatus of about 30 hours -- pontificating about how the Johns Kerry and McCain, with Ted Kennedy killed Nick Berg. They didn't. Their behavior recently -- and, in the cases of the two Dems from Mass., since the middle of last year -- did not cause a group of mutants to severe the wailing man's head. (NOTE: McCain has a POW thing going, as explained in the post below.) Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the mutant who masterminded the attacks of September 11, in that all of these people are the same person. In that same sense, al-Zarqawi hacked off the head of Daniel Pearl, blew up Bali, and committed every other imaginable atrocity against individuals, singly or en masse. They do their thaang no matter what.

I can posit that some of these mutants were among those "sexually humiliated" (a term adopted by the press), though that does not make such treatment any more in keeping with charming American values.

Wake up. It is us against them in a competition for the future of civilization. The press can focus on some abuse in an Iraq prison, or generate a non-extant call for the Secretary of Defense to resign, but they are again missing the story. It's understandable that they want their boy to do well in the election, or at least want the President to lose, but they are a distraction. The problem is, they are a loud distraction.

0 comments

5/11/2004

 

This Blog has returned


The Blogspot upgrade did not treat me right, and I was unable to publish my blog at any time after 7p ET Monday.

Blogspot now has a comment capability, so I could get rid of the Haloscan code. To get to the comments, just clock [Permalink/COMMENT]. That takes you to the posts own unique page, on which at the bottom there is an area for comments. That page is also the permalink, should the analysis strike my fellow bloggers as interesting.

I'm blogging now in my tenth month, and I have become used to putting my thoughts down and live as they strike me. There's a kick to it, and I was sitting on my hands nervously this (Tuesday) afternoon when Stephen Cambone and General Antonio Taguba testified. They acquitted the President and Secretary Rumsfeld, of course, but some of the Dems are continuing their partisan rattling about the atmosphere in the environment of ignoring the Geneva Convention.

Jim Talent (R-Missouri) laid it in Clinton's lap for cutting military funding and troop morale, and then I think it was Ben Nelson of Nebraska who snapped about partisanship. Which is exactly what the Dems are doing as well.

James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) declared: "I was more outraged by the outrage than I was by the treatment of the prisoners." My wife tells me she applauded. For his part, John McCain (R-Arizona) walked out of the room. Methinks McCain is errantly equating the prisoners in Abu Ghraib, and the American treatment thereof, with American P.O.W.'s in Vietnam and their treatment by the VC.

I can understand why McCain would feel a certain sympathy for prisoners, as he knows what it's like to be abused by captors, but it is not comparable. McCain needs to find a new band of brothers, such as the civilian who had his head severed messily by the terrorists Tuesday afternoon.

I wrote this on Tuesday night, and I'll post it… whenever.

1 comments

5/10/2004

 

And you know what happened to Winston


Geopolitics. With an American President, he won a war and was subsequently dumped by the British voters. British Labour [sic] Prime Minister Tony Blair is certainly no Winston Churchill, a Tory, and it is thought that Churchill's Conservative Party lost the 1945 election due to voters' remembering their pre-war economic suffering. ("It's the economy, stupid.")

Blair faces a different situation. He has some bigwigs in his own party questioning his ability to lead, what with his face inexorably linked to President Bush and the war in Iraq, and he faces a Conservative Party that naturally wants to return to power. The question being, does he take Labour down with him or does he resign? One would think Mr. Blair will wait it out, hoping that things finally turn around in Iraq. Once the Iraqis take over their own country and joint the community of civilized nations, both he and Bush stand to receive adulation all around.

And now, BBC.co.uk reports, the Prime Minister has the prison abuse matter on his head.
Firstly, because of the wider claims of brutality by some British troops contained in the Red Cross report but, probably more dangerously, because of the uncontested cases of abuse by the US.

Even if British soldiers are in the clear, the prime minister is bound to suffer because of his closeness to the US president and his persistent support of the US actions in Iraq.

Whatever the outcome of the ongoing inquiries, Mr Blair must be in no doubt that he is now facing probably months more controversy over the war.

And it looks increasingly likely it will rumble on into the next general election.
Speaking of the next general election, this one in the U.S., pollster John Zogby, the election is JF Kerry's to lose. {HT, Viking Pundit]. Actually, between the lines, he says that it is the A.B.B. candidate's to lose. His thesis is that Kerry needs only to keep the States Al Gore won in 2000 and add a State or two. The problem is that Kerry is not going to carry what Gore did in 2000. Gore had the advantage of running as a sitting Vice President, while Kerry does not. Many of Gore's supporters were enthusiastic about the candidate; Kerry's are not. And even if Kerry wins all the States and DC which Gore won in 2000, he will have seven few electoral votes than did Gore.

Zogby's other thesis is that there are two America's. Are you more likely to believe a pollster than a trial lawyer?

Zogby makes a few shoddy assumption and, for some reason, tries to draw analogies to elections held when, he would argue, there weren't yet "two America's." Perhaps he should be quiet and poll some people.

1 comments
 

Daschle Decries Partisan Sniping


From the Associated Press, we have stories of Tom Daschle complaining about the harsh partisan tone of today's politics:
"Demonizing those with whom we disagree politically does not serve the interests of democracy. It does not resolve differences," the South Dakota Democrat said to about 500 people at Kansas State University.

"Today, enormous new challenges confront each and every one of us," he said. "We will not meet those challenges or seize those opportunities if we indulge in the brutal politics of division, if we attempt to silence those who have other ideas."
He mentioned specifically Max Cleland and Tim Johnson being compared to Osama bin Laden.

Meanwhile, Daschle is sniping away at John Thune in a race the results of which could keep us wondering just how swift the conventional wisdom that we're a "50-50 nation" is.

Tom Daschle attended the 2002 Paul Wellstone Memorial.

It's a question of perception. If a voter hears a candidate vocalizing about the horrors of negative campaigning, the voter thinks the candidate is against it and thus does not engage in it.

0 comments
 

Judson Cox writes...


From the Rightsided Newsletter "Right Columnists" section, "Abu Ghraib Sadists Against the War":
The photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse were disturbing, but they were not scenes of torture. Torture is how Saddam and his thugs ruled Iraq. They cut out people's tongues, cut off limbs, crushed feet, raped and killed children in front of their parents, lowered people feet first into vats of acid and plastic shredders and filled graves with hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. The pictures from Abu Ghraib were of humiliation and abuse. The guards who committed these acts should be punished to the full extent of the law, but these abuses should never be e! quated to the torture ordered by Saddam - to do so is to minimize the suffering of Saddam's victims. [MORE]
The Abu Ghraib Sadists Against the War is the name of a group Cox would have Lynndie England form if she were thinking of a political future in the Democratic Party.

0 comments
 

Phantom Molester


Sixty-two-year-old Merlyn Schutterle, who once called himself the "Phantom Molester," has changed his mind and will not run as a independent for the seat vacated by convicted Representative Bill Janklow (R-South Dakota).
Schutterle later was taken to the state mental hospital in Yankton but was released after a psychiatric evaluation determined he was no danger to himself or others.
That leaves on the ballot Libertarian Terry Begay, Republican Larry Diedrich, and Democrat Stephanie Herseth


Thank you.

0 comments
 

Million Mom March


About 2,500 people showed up in DC yesterday to scream about guns killing people and to push for a renewal of the infamous Brady Bill, set to expire in September. [NYT link]

Gun control is an emotion-driven issue which cannot stand in the face of reason or that most rational of documents, the United States Constitution. I'd like to think that this is keeping people away from these "gun bannit" rallies, rather than sheer boredom.

1 comments
 

The Nuremberg Trials (1945-1946)


The Nazis tried at Nuremberg were changed with waging an aggressive war, using slave labor, looting from the countries they had occupied, and abusing and murdering civilians -- most notably the Jews -- and POW's. The court was a special body created specifically for this purpose by the victorious allies in a war against barbarity. The crimes were so heinous as to result in a dozen sentences of death by hanging.

Seymour Hersch of The New Yorker compared Abu Ghraib with the "Third Reich" on CNN's Late Edition Sunday morning.

This hyperbole both unfairly characterized the American miscreants as inhuman butchers and trivializes the sheer magnitude of the Nazi crimes against humanity. You have to be an unsophisticated punk to resort to such analogies.

The "Nuremberg Defense" -- "following orders" -- was taken by the defendants at the Nuremberg trials, and it was rejected. The crimes were so unspeakably horrible that the sane and moral human would be repulsed by committing them even under direct order. This Abu Ghraib stuff, while horrible, is nowhere nearly as unspeakably obscene.

Self-righteous indignation is counterproductive, as it obliterates proportion and makes impossible a realistic remedy.

Stop it.

0 comments
 

Note from the Front


I received the following yesterday evening (ET) from an old friend of mine, an Air Force Tech sergeant stationed at the Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, near the Iraq border:
Hello! Sounds like everybody is going ape over the photo's of the prisoner abuse in Iraq. It's sad that most of the soldiers are from Pennsylvania. I think there will be some interesting information reveled once the courts martial begin. Those pictures have undone some the good work we have tried to do here. how sad. I hope to be back in June, or July, how are you guys doing back there?
I did not want to tell him about the politics of the matter, as they are unimportant. He might have been feeling for a Stateside reaction, or maybe he was just saying hello from the desert.

The President meets with Don Rumsfeld today, and some in the Brit press are faulting their Prime Minister for not fessing to British "atrocities."

0 comments

5/09/2004

 

GHWB vrs. Rumsfeld


Here's one from the NYTimes, circulating a rumor that Don Rumsfeld and the President's father did not quite get along. It deals with the Ford Administration and then-nascent Presidential ambitions:
As veterans of the Ford White House remember, Mr. Rumsfeld was an intense rival of George Bush's, and by all accounts the men had a terrible relationship in the 1970's and 1980's. Bush partisans still say that Mr. Rumsfeld masterminded what became known as the Halloween Massacre, the 1975 Ford cabinet shake-up in which Mr. Rumsfeld jumped from his position as White House chief of staff to become secretary of defense, thereby enhancing his prospects, never realized, of being President Gerald R. Ford's running mate in 1976.

In that same shuffle, Mr. Bush, who had been the chief United States envoy to China, was sidelined as director of central intelligence — a job that took Mr. Bush out of the running for vice president, since at the time C.I.A. directors were thought to have no future in politics.
The story contains a quote from 41's current chief of staff, Jean Becker, indicating the relationship between the two is probably now mutually cordial.

It also contains the claim that 43 chose Rummy to be Defense Sec. because he knew the hardened old hand could be an effective counterbalance to the cabinet's "new star, Colin Powell." He didn't, then, want one man to run away with the Administration.

It's good "inside Washington" stuff, whether we believe the tales or not.

0 comments
 

Katherine Harris, Florida 2000 joke


Al Gore received 537 fewer votes than did George Bush in Florida, 2000. The votes were recounted various times for over a month, and Bush never relinquished his lead. The Supreme Court halted Gore's final bid to win the electing via extra-Constitutional recount, the Florida Secretary of State finally (again) certified Bush the winner, and he has been our President for the past three-and-a-third years. An unofficial non-partisan media recount later confirmed the official results.

Congresswoman Katherine Harris (R-Florida) was then the State Secretary., she certified the election, and all the media has left are it's tired jokes.

From the AP.
As Florida secretary of state, Katherine Harris oversaw the disputed 2000 presidential election and the recount that followed. Now she admits she's responsible for a vote going uncounted -- her own.

The congresswoman forgot to sign her absentee ballot when she voted in Longboat Key's local election on March 9. So her vote didn't count.
Harris says she was rushing to catch a flight to Washington, D.C. when she handed the unsigned ballot to her husband to send in. She said she usually votes in person.

Harris said it was a mistake and she regrets it.

0 comments
 

Where has JF Kerry been lately?


The Abu Ghraib festivities have left candidate JF Kerry lurking beneath the news, but according to Donald Lambro in today's Washtimes, Kerry's doing it on purpose.

Former Al Gore girl Donna Brazille had an observation:
"Kerry is still being defined. He has to go out there each and every day and try to break through the daily chatter on Iraq or the echo chamber on [Defense Secretary Donald H.] Rumsfeld," Miss Brazile said.
What a shame that this broke just as JF Kerry was beginning to try to define himself as a… I'm not sure what. That $25-million ad buy has so far been awfully vague.

0 comments
 

Biden and Hegel on Face the Nation



Senators Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and Chuck Hegel (R-Nebraska) appeared on CBS's Face the Nation this morning, and here's what I wrote for the Rightsided Newsletter:
Host Schieffer kicked off his show by reading from the editorial in next week's Army Times, a civilian publication which is evidently well-read by members of the military. The editorial faults Rumsfeld and Joint Chiefs chairman General Richard Myers for a "lack of situational control" and failures at all levels.

Senator Chuck Hegel (R-Nebraska) declared that the President is commander-in-chief, and this was the worst incident since Vietnam. He agreed with the Editorial and declared that "we have miles to in on this issue."

Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware) also agreed with the editorial and declared this to be "a sad moment." He faulted the Administration for losing its "moral clarity," and added that this is "bigger than Rumsfeld and Myers."

Biden asked: "What would Ronald Reagan have said?" (I think I'll offer a theory on the blog later.)

Biden stated: "The President should regain his clarity that he's lost," and he talked about standing on the rubble in Manhattan. "He should be speaking to the American people." He said that the Administration was ruining everything he, Biden, had worked for: that the United States is not wrong to act in the name of world justice. (That was a paraphrase. Biden did not use the term "world justice," per se.)

Hegel said that the pictures at which Rumsfeld hinted on Friday should be made public, that we should learn the lesson of Watergate: "Get it out now… deal with it publicly."

Karen Tumulty of TIME Magazine asked Biden: "Does the Administration grasp how big that is."

Is this as big as the press has tried to make it? Not in the "damage to the Bush Administration" sense to which they are so devoted, but the intelligence community may take another hit.
This ties into something Jaws of Jawsblog said in the comments below. He mentioned MSNBC's site reporting that the military is not happy with Rumsfeld or Myers. That's probably in reference to the Army Times editorial to be published next week. That Times is a civilian publication, so it does not speak officially for the military. In fact if it did, questioning the command should get it drummed out of the service immediately.

This might be a case of some questioning by the military escaping safely in the guise of a civilian publication.
0 comments
 

Intelligence Did It?


Guy Womack, attorney for Army Spec. Charles A. Graner Jr, 35, said that his client was ordered to stage the photographs as part of a prisoner humiliation program instituted by military intelligence. Both he and The New Yorkers' Seymour Hersch pointed out such intelligence officers standing in the photographs and/or, allegedly, just out of camera range.

There are also reports that Abu Ghraib was initially, when in Coalition hands, run by the CIA.

Is Tenet going to take another hit?

0 comments
 

The Rightsided Newsletter is live


The Rightsided Newsletter has been sent to the sundry global Inboxes, and it is now live on the web for your perusal, if you do not yet subscribe, RIGHT HERE.

I'll also post parts of it here on the Political Annotation weblog, like this brief bit about former Iraq exile leader Ahmed Chalabi on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer.

The caveat is that one has to take anything Chalabi said with twice the allowable daily dosage of grains of salt, but it looks good:
Iraqi Governing Council member Ahmed Chalabi told Blitzer that the guards the guards' behavior was disgusting and was the work of "overzealous people who wanted information" through interrogation. He also faulted that there was no Iraqi involvement in the interrogation process.

Chalabi said that the decision to turn Saddam's Abu Ghraib torture facility into a Coalition prison was "an ill-advised decision." He argued: "It should have been razed or turned into a museum." The military has said that this decision would be left up to the Iraqis.

Of Donald Rumsfeld, Chalabi said: "The Defense Secretary has done a good job." He praised Rumsfeld's efforts.

"President Bush is seen [by the people of Iraq] as the man who liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein." If this statement is indubitable, and not everything from Chalabi is, then our press has this dead wrong.
Kewl.

Later, I want to talk very briefly about Steph's interview with Guy Womack, attorney for Army Spec. Charles A. Graner Jr., one of the soldiers accused of abusing prisoners in Iraq. He blames the intelligence services, and I have to find the Daily Telegraph piece concerning this which I read last night.

0 comments
 

Meet the Press...


This is from the Rightsided Newsletter, in progress, regarding this morning's episode of Tim Russert's Meet the Press:
Host Tim Russert spent the first half hour or so of MTP talking to Senators Warner, Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), and Carl Levin (D-Michigan), as well as former candidate for the Dem presidential nomination Wes Clark, about Abu Ghraib.

Warner had no sooner finished telling Russert that they still didn't know who was in charge of the interrogations when Levin offered: "The responsibility lies on his [Rumsfeld's] doorstep." He spoke from the Dem talking points, of the "system effort" to get information at any cost, of the "environment" of disregard of the Geneva Convention created by the President.

He spoke of the White House's averment that the Geneva Convention did not apply to Afghanistan, with the President referring to it as "legalisms."

"I think he helped to create the environment" in which the Geneva Convention was ignored at Abu Ghraib.

Wes Clark rattled on about the "credibility of the U.S. mission" and "how we are perceived" by the international community. Are we perceived as taking the abuses at Abu Ghraib seriously? He also stuck with the Dem talking points, about the President creating an atmosphere in which the Geneva Convention could be ignored.

Senator Graham told them that the application of the Geneva Convention did not matter. He was angry that United States policy and laws were abrogated at Abu Ghraib. By questioning the applicability of the Geneva Convention to a given set of circumstances, the President most certainly did not call into question U.S. law and military policy.

Levin interjected that "we need a policy change." It has to be "internationalized," he insisted, to give it an air of "legitimacy." He said that this mistake was made early on by the Administration, implying that we need a new president to fix things. This may be Kerry's new case for himself: The Only Candidate Who Can Internationalize the War Effort. That is risky, because to the extent that the President continues to succeed in internationalize various aspects of the effort, the more Kerry is seen as blowing a lot of hot air.

And it could be argued that if Kerry were President, he would have changed policy several times by now.

Warner thinks we have to give the June 30 deadline for Iraqi sovereignty "a try." Clark sees a 50-50 chance of the Iraqis rising up and throwing us out before full sovereignty is achieved.

Senator Graham said: "To the White House, pleas don't say, 'get of his back,'" regarding Secretary Rumsfeld. Clark said we have to internationalize things, and Senator Warner said: "We're doing that." The White House is doing its best to get others involved, and it is succeeding in certain respects, but it is important to the election campaign of JF Kerry to create the perception of arrogance and isolation.

0 comments
 

The Evan Bayh Show


This is from the RIghtsided Newsletter, in progress, about Senators Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) and John McCain on Fox News Sunday this morning:
FNS this week was to be a response to Ted Koppel's recitation of the dead, looking at the accomplishments of the Coalition forces in Iraq, but that was truncated to about 20-minutes. The bulk of the show was taken by a talk with Senators Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) and McCain about Abu Ghraib.

Bayh was very calm and assuring, very vice-presidential in an election season where JF Kerry will need a quick jolt of gravitas. Kerry leaning on Bayh for gravitas is almost comical, but it might be necessary.

Asked about the resignation of Rumsfeld, Bayh insisted: "I really don't think him stepping down would placate the Arabs." That is what he wants to see happen, and it frankly is something which is not going to happen. They were never happy to begin with. But Bayh preemptively castigated the president for "cast[ing] him aside" to save himself politically. He read the Democrat Sunday talking points, and he blamed Abu Ghraib on the environment created by the President. (More on that as we go….) "This is a question of Presidential leadership."

McCain, who was largely silent, stated that it served no good purpose, "aiming unwarranted criticism at the Secretary of Defense." That, he said, is what Vice President Dick Cheney meant when he admonished the Dems and the press to "get off his case and let him do his job."


0 comments
 

McCain's Question


From today's Rightsided Newsletter, in progress:
The first question out of Senator John McCain's (R-Arizona) mouth when grilling Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Friday was: Who was in charge of the interrogations? The Secretary couldn't give a solid answer, even after consulting with the generals seated with him. On MTP, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-Virginia) gave his answer to host Russert: "It is still not known." Evidently somebody was, and Senator Warner assures us that they are going through military channels to find out exactly whom it was.
That's on my mind because I'm also in the process of belittling a piece by the DC correspondant for Newsday, a very addle-brained fellow.

0 comments
 

The Sunday Morning Talk Abu Ghraib Shows


KEY:
MTP: NBC’s Meet the Press with Tim Russert
FNS: FOX’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace
FTN: CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer
TW: ABC’s This Week with former Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos
LE: CNN’s Late Edition with Wolfgang Blitzer

And that's the KEY I use for my Sunday review and analysis of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, mercifully inimitable, for the free Rightsided Newsletter. If you are interested, please visit our web site or send a blank e-mail to rsn-subscribe [AT] tripod.com.

Russert on MTP will discuss Abu Ghraib with Senators John Warner (R-Virginia) and Carl Levin (D-Michigan). He will discuss Abu Ghraib also with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina>.

On FNS, they may or may not have their previously scheduled show about the positive things are troops are doing in Iraq, but host Wallace will talk to Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Evan Bayh (D-Indiana), both discussed by the media as possible veep picks for JF Kerry, about Abu Ghraib.


Schieffer on FTN will talk to Senators Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) about Abu Ghraib.

On TW, Steph will talk to -- "That's Pat!" -- Senators Pat Leahy (D-Vermont) and Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) about Abu Ghraib. He will then talk to Guy Womack, who is representing Army Spec. Charles A. Graner Jr., one of the accused wrongdoers at Abu Ghraib.

On LE, Wolfgang will talk to Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), Representative Duncan Hunter (R-California), New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, the Democrat to whom everyone likes to speak, about Abu Ghraib. He'll also speak to Ahmed Chalabi, the whining former Iraqi exile who might soon again be cast into exile, and Ambassador Joe Wilson, trying to resuscitate his failed book store.

There will be universal outrage at Abu Ghraib because it is what the press demands. In an election year, the press get what they want and the public, for the most part, wants what they get.

0 comments

5/08/2004

 

NO SCAPEGOATING!


Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Ben Nelson said Saturday that we mustn't scapegoat this Abu Ghraib thaang, blaming the soldiers posing with prisoners or snapping the photographs.

Nelson said: "I think we need to move beyond scapegoating," adding that he does not yet think Don Rumsfeld should resign, but "I may get there depending on what other information comes out." He spoke of moving "beyond scapegoating here of privates and sergeants to get at the facts as to what truly did happen."

Rumsfeld would be a scapegoat, but he's not one of the "privates and sergeants" to whom Nelson referred. (Please pardon the crassness, but Privates & Sergeants might be a good name for any bootleg videotape which might show up on the 'Net.)

Pfc. Lynndie England, the 21-year-old soldier seen in a photo smiling at a prisoner's privates to which she is pointing, and in another holding a leash attached to a prisoner on the Abu Ghraib floor, has been charged in this matter.
She is accused of assaulting Iraqi detainees on multiple occasions; conspiring with another soldier, Spc. Charles Graner, to mistreat the prisoners; committing an indecent act; and committing acts "that were prejudicial to good order and discipline and were of nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces through her mistreatment of Iraqi detainees."
This will doubtless rule the Sunday shows tomorrow, about which I'll write in the Rightsided Newsletter as always, but FOX News Sunday will concern the positive things our soldiers have been doing in Iraq. This was planned as an answer to Ted Koppel's show last week.

0 comments
 

The Sheikh's Solution


The Iraqi pseudo-cleric, Sheikh Abdul-Satter al-Bahadli, might have a solution to his countries current ills.

From the web site of the London Daily Telegraph:
He told the 3,000 worshippers that anyone who captured a woman soldier would be allowed to keep her as a slave. Al-Bahadli is a close adviser to Muqtada al-Sadr, head of the Mahdi army which is at the centre of fighting in the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala.
Pro-slavery. These people, the mutants, are far worse than any U.S. "prison atrocity."


0 comments
 

Kerry's arrogant, "go-it-alone" trade policy


I found this one from Australia's ABC News, here.

United States Trade Representative Robert Zoellick told the Institute for International Economics:
In a speech at the Institute for International Economics, Mr Zoellick said the contest offered voters a choice between Mr Bush, who has aggressively pursued trade pacts with countries around the world, and Senator Kerry, who has promised to conduct a 120-day review of existing trade agreements before deciding how to move ahead.

Mr Zoellick, a Bush appointee, was critical of the Kerry campaign's refusal to say whether the Massachusetts Senator would ask Congress for a two-year extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which expires June 1, 2005.

[ . . . ]
Mr Zoellick said Senator Kerry's 120-day review would "eat up all of the time you have left in 2005 on trade promotion authority," putting potential agreements with a long list of countries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America in doubt.
Ready to inform voters in the southern United States that he is a gun totin', huntin' child o' the Old West (Colorado), JF Kerry is becoming a wannabe Cowboy.

0 comments
 

Sexy fashion in Iran


In the Iran, females get carted off to prison if they don't wear black and shapeless sack. These girls are determined to be sexy, so they've taken to this:
"There are some manteaus [sacks] with slits on the sides up to the armpits," said Mahmoud Salehi, a 25-year-old manteau salesman. "And then there are the `commando manteaus,' with ties on the legs to show off the hips and an elastic under the breasts to accentuate the bust."
And they're evidently not being whipped and beaten for this.

That's progress for the Islamic Republic: chicks are allowed to wear fashionable sacks.

Here's yer Nicholas Kristoff NYTimes Op/Ed, RIGHT HERE!

Kristoff thinks there has been "progress in Iran." Hardly. It's hardly an unalienable right, to cut slits in one's sack.

0 comments
 

More serious than we thought?


Press ultra-hyperbole from the Financial Express:
There is a striking similarity between the run up to the attacks in Washington and New York on Sept 11, 2001 and the ghastly occurrence inside the Abu Ghraib prison. There have been ample forewarnings.
Should Secretary Rumsfeld have put Jamie Gorelick on the commission investigating what happened at Abu Ghraib?

I wonder when I will be able to remove the term "Ghraib" from my spellcheck.

0 comments
 

Kerry moves to Middle


The New York Times sees JF Kerry dropping the populist blather and moving to a more centrist line.
As he makes the transition from a primary contender to a general-election candidate, Mr. Kerry has been steadily, if subtly, tinkering with his message. He has dropped some of his more heated notes of outrage and added cooler ones about economic opportunity, empowerment, and shared responsibility, the cornerstones of Mr. Clinton's, and the council's, brand of progressivism.
Well, Bob Shrum does not run centrist campaigns. He never has, and I think he's way too old and dug in to alter that pattern.

I'm not Clinton obsessed and paranoid -- as are Toesucker Morris and Rush Limbaugh, who make money furthering the nonsense -- but I wonder…

(Forget that Hillary 2008 nonsense. These people surely know better.)

0 comments
 

Make up your mind


Pew's Andy Kohut thinks 20-million Americans have yet to make up their mind on whether to vote Bush or Kerry. Knight Ridder thinks everyone has made up their mind, "leaving the decisive judgments to as few as 2 million to 3 million likely voters such as Diamond in 17 battleground states. Once they make up their minds, they could decide the election."
If you're an undecided in Ohio, they'll come cut your grass and wash your dishes," [Republican Frank] Luntz said.
The same should apply to the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and my lawn needs cut. Also, my wife would like me to put in a few more bushes in the front. And I have a few errands I don't really feel like running this afternoon.

I'd prefer to have Kerry people do this work for me, as their campaign is desperate and they'd better to a darn good job if they want my vote.

Seriously, how many people are undecided? I mean, really undecided? President Bush's poll numbers have shown the potential to be significantly higher than they are right now, so the vote is out there. Kerry is counting on the anti-Bush figures…

0 comments
 

Abu Ghraib, the President, and Kerry


Scripps Howard has a thesis that President Bush was nearly ready to put JF Kerry away -- opening a huge lead over the Dem -- when this Abu Ghraib scandal hit.

They offer that the President was beginning to put some distance between himself and candidate Kerry in the previous week's polls then Abu-Ghraib hit the air:
But Bush was forced to spend much of the week dealing with the Abu Ghraib debacle, sitting for interviews with two Arab television networks and finally doing something he is not generally wont to do - publicly apologize. Now the question becomes whether the reports of abuse at the prison, bolstered by photographs and videotape, provides a short-term problem for the Bush campaign or a long-term malady.

"The abhorrent pictures on our TV screens have stained our honor," Bush acknowledged to a crowd of supporters during a campaign swing through Dubuque, Iowa, on Friday. "They do not reflect the nature of the men and women we have sent overseas."

But there remains some feeling that the president hasn't gone far enough, and that his political problems won't retreat anytime soon.
It seems that, for some reason, the folks at Scripps Howard are trying to characterize Abu Ghraib as something it might not be, politically. They might like to think that it has harmed the President's reelection standing, but the proof is nowhere. I had detected no real difference in the polls, any sign that the President was pulling decidedly out front, or was about to do so; rather, it was more of the same.

The damage from Abu Ghraib, if any, has yet to be determined. We have a poll indicating that it has not hurt Don Rumsfeld. The President's reelection has remained largely independent of the media's scandal-of-the-week. This one may be different, though, as the press has its pseudo-salacious pictures.

0 comments

5/07/2004

 

The French amazed at President Bush's Bus


The French wire AFP, Friday, seemed tickled by President Bush's and his campaign bus in the Internet age.
US President George W. Bush courted voters in two heartland states Friday on a bus -- a state-of-the-art, specially equipped, run-a-war-from-the-road bus, but a bus nevertheless.

[ . . .]
The Bush campaign has determined another reason for getting the president on the road: Its internal polling has found that Americans, who normally tune in after the Labor Day holiday, are more interested in the 2004 election.

"Our polling shows they're as interested now as they were in October 2000," one campaign staffer told AFP on condition of anonymity. "That's why we've been engaging so much."

And Holt points out that modern technology does little to change traditional concerns: "Even in the 21st century, elections are about the discussions that people have at their kitchen tables, their diners, down at the mailbox."
It must be interesting to your average Pierre or Antoinette, reading about American presidential campaigns as the image Chirac and the poet de Villepin scooting around Toulouse in a big bus.

And, of course. JF Kerry is too Euro-saavy and sophisticated to do the pedestrian bus thaang. (His is called the "Jobs First Express." A very appropriate name, considering that the Labor Department just announced 288,000 new ones were created in April.)

0 comments
 

Does it matter?


Does it matter that the generals seated to either side of Donald Rumsfeld this afternoon had more medals arrayed on their chests than JF Kerry could have thrown over even a very short fence?

If you want to talk of bravery in defense of our nation, they are the ones to whom to look.

0 comments
 

Something Positive from this prison mess


She did not phrase it that way, but here's a quote from a Detroit Free Press exclusive. The talked to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice today (Friday), and she called this incident "disturbing" and a "setback," but added:
``I do believe how it's handled can demonstrate to the people of Iraq and perhaps to the people of the Middle East the essential difference between a democracy and a dictatorship,'' she said. ``In democracies, young soldiers say when abuse like that takes place. It was a soldier who called this to the attention of a superior.''

She added, ``Nobody ever said human beings are perfect because they're in a democracy. The difference is that in a democratic system, acts like these are exposed and dealt with.''
The key to what she said is that it will demonstrate to those who've lived outside of democracy how a democracy treats such problems. They might well not understand.

This was something the President stressed in his Arab TV interviews on Thursday: how things are handled in a democratic society.

0 comments
 

Bush vrs. Kerry, State-by-State


Here is something a tad more substantial than those oft-annoying national snapshot popularity polls. Scott Elliot, a.k.a. "The Blogging Ceaser," at Election Projections has been doing a wonderful job of formulating the State-by-States as they would be if the vote were today. His latest in right now a week old (4/30), but he has President Bush finishing with 274 electoral votes, to 264 for JF Kerry -- were the election held not in November, but now.

The Associated Press has done their own review of various polling sources, and they have the President taking 24 States worth 205 electoral votes. JF Kerry gets 14 States and the District o' Columbia,.totallying 205 electoral votes. They have 12 States with 138 votes undecided at this point.

Here's one from the AP story linked:
Along those lines, Kerry advisers have checked the cost of air time in North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky. They insist that the Vietnam veteran and hunter could overcome the cultural hurdles that tripped up Gore in the South.
Kerry's a hunter?

He's pushing his luck with that one.

I've said that for JF Kerry to win, he needs the economy to tank or Iraq to turn into a disaster, probably both. Despite everything, President Bush has his lowest economic approval ratings yet and April was the worst month yet for KIA in Iraq, and it's still doing nothing for Kerry. He might need Saddam Hussein to escape and have himself elected Prime Minister of Canada. Come to think of it, even that might not work for him.

0 comments
 

"The Buck Stops Here" -- what Truman Meant


JF Kerry:
"The chain of command goes all the way to the Oval Office," Kerry said. "Harry Truman did not say 'the buck stops at the Pentagon.'"
He hit on the pop media line that the President is too stubborn to apologize. The line works.

If something goes wrong in the executive department of the government, the President can be faulted for not shouldering the blame if the opposition cites President Truman, who nuked Japan to end a war.

When the sign on Truman's desk said "The Buck Stops Here," it meant that the President was the one who had to make the decision; he could not pass it off to someone else.
On more than one occasion President Truman referred to the desk sign in public statements. For example, in an address at the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made." In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.
Kerry and the Democrats have misused the statement to indicate that the President should accept responsibility for everything which happens on his watch. That is not what Truman meant. They do not do this knowingly; rather, I assume they simply have no idea of that about which they are talking.

0 comments
 

Kerry is to Dole as Dole is to Kerry


Robert Moran, in Friday's NRO, writes of a sitting Senator painted negative by a President with favorable/unfavorable ratings of 40/40. Unemployment around 5.6-percent, etc. That was Bob Dole. That is John Kerry.
Kerry's only hope is that voters turn on Bush and use him as a vessel for their frustration. This could happen. The right direction — wrong track numbers in this survey are problematic, the economy continues to be a problem area in the polling, Iraq is a wildcard, and Bush faces a heavily polarized electorate.
Yep. The A.B.B. vote has to well and be energized by bad news in the economy or the war, probably both.

Read Mr. Moran's piece: HERE.

It is a sign of either dense stubbornness or surrender if the Dems stick with Kerry as their candidate. Why did the GOP stick with Dole in '96? They owed him that much, probably, and there was no one else.

Do the Dems have an excuse with Kerry?

0 comments
 

Quickie Poll


According to an Washpost ABCNews poll, seven in ten Americans do not think Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld should resign. That's across the board. They had 48% saying that the President handled this properly, with 35-percent improperly. The Washpost story then contains the non sequitur: "But 17 percent are undecided, a clear indication that many Americans are waiting for more information before coming to judgment." The undecided figure is not a clear indication of anything. In fact, probably more than that 17% figure are not going to make up their mind about this at all.

The Democrats are angry that the President did not tell them of this sooner. Rumsfeld testified before Congress a few days before the initial pictures were released, and he didn't say a word Senator Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota) teed of on Joint Chiefs Chairman Richard Myers about this as this afternoon's session closed, spouting barely connected words of protest that the Congress was a co-equal branch of government according to the Constitution.
But there was no clear indication yet that the scandal has affected the public's overall attitudes toward the war in Iraq, which have been trending downward since the first of the year as the situation in Iraq has grown increasingly violent and unstable.
Has it?

0 comments
 

Can Rumsfeld be Effective?


"If I thought I'd not be effective, I'd resign in a minute." He added that he would not resign for political reasons.

He sees this for what it is. It's a serious matter, yes, but it is being turned into an opportunity to score political points.

0 comments
 

Rumsfeld's Testimony


The Testimony of the Year was Dick Clarke in front of the 9-11 Commission. Because of Mr. Clarke's character problems and nasty streak of spitefulness, that did not work out. But, they had said, the President's career was at stake.

The Testimony of the Year was National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice before the 9-11 Commission. "Would she snap under pressure and admit everything?" The President's reelection was at stake. That didn't work out for them, so…

The Testimony of the Year is Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld before the Senate and House Armed Service Committees, at 11:45a and 3p ET today respectively. NPR's hourly news had Rumsfeld on his way out, quoting Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R-Virginia) as saying that Rumsfeld is not in trouble… "yet."

Congress is upset because they weren't told of the photographs. And the abuse. Rumsfeld should tell them that because it was an isolated incident, no one thought to tell them.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, on CBS's Early Show, said of Rumsfeld: "He ought to outline the events as he knows them, what did he know and when did he know it." Ooooh, WATERGATE!

Either way, Rumsfeld will acquit himself for the Republicans, and nothing he says will change the minds of the partisan Dems who believe they have their quarry cornered and can do something to liven Kerry's campaign.

0 comments
 

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs…


Well, the economy gained 288,000 jobs in April and the unemployment rate fell to 5.6-percent, Bloomberg.com also reports that the economy added more jobs in the March/April frame than any time since the same period in the year 2000.

President Herbert Hoover. Jobs hit a high mark in 1929, then they dramatically dropped while Hoover was President. The economy lost jobs during Hoover's final year in office. The analogy has been shattered.

0 comments
 

Rudy and two sets of abuse


From the Washington Times:
"It does not represent the majority. It's an aberration, a horrific aberration," said Mr. Giuliani, who during his two terms as mayor presided over the furor raised by the police torture of Abner Louima in 1997 and the fatal police shooting of an unarmed immigrant Amadou Diallo in 1999.
Any pictures? When answering a question about what he said to Don Rumsfeld yesterday, the President said that he was angry that he had not been told "about the pictures." He seamlessly switched to "about the report," but I was left with the impression that he was rightly concerned about the mess caused when the press got its undiscerning hands on a few pseudo-salacious shots of SEXUAL HUMILATION!

And it has to be the reaction here. Reaction in the Arab world has shown no real change in attitude. The Arab man-on-the-street still hates America because that's all he has been told or taught, by muezzins shouting for Friday prayer, Mullahs spitting fire, and by editorialists foisting fake photographs from the Internet on a people who have been told that they are allowed to know any better.

Most people in the United States, except for our own mullahs and mullah-like noisemakers, were angry at a few officers in NYC, realizing that almost all of the rest were decent human beings willing to lay down their lives on the job. Most Moslems are taught to hate us.

I hope we're not being taught to hate Moslemsa.

0 comments

5/06/2004

 

Gorelick's says she is a Democrat


And she puts her money where her mouth is.

From the Kansas City Star's THE BUZZ:
At least six of the 10 members of the 9/11 commission have made campaign donations since joining the panel, records show.

Jamie Gorelick, who has given roughly $14,000 to Democratic causes and candidates, said the panel decided early that members should not physically participate in partisan activities, but that they could donate to campaigns: “If I stopped for the period of my service, it doesn't give a more honest representation of who I am -- I am a Democrat.”

Bob Kerrey has donated at least $25,000 to Democratic candidates and party committees. Chairman Tom Kean has donated at least $4,000 to Republicans.

Slade Gorton gave $2,700 to Republicans, James Thompson contributed $2,000 to President Bush's campaign, and John Lehman has given at least $6,000 to Republican candidates and causes.
A panel of partisans investigating something which huge political ramifications.

0 comments
 

Jack Murtha's Opposition


The press is making giddy noise because Congressman Jack Murtha (D-Pennsylvania), who has been transformed into "one of the staunchest supporters of the military," telling the world at a Pelosi press conference that we could not win the war in Iraq if we continued to fight it the Bush/Rumsfeld way.

Jack Murtha is the dean of the Pennsylvania Democrat delegation and is one of the longest serving Dems in the House. He supports the military, but one must understand that he is a dreadfully partisan Democrat of the old school. If Pelosi wants an old Democrat to put on a respectable outfit and campaign against the President on the military, Murtha will do it in the drop of a hat. He prides himself on being adaptable to paradigm-shifts in the house, and he is in a cynical manner.

His remarks signal nothing new.

0 comments
 

Find someone to blame… then kill him


There is, in this country, a need to simplify things. I said in 2001 that the press would never get the War on Terror, and most of them haven't. Fought on military, intelligence, diplomatic, financial fronts, "where's the beachhead and the body bags?"

This applies also to some Republicans, but a crisis needs one person on whom to place blame. Donald Rumsfeld. They don't like him, anyway. He was more popular than them for a time, and he doesn't always remember to get out his mat and pray facing Capitol Hill every time Daschle or Pelosi ring their bells. Perhaps he doesn't answer his Bat Phone.

Reuters talks of a ""growing chorus," listing Pelosi, Tom Harkin, and Chuck Rangel.

They're not angry with Rumsfeld merely because of what happened at Abu Ghraib and subsequently. For instance, Pelosi wailed:
American taxpayers are paying an enormous price because Donald Rumsfeld has done a poor job as Secretary of Defense. Secretary Rumsfeld must resign."
Teddy Kennedy, perhaps smelling easy blood, has taken a calm approach: "I think it will be determined on his testimony. We ought to listen to him.''

He testifies tomorrow. The President is standing by him, as well he should. If one of the chief architects of the war in Iraq resigns, the President loses a chunk of credibility as a war leader.

I call on Pelosi to resign. As my late grandmother might have said: "I like that nice young man from Tennessee." Is Harold Ford the future of the Democratic Paryt? Hardly, but we can discuss that later.

I'm listening to one of J.S. Bach's Viola de Gamba sonata, and I'm for now at the point where the storm has passed. Soon.

0 comments
 

Roman Catholic NJ governor obeys the church


Acting as a legitimate Roman Catholic, New Jersey's pro-abort Govenor Jim McGreevey said Wednesday that he will respect the church's wishes and not request the Eucharist.

He complained: "I believe it's a false choice in America between one's faith and constitutional obligation." However, if ones faith is Roman Catholicism, he does not advocate the practice of abortion. And no elected official has a Constitutional obligation to be pro-abortion. He can do his job while opposing abortion.

JF Kerry is a walking, breathing cipher. The Ultimate Null.

0 comments
 

Prez holds child in swing State (OH)


This from the Cincinatti Enquirer:
In a moment largely unnoticed by the throngs of people in Lebanon waiting for autographs from the president of the United States, George W. Bush stopped to hold a teenager's head close to his heart.

Lynn Faulkner, his daughter, Ashley, and their neighbor, Linda Prince, eagerly waited to shake the president's hand Tuesday at the Golden Lamb Inn. He worked the line at a steady campaign pace, smiling, nodding and signing autographs until Prince spoke:

"This girl lost her mom in the World Trade Center on 9-11."

Bush stopped and turned back.

"He changed from being the leader of the free world to being a father, a husband and a man," Faulkner said. "He looked right at her and said, 'How are you doing?' He reached out with his hand and pulled her into his chest."
It's a natch for the Prez, but I can think I can hear Rove giggling and Mehlman shouting, "Ka-CHING!"

0 comments
 

Kerry and the Abuse at Abu Ghraib


[ht, dgci]

"The Abuse at Abu Ghraib." It sounds like a CBS News special report, or some such. If they pilfer my line, I'll sue.

From Deb Orin at the NYPost:
IT was bizarre yesterday to hear John Kerry criticize President Bush over the Iraqi prisoner-abuse scandal, considering Kerry publicly confessed to committing war "atrocities" when he served in Vietnam.

"Yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers," Kerry told "Meet the Press" in 1971, ticking off "free-fire zones" and burning villages in violation of the Geneva Convention.
The full Kerry quote from '71 is:
I [jf kerry] committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50-caliber machine guns which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search-and-destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare. All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down.
One would think, then, that Kerry would be somewhat understanding; after all, the atrocities he perpetrated make these look like the church picnic of proverbial-speak.

I hope he didn't take a second mortgage on his glass house.

0 comments
 

$25-million more for Iraq and Afghanistan


President Bush asked Congress yesterday $25-billion to be made available to the Pentagon beginning in October for work in Iraq and Afghanistan. This brings the total requested so far to $160-billion.

The $25-billion request, which White House budget director Joshua Bolten called "an insurance policy" to ensure that funding would not be interrupted in case more was needed, is a tacit admission that the last request might not have been enough.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) has issued a statement [text] saying in part:
"By requesting just $25 billion in additional money for our troops in Iraq -- when we know that at least twice that amount will be needed -- the Bush Administration is once again keeping the true cost of the war from the American people.

[ . . .]
"We need to know how the Administration all of a sudden decided that it needed $25 billion since many experts -- including the House Budget Committee -- have concluded that at least $50 billion in additional funding will be necessary to provide our troops with the equipment and support they need to accomplish their mission."
The Administration, Nance, is not saying that it needs $25-billion; rather, they seem to be saying that they might need it in an emergency and don't want to have to put up with your yapping which would delay a request if it is needed.

As it stands now, by requesting it this early for October, are allowing Pelosi to babble and drone, getting it out of her system and not interfering with the funds the troops may need.

If Pelosi is concerned, I think she should take the "brave and principles stand" of voting for the $25-billion before she votes against it.

0 comments
 

Out of Control


From the Canadian press, the Toronto Globe and Mail:
More photos showing the abuse of prisoners in Iraq have been published, threatening U.S. efforts to control a scandal spiralling [sic] out of control.
Men on leashes and panties.

Why were these people in prison in the first place? Why were they inside, not out in the tents with the majority of prisoners?

Out of control. What will happen when the scandal spirals out of control? Will it take on a life of its own, being blown from all proportion?

It's what we have now.

Someone's going to have to write a book about this, to be released in mid-October. That's the way this is going.

0 comments
 

Top Ten Jewish Conspiracies


All that ails the Islamic world, according to their going theory, is the fault of a grand conspiracy of Jews, Zionists, or "their helpers." It is their culture, and they actually believe it.

Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), has compiled in today's NRO a list of the "top ten Arab conspiracy theories in recent months." For example:
6. Writing in Kuwait's Al-Watan on March 14, columnist Adnan Zayid Al-Kazimi identified the real culprit in the Madrid bombings: "I claim with certainty that the ones who attributed all evil to the Arabs and the Muslims are the Zionists, those who are closest to carry out such an operation like the other operations [that they carried out]."
[LINK]

0 comments
 

World Leaders Support…


JF Kerry has evidently not met Pakistani Prime Minister in a New York City restaurant.

The Associated Press:
Zafarullah Khan Jamali's comment was a rare taking-of-sides by a world leader in another country's election, and one that is particularly unusual given the American president's low standing among Muslims angered over the war in Iraq, U.S. support for Israel and allegations that American servicemen abused Iraqi prisoners at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad.

"Today we are lucky with the Republicans that the president, his secretary of state, the vice president and the secretary of defense -- they all have a personal relationship with Pakistan, and also as a government, so that I think is a much better bet as far as Pakistan-American relations are concerned," Jamali said Wednesday at his official residence on a hilltop overlooking the capital.
Well, the American wire was shocked that a foreign leader would back the President. It doesn't fit with their cosmology.

Kerry can dismiss it in the same way as he laughs off the coalition in Iraq, with U.S. condescension. Pakistan's not important, not a major country, he might say. He's done it with the Coalition in Iraq, and it is a tangible example of the arrogance of which he falsely accuses the President.

0 comments
 

Photographs and Fake Photos


Good morning. The Egyptian press carried photographs taken from a pornography web site with captions claiming that they were taken at the Abu Ghraib prison. The U.S. Embassy protested:
"They are clearly staged photos, done by actors, as the site itself states. Their publication needlessly inflames an already heated atmosphere."
Egyptian editor said that at most of the photographs his paper published were legitimate:
"We have published, maybe, one picture from the Internet," Bakri said.
That is an admission of false reporting.

This morning, the web site of the Al Jazeera cable outlet picked up on a story from the Washington Post, reporting that a new batch of photographs showed up on the US morning shows:
The new collection includes more than 1,000 digital images ranging from scenes of mundane military life to pictures showing crude simulations of sex among soldiers.

Some of the pictures also appear to show US soldiers abusing prisoners, many of whom wear ID bands. However, The Post said that it could not eliminate the possibility that some of those images were staged.
My wife is taken aback by the "sexual humiliation," and I alluded to that term a few days ago as one hatched by the media to create a special anger amongst Americans.

This is unacceptable, but it is not worse than it is, and it should not be portrayed as such. But the anti-Americans in the arab world, the opposition American political party, and the American media have a vested interest in sweeping proportion aside.
0 comments

5/05/2004

 

Tear down this Prison


It seems that Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) told colleagues last week that we ought to raze the Abu Ghraib prison "to send a message here to the world" that we want to put the recent abuse behind us.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Pat Roberts agrees: "I think we ought to take it down -- take the damn thing down."

Carl Levin, the ranking Dem on Armed Services, said he would review the plan to "make a clean break" from the scandal.

The prison should have been demolished a long time ago. The statue came down and Saddam Hussein's army was dispersed. The country needs to make a clean break from the evils of the Hussein regime, from the evil done in that prison.

A campaign to remove the last vestiges of Saddam's barbarity would be something for which the American people would go. President Bush could lead it and Mike McCurry could give daily progress reports out of the White House. It's a new focus besides the bloodshed.

The President would clear out as much of Saddam's detritus as he could in the next two months, then the new Iraqi government would take over the removal program. It's political dynamite!

Tear down the prison, but not to hide from what happened there when it was in U.S. control; rather, Saddam has to go.

0 comments
 

Kerry's Qualifications


This one is taken directly from ABCNews.com's NOTED NOW:
"WE KNOW WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOSS OF ENEMY LIVES": Kerry asked whether he killed anybody in Vietnam, how it felt during Univision interview: "I think it affects anybody who carries a gun in another country shooting at human beings. Unless you're insensitive, it has an impact on you. But I did my duty, I'm proud that I served my country, I'm proud of my service and I learned a lot of lessons. And I think I will make a much stronger commander in chief, a much better head of state..."
I shan't comment.

0 comments
 

An Opinion Piece from the Brits


This is from Wednesday's London Daily Telegraph, an opinion piece by a fellow named Boris Johnson, MP from Henley and editor of the British lefty mag called The Spectator.

In his Op/Ed, to use the American parlance -- linked HERE -- he discusses how he had voted for Britain's involvement in the war but had since changed his mind. What got him, he said, were the pictures of wailing wives and the "expressions of immortal hate on the faces of the Iraqis."

I do not know how he felt when that expression of immortal hatred was on the face of the dictator of Iraq, a man who had proven time and time again his willingness to destroy anything and anyone which valued freedom or stood in the way of his delusional Saladin-trip.

He talks of how, well, Saddam had no WMD, but at least we stopped him from torturing people. BUT HERE ARE THE AMERICANS… !!! Tossing people into shredders, lopping off their gonads so they can have lunch…what?

Here's my favorite graph from his limey bit:
But I have felt the extra rage of one who has been a mug. Up and down the country, I have given the same defence of the operation. "Of course Saddam never had anything to do with September 11, and of course he never had any weapons of mass destruction. But there is one powerful reason for supporting the liberation of Iraq," I say, "and that is that we rid the world of an odious tyrant, and we have made life better for the Iraqi people."

Well, look at what is happening now.
What can I say? Boris evidently has a reputation for being " unkempt, bumbling and, some say, a buffoon."

Yes, I'm not attacking his argument. It is absurd, and somebody give Bob Shrum this man's address.

0 comments
 

It's Politics to Kerry


From the AP:
"The horrifying abuse of Iraqi prisoners which the world has now seen is absolutely unacceptable and inexcusable," he said. "And the response of the administration, certainly the Pentagon, has been slow and inappropriate. I believe the president needs to guarantee that the world is going to have an explanation.
Kerry is bound by the political season to say something like that, and his opinion is relevant only because he might be the Democrat's nominee. And because he is a probable presidential nominee, his opinion will be relevant for a long time after he has lost in November. Al Gore's opinion was considered relevant and would still be so if he hadn't lost his mind.

"YAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!"

In the meantime, the President went on Arab TV Alhurra and.. well, he explained. [transcript]
It's also important for the people of Iraq to know that in a democracy, everything is not perfect, that mistakes are made. But in a democracy, as well, those mistakes will be investigated and people will be brought to justice. We're an open society. We're a society that is willing to investigate, fully investigate in this case, what took place in that prison.
He explained that such actions are not tolerated in democratic societies, unlike in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. He explained the process for dealing with such things in a democracy, assuring them that the culprits will be brought to justice after an investigation AND preparing them for dealing with such thing when they are an open society.

There is a double-standard between the United States and the Iraq under Saddam Hussein. There should be. We expected mass graves from Saddam; we do not expect prisoner humiliation from the United States military.

This story has no sense of proportion.

0 comments
 

Nader might be Kerry's Strategy


The latest Quinnipiac (April 26-May 3) has Bush leading Kerry leading Nader, 43-percent to 40-percent to 6-percent. In there piece, linked above, Quinnipiac headlines that the Bush team's approval rating is the lowest it has been, yet he is still beating Kerry.

Quinnipiac ran "approve -- disapprove" ratings for the Administration team:


Less than half of those surveyed thought America was right to liberate Iraq, but trust the Bush more than Kerry, 48-37, to take care of things from here on.
"President Bush and his team are going down in their approval ratings, but Sen. Kerry is going nowhere. Bush has lost three points in the three-way matchup, but those three points did not go to Kerry. The so-called gender gap, where men favor the Republican candidate and women favor the Democrat, is very narrow right now, with the exception of white women, who are lining up strongly for Bush," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
These national snapshots are often distractions. With Nader's 6%, Kerry is beating Bush slightly over the margin (+/- 2.2%) Does Nader solidify it then toss it to Kerry at the last minute? If the 6% is set to excited by Nader to vote against Bush, they'll be more prone to vote anti-Bush for Kerry if the Consumer Avocado throws his support that way.

0 comments
 

College Abuse Conference


Liberal bias in our universities is a form of abuse.

There will be a College Abuse Conference at the Century 21 Building in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, on Saturday from 10a to 3:30p. There will be sessions of speakers or panel/discussions on the Persecution of Professors, Intellectual/Ideological Abuse and Bias, Remedies, and What Students Can Do.

Speakers and panelists include professors of political science, English, physics, etc. There will be student activists, Congressmen, Trustees, and attorneys.

Welcoming remarks will be by attorney Whit Whitfield, who is taking on Democrat Congressman David Price in the 4th district of North Carolina. The coordinator is Dr. Christina Jeffrey, former historian of the U.S. House of Representatives.

For more information, I've posted the press release.

0 comments
 

Disney Rejects Moore


Disney owns Miramax, and Disney says Miramax will not distribute the latest film by Michael Moore. Period.

The film is called Fahrenheit 9-11, and it evidently tells the tale of the Bush family and their relationships with various Arab oil nasties, including, notably, Osama bin Laden.

But Moore is blaming money:
Mr. Moore's agent, Ari Emanuel, said Michael D. Eisner, Disney's chief executive, asked him last spring to pull out of the deal with Miramax. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner expressed particular concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor.

"Michael Eisner asked me not to sell this movie to Harvey Weinstein; that doesn't mean I listened to him," Mr. Emanuel said. "He definitely indicated there were tax incentives he was getting for the Disney corporation and that's why he didn't want me to sell it to Miramax. He didn't want a Disney company involved."
Moore himself said in an interview recently:
Mr. Moore, who will present the film at the Cannes film festival this month, criticized Disney's decision in an interview on Tuesday, saying, "At some point the question has to be asked, `Should this be happening in a free and open society where the monied interests essentially call the shots regarding the information that the public is allowed to see?' "
Moore said that the only way it is partisan is in favor of "the poor and working people in this country who provide fodder for this war machine."

Moore's whining. When garbage is produced and someone wants nothing to do with it, the producers of the garbage scream "FREE SPEECH!" The "information" is Moore's film will not be seen by the public, no matter who distributes it, because I'm sure the film is as defective as his previous work. Most folks don't care what he has to say.

Look, Mel Gibson's latest film was rejected by big Hollywood -- no room at the inn? -- and he found a way to distribute it. Go for it, Michael.

0 comments
 

Kerry Responds to Vietnam Vets


The JF Kerry campaign has responded to allegations by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, led by Navy Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman (ret.), that in his 4 1/2 months he Vietnam, he was "aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard to specific tactical assignments. He was a loose cannon" -- and "unfit to be Commander in Chief."

Campaign boss Mary Beth Cahill, part of the Kerry-Kennedy connection, issued the following statement on her candidate's behalf:
"This attack was organized by the same pro-Bush group that smeared John McCain in 2000. It has ties to the White House and to Bush in Texas," the Kerry campaign said.

"If he wanted to, the President could stop these baseless attacks on John Kerry with one phone call. But instead he allows groups like this to attack John Kerry, who put his life on the line to serve his country."
Bush/Cheney chairman Marc Racicot countered:
"Allegations by the Kerry campaign that this news conference was organized by the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign or the Republican National Committee are false," said Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Chairman Marc Racicot in a statement.

"Neither the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign nor the Republican National Committee have coordinated or participated in the planning of this news conference," Racicot said. "We first learned of the event yesterday through press accounts."

"We honor all veterans' service to their country and respect their right to participate in the political process, regardless of whom they support in this election," Racicot added.
The best way to marginalize legitimate opposition is to label it a conspiracy and link it to the opposing campaign. Create the appearance of coordination and it can be dismissed without being addressed.

0 comments
 

Wictory is at hand


On Wictory Wednesday, we talk about what we can do to support the Bush campaign, to fend off the waffling insurgent from the left.

Candidate JF Kerry is in the process of spending $25-million to define himself as a Colorado boy….

And they're already starting to use the humiliation at Al Ghraib against the President, as they have him late with his "proactive response" and scrambling to do "damage control." It's the scandal-of-the-week.

Let's counter that.

Click RIGHT HERE to be directed to the page where you can become a Bush Team Leader, an official part of the campaign. You can also join by donating at the campaign's SECURE SERVER.

This effort is undersigned by WW founder PoliPundit and the entire cast of Wictory Wednesday bloggers (page an inch or so to #3).

Let's rock the house.

0 comments

5/04/2004

 

Who is John Kerry?


We don't know. It's as easy as that.

Eric Lindholm at Viking Pundit wonders if Kerry has a single issue on which JF Kerry the Coloradoan has taken "an unpopular position guided by some personal belief."

I think I may have one, Eric. Kerry the Coloradoan's pro-abortion position is unpopular in the Catholic Church. But it is popular in the Democratic Party. And it is not guided by a personal belief. He says, and permit me to paraphrase: "I voted for abortion on demand, even if I am personally against it."

The man is confounding. If pro-abortion or anti-abortion is a matter of faith in whether or not an unborn baby is of human origin, and Jesus Christ is the teacher of anti-abortion, who is the pro-abortion teacher? Teddy Kennedy? Or does Kerry want that mantle for himself? After all, he wants to be the "next" black President. Even though he has some dude follow him around and make the PB&J for him.

John Kerry is for the Big Dig, even though it is an object of ridicule around the nation. He believes in campaign cash from the insurance companies involved. Or is he now against that highway project?

I see it rainin' fire in the sky.

0 comments
 

The Press, Racism, and the Secretary of State


I have detected a certain element of naïve racism in the press which portrays Secretary of State Colin Powell as the hapless but honest man being fooled and used by the conniving boss men: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc. We've heard it more explicitly from blacks like Harry Belafonte, and still in the undertones from others like Maxine Waters.

For a colorful description of Belafonte's sentiments, read this column by St. Petersburg Times columnist Bill Maxwell:
When asked if he thought Powell had finked out as Bush tries to make a case for declaring war against Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Belafonte unloaded. Until a few weeks ago, Powell, the nation's first black secretary of state, had been considered a voice of sanity in an otherwise war-obsessed White House and was a leading advocate of securing U.N. approval for military action.

Belafonte accused Powell of having abandoned his principles and likened his turnaround to the behavior of a "house slave."

"In the days of slavery," Belafonte said, "there were those slaves who lived on the plantation, and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master. . . . Colin Powell's committed to come into the house of the master. When Colin Powell dares to suggest something other than what the master wants to hear, he will be turned back out to the pasture."
The column itself is loaded, and worth a look.

Read these opening paragraphs from an Associated Press story from Tuesday:
WASHINGTON – Secretary of State Colin Powell feels uneasy about being the house pragmatist in an administration dominated by ideologues, a close friend says.

"This is, in many ways, the most ideological administration Powell's ever had to work for," says Harlan Ullman. "Not only is it very ideological, but they have a vision. And I think Powell is inherently uncomfortable with grand visions like that. ... There's an ideological core to Bush, and I think it's hard for Powell to penetrate that."
The article then goes on to provide further "documentation" that Powell is the "house pragmatist" in the big ole' white house, who just can't grasp none of that vision thaang.

They want to tear the man down.

0 comments
 

Al Gore and the Young American


Al Gore and other investors purchased Newsworld International from Vivendi Universal, the struggling French media giant, and plans to turn it into a public affairs and entertainment outlet for the 18-34 demographic.

Al Gore says he's not targeting the nation's most popular cable news network, the FOX News Channel, despite rumors to the contrary.
"This is not going to be a liberal network, or a Democratic network in any way, shape, or form,'' the former vice president said.
Is there a wink we're missing?

There are a few that claim that while the FOX News Channel claims to be "fair and balanced," they wink when the say it. It's not true, the claim goes.

Gore no doubt buys into this sloppy line of thinking, so he might be thinking along the lines of: "Well, if Murdoch and Ailes can claim to be fair and balanced, so can the Al Gore News Network!" (NOTE: I invented the name for the new network; what he actually calls it is his business.)

After watching Gore on the stump for the past several years, I cannot imagine the man reserving his fiery vitriol from certain aspects of his life. Unless he is a brilliant actor and genius compartimentalizer, which would make his political life an ingenious fraud.

0 comments
 

ABK: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth


At least the Boston Herald covered it.
A group of Vietnam veterans will charge today that Sen. John F. Kerry is ``unfit'' to be commander-in-chief because of his claims that U.S. soldiers committed widespread atrocities during the war.

Roy Hoffman and John O'Neill, both known Kerry opponents, said they will be joined by at least a dozen swift boat veterans today in releasing a letter saying he is unfit to serve.

The drafters of the letter, a new group calling itself ``The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,'' claims it will be signed by ``a substantial majority of all known Swift boat veterans.''
Insight on the News (InsightMag.com) covered the story from a more confrontational perspective:
Sen. John Kerry's accounts of his service in Vietnam and his statements that he witnessed atrocities were attacked as fabrications and political opportunism today by a group of Vietnam veterans who served with him personally or in the units affiliated with him during his short tour of duty in Southeast Asia.

The veterans, including some of Kerry's former commanders and shipmates, have formed an organization called "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" and called on the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to authorize release of all his service records, including medical records.

[ . . . ]
"I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces," said retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, chairman of the organization. "This is not a political issue. It is a matter of honesty."

Hoffman said Kerry had recently telephoned him and spent 45 minutes attempting to convince Hoffman of not proceeding with the formation of the organization, which Democrats have attacked as a shill for Bush.

Hoffmann, who debated Kerry on television in 1971 over Vietnam allegations, denied any ties to Bush or the Republican Party. The Swift boat veterans held differing political and social views, he said. "There is only one issue we all agree on, and that is the issue of John Kerry."
This is a new dynamic in this race: an Anybody But Kerry (ABK) movement. The President can count on his supporters to vote for him, and on the ABK movement. JF Kerry can count on probably most of the ABB movement -- the ones who do not vote for Ralph Nader -- to vote for him.

Keep an eye on the Internet (bloggers, indies) for news of Swift Boats Veterans for Truth and the ABK movement. The mainstream will either ignore it or laugh it off as a few disgruntled Vietnam Vets, an ugly stereotype which one would think would not include a Rear Admiral.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
See also this report from the Cybercast News Service (CNS.com).
0 comments
 

Systemic Sexual Humilation


On ABC's This Week on Sunday, Joint Chiefs Chairman General Richard Myers declared that the prison abuse was limited to a handful of guards; it was not systemic: "I would say that categorically. There is no, no evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all.". I could see host George Stephanopoulos's eyes light up when he heard that word: "Systemic."

How did Myers know it was not systemic?

Lawmakers met behind closed doors with Pentagon officials Tuesday. Teddy Kennedy emerged to declare angrily that the abuse was systemic:
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., emerged from the briefing saying he feared allegations made public so far are ''the beginning rather than the end'' of the abuse allegations.
As a Kerry campaign spokesman, it is Ted Kennedy assignment to rail against the Bush Administration

The abuse is now being called "sexual humiliation." That is a loaded term, and in America, it evokes images of child daycare scandals, serial rapists, sex gizmos, and Jacko. I could see something going on with that female soldier pointing at the blurred-out genitals of a hooded male prisoner, but the minds of perverts are somewhat tricky things. Sexual humiliation need deems captures the imagination of an overly sex-obsessed culture, and to such a society, its implications are several degrees more nefarious that mere garden-variety humiliation.

This will be used against the President. I just hope JF Kerry doesn't try to say that things would have been better if the President had gotten the French involved.

0 comments
 

Dean supports (?) Kerry


From the Washington Times, today (Tuesday):
Howard Dean yesterday said he wants his former presidential campaign -- renamed Democracy for America -- to play a key role in energizing grass-roots Democrats and independents to help elect Sen. John Kerry in November.

"My goal is to get every single one of my supporters to vote for John Kerry," the former Vermont governor said in a conference call with reporters yesterday.
Does Howard Dean support JF Kerry? Of course not.

We know what was said during the primary season, and here is a sample:

From CNN.com, January 30:
At Thursday night's debate, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean attacked Kerry as weak on health care, saying the Democratic Party needs a candidate "who is willing to get stuff done."
From the GW Hatchett, Febuary 5:
Dean charged that during Kerry's time in the Senate, he had not managed to pass any of the 11 health care bills that he sponsored. Kerry replied that if Dean had a better understanding of Congress, he would realize that many times senators see their ideas come to life in bills sponsored by other members.
From Knight-Ridder, January 18:
Dean attacked Kerry for once daring to suggest that the Agriculture Department could be cut back.
From The Journalism Students Online News Service, [no date given]:
Dean attacked Kerry for his support of the Iraq resolution....

"(Kerry's) experience (in foreign affairs) led him to give the president of the United States a blank check to invade Iraq," said Dean.
From The Gadflyer, January 31:
Dean attacked Kerry for not having a distinguished record of sponsored legislation as a Senator.
From Newsmax.com, January 26:
Howard Dean… questioned Kerry's judgment in voting against the Persian Gulf War in 1991 while supporting the 2002 resolution to invade Iraq.

"I think it should be the other way around," Dean said as he and other candidates entered the final day of campaigning before New Hampshire's leadoff primary. "Where was John Kerry when George Bush was giving out all this misinformation?"
From FOXNews.com, February 10:
The Dean camp, however, says Torricelli's fund-raising provides more evidence that Kerry is a captive of special interests and a Washington insider.


Anybody But Bush (ABB). That is as close as JF Kerry gets to support these days, and this is why the Colorado boy is spending $25-million to become someone.

How much on an army does Dean have left? If his supporters were sensible, they'd have forgotten him long ago. Then again, we are talking about Deaniacs…

0 comments
 

Franken for Senate


I heard this at the tail-end of CNN's Headline News last night, and the Associated Press has has the story. TV clown Al Franken wants to run against Minnesota's junior Senator Norm Coleman in four years. He grew up there, after having been born in New York City, and he says he's asked Hillary Rodham about running for the Senate in a place where you no longer live.

Franken said that there is a 50-percent chance that he'll run. Rob Eibensteiner, chairman of the Minnesota Republican Party, commented: "This is a joke, right?"

The entire premise of Al Franken is a joke.

0 comments
 

Two New Columns…


On the RSN web site.

Dennis Campbell's Democrats Strike Out on the Great Moral Issues:
If there is one statement that summarizes Democrats from the 19th Century to the 21st, surely it is this: They consistently have made wrong choices when it comes to the great moral issues confronting us. [MORE]



Barbara J. Stock's American Shame - Arab Hypocrasy:
Is it possible for a handful of men and women to bring shame and disgrace to the greatest fighting force in the world? Is it possible for this small number to embarrass a country of over 280 million people? Yes, it is and they did. [MORE]
Remember to close the annoying sidepane

Enjoy the prose.

0 comments
 

The Dutch say…


There's an interesting article on the Radio Netherlands site today: the Dutch reporting on Kerry's new ad campaign.

It concludes:
The advertising campaign has cost the Democratic presidential challenger 25 million dollars. Once his campaign team believes the American voters have come to see John Kerry in a more positive light, they won't be afraid to go on the attack with a negative advertising campaign targeting his opponent. But, for the moment at least, Mr Kerry is confining himself to emphasizing his leadership qualities and his independence, with just the occasional dig at President Bush, such as the allusion to the loss of millions of jobs under his administration.
It sounds as if they spoke only to JF Kerry's campaign. Perhaps we can sit them down with Ken Mehlman, Ed Gillespie, and Mark Racicot for the rest of the story.

0 comments
 

Kerry's Veep


Good morning. I don't know how long this has been on the CNN page, as its not dated, but they have a feature, broken up like an NCAA tournament chart with brackets, on -- Who's Kerry gonna pick?

They say the piece was put together for "political junkies," and their "GRAVITAS BRACKET SEEDS" include Bill Clinton and… Tom Brokaw. They pair the NBC anchor against John McCain:
This match-up may sound like it is straight out of Fantasy Island, but both these names have been floated and there should be one spot in this bracket where star-struck Democrats can have some fun. (And remember, the question is who John Kerry will make an offer to, not who will accept that offer.) . . .

If Kerry's looking for star power, there is another name that has been floated - soon-to-retire NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw. After all, he will have nothing to do after December 1 and he is welcomed nightly into millions of American households. Of course, vice president would be a demotion for a network news anchor, but naming Brokaw to the ticket might get the greatest generation to stand up and salute one more time.
What about Daffy Duck?

0 comments

5/03/2004

 

Kerry Plans to Define Self, II


Last night I postedword that candidate JF Kerry planned to spend $25-million this month to define himself as a Vietnam vet, etc. Jaws of JawsBlog noted that this "like his primary ads in NH all over again." Maybe so, but Kerry let's out one heretofore unbeknownst to me fact about himself: JF Kerry is a Coloradoan. (Perhaps it's where he gets the gold rush when shopping for brides.)

Taegan Goddard posts a quote from CBS Marketwatch and links the commercials, which can be found: HERE.

But the Colorado Rocky Mountain high
I’ve seen it rainin’ fire in the sky
The shadow from the starlight is softer than a lullaby
Rocky Mountain high (high Colorado) Rocky Mountain high (high Colorado)


0 comments
 

Mitt Romney and Capital Punishment


Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, via a commission, has proposed a formula with which the Commonwealth could reinstate the death penalty.
One of the major recommendations is raising the bar for a death penalty sentence from the normal legal standard of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a finding of "no doubt about the defendant's guilt." The commission has also proposed that a defendant in a capital case be given the option of facing two separate juries -- one to try him and, if he is convicted, a second to sentence him.
DNA, forensics.

It is possible that Romney is angling for a Vice Presidential nod should Dick Cheney step aside. It seems improbable that Massachusetts (or New England in general) would vote Republican in a Presidential election, but it might force Kerry to dump a lot of money into the Bay State

Just a thought.

0 comments
 

About Ted Rall


Just a reminder: Ted Rall is in no way consequential. He is at best a mediocre intellect, and he has never been a serious individual.

I shall never mention his name again.

0 comments
 

Saleh is Out


All over the press on Saturday were reports that former Republican Guard General General Jasim Mohamed Saleh had taken over the new Fallujah Brigade of Iraqi soldiers securing that city. U.N. General Secretary [sic, mine] Kofi Annan told host Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press that he had selected Saleh to put an Iraqi face on the mission. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers appeared on Fox News Sunday, Face the Nation, and This Week telling us that this was bad reporting, that Saleh had not been selected. He still had to be fully vetted.

Coaltion Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor told host Wolfgang Blitzer on CNN's Late Edition that Saleh was definitely in.

Now from Reuters comes word that Saleh is out.
Their initial choice, who outraged victims of the Baathist regime because of past service in Saddam's feared Republican Guard, said he was stepping aside, leaving command of the new Falluja Brigade to former intelligence officer Mohammed Latif.
So Myers was right.

0 comments
 

Vets Say Kerry is "Unfit"


From the Cybercast News Service (CNSNews.com):
Hundreds of former commanders and military colleagues of presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry are set to declare in a signed letter that he is "unfit to be commander-in-chief." They will do so at a press conference in Washington on Tuesday.
Read the story HERE.

"Unfit" is a word I've used.

I was tipped to this story by an unlikely source. It could be refreshing in this season.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My referrers reminded me of this, from an April 17 post:
A soldier can kill. A soldier can be killed. It is a special employment, and it must not be considered, for the purposes of winning a war, with the terms used for civilians in peacetime.

Mr. Kerry voted not to fund those troops, thus denying them the rights of soldiers.

He is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
And he is.

0 comments
 

Dodd to seek reelection


Connecticut Democrat Cristobal Dodd says he is going to run for another term. No surprises, but he was an ambulating contradiction when he announced this AM:
Dodd said when he ran for re-election six years ago the economy was strong, the United States had good relations with foreign countries and the country had made strides in health care and education.
Okay, the economy is strong, the U.S. has great relations with foreign countries, and we have better medical treatments and more home-schooled children than every before. Despite Dodd's partnership in obstruction.
Dodd said he was seeking a record fifth term to "protect against the radical and reckless path the Bush administration is putting this country on."
Dodd's assertion is that things were great, Bush came along and was "radical and reckless" while Dodd was a Senator, and now he wants to be re-elected to prevent what he has unable to prevent for three years.

It's amazing to watch these minds function.

0 comments
 

New Judson Cox Column


The latest column by Judson Cox, Yo Quiero GOP, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
Approximately 90% of black Americans vote only for Democrats. However, a few decades ago blacks were more likely to vote for the party of Abraham Lincoln than for the party essentially founded by the Ku Klux Klan. Democrats by day/Klansmen by night, like Robert Byrd, Bull Conner and George Wallace were racist segregationists who wielded dogs, fire hoses and clubs in the civil rights battles. [MORE]
He speaks for himself.

0 comments
 

Attacking the Catholic Church


We have established that to believing Catholics, abortion is not a political issue; the sanctity of human life is fundamental to their faith. In today's San Francisco Chronicle, Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, rumbles with determination to confuse the religious and the political.
The few policy-makers who have been punished or attacked [by the church for their pro-abort beliefs] have not changed their views, and instead have been perceived as more sympathetic candidates, winning elections even when they were the underdogs.
The church is not trying to influence elections. The Eucharist is sacred to them, and some bishops do not what non-believers (in church doctrine) to participate. This is not political.
But something has changed in the Vatican and among conservative Catholics: No longer are they simply anti-abortion, they are now Bush Republicans. Like their earlier counterparts in the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition, winning elections has become more important than practicing good theology. They know that the Catholic vote will play a critical swing role in the 2004 election, and they hope to deliver that vote to George W. Bush. A Catholic Democrat is a serious obstacle to that goal.
That is quite a charge! Francis Cardinal Arinze, the Vatican official from Nigeria who oversees the sacraments, recently said that pro-abort politicians should not request the Eucharist. He had compiled a report covering the Eucharist broadly, and people like Kissling are attempting to politicize church doctrine. Arinze is more concerned with the way in which the Mass is celebrated than with Bush/Cheney or the Democrat Party. He is a member of the Vatican's College of Cardinals, not one who dotes on the U.S. Electoral college.

0 comments
 

Warren Buffet and JF Kerry


Warren Buffet, a registered Democrat, is a high profile billionaire. Candidate JF Kerry, like last year's Arnold Schwarzenegger campaign, has signed him on as an "economic advisor." In reality, though, this is merely Buffet lending his name to the campaign, if that. The Financial Times reports today:
"I have only had one talk to John Kerry who called me three weeks ago and said would I work on an economic council with Roger Altman and Bob Rubin [Treasury secretaries in the Clinton administration] and some others and I said yes and that's about it," said Mr Buffett.

"I have not had any meetings yet but I expect I will receive calls asking me to endorse a policy of some sort or another."
And like most other Kerry "supporters," Buffet is forced to overlook the candidate and go the Anybody But Bush (ABB) route; to wit:
"I think the election will be a referendum on George Bush," said Mr Buffett at the close of his annual shareholder meeting in Omaha. "The Kerry campaign is quite unimportant compared to how people feel about Bush when they go into the voting booth."
From Bloomberg.com, we find Buffet's sole criticism of President Bush:
Buffett said he has become an economic adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. He said President George W. Bush's tax cuts are ``tilted toward the rich.

``I've got way more money in my pocket because of the tax change and I don't think it's a good idea,'' he said.
Buffet thinks that because he has more money, no one else does. This is erroneous, of course, as the President's tax cuts have helped those who do not happen to own Coca-Cola stock valued at more than $10-billion. (Or ketchup stock, for that matter.)

0 comments
 

The Fight is Not Over?


Specter defeats Toomey. As had been long expected, those were the results of last Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary. That's that: GOP nominates Snarlin' Arlen, again.

Pennsylvania's James N. Clymer, head of the national Constitutional Party, says his group will field a candidate this November: "Arlen Specter does more damage to the conservative movement than [Democrat opponent] Joe Hoeffel."

I received an e-mail this morning from Charles Fournier, Ballot Access Chair and Eastern Vice-Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania (LPP), with word that his party needs 25,000 signatures to put their candidate on the ballot this November: Jay Russell - pro-gun, pro-small government, and pro-life. As Fournier writes, Russell seems to be the "[L]ibertarian double of Pat Toomey."

Russell will not win, and that is my main concern about the Libertarian Party; that being said, I cannot support Specter. Russell sounds like someone I can support even as what will essentially be a protest vote. But there is something bigger for the conservative movement in this.

If Hoeffel wins, Pennsylvania will have a Democrat Senator, but the GOP will not lose its Senate majority. We're set to pick up seats this fall. If Hoeffel wins, Arlen Specter will not be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, blocking the President's conservative judicial nominees at will.

A vote for Jay Russell is a vote for Arizona's Jon Kyl to be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Unlike Specter, Senator Kyl is conservative and respectable.

Not all fights are over.

0 comments

5/02/2004

 

Kerry plans to define self


The Associated Press reports that JF Kerry will spend $25-million in may defining himself.
The new ad campaign featuring his biography and platform includes substantial ventures into two Republican-leaning states.

[ . . . ]
The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the two new ads -- one that focuses on aspects of Kerry's life such as his Vietnam service and another that talks primarily about his top issues -- also will run on national cable networks.
Vietnam. Go figure.

0 comments
 

KOFI ANNAN MEETS THE PRESS



Here's this from this afternoon's Rightsided Newsletter regarding Kofi Annan on Meet the Press this morning. Note his estimation of the role of the United Nations in Iraq.

KOFI on MTP. Russert offered U.N. General Secretary [sic, mine] Kofi Annan the opportunity to ply his wares this morning, and Kofi did not disappoint. When asked of the June 30 turnover day for Iraq, Kofi said: "I think [the transfer of] sovereignty will be and should be complete but their [Iraqi's] powers will be limited." He explained that, according to the U.N. plan, the Iraqis still have to write a constitution before they can pass any permanent laws, and they will hold their first national elections of January 1, 2005.

Annan disclosed that he decided that the U.S. military should turn Fallujah over to the Iraqis, in the person of former Republican Guard General Jasim Mohamed Saleh, because "you have to win the hearts and minds of the people [of Fallujah]." He decided to "defuse the situation" in Iraq and to "work with the Iraqis." And he approved of Saleh, pointing out that not all members of the Iraqi army "committed atrocities." (I had a gentleman suggest on the weblog that the allies might have used the skills of German General Erwin Rommel should he have switched sides, as he was not one of Hitler's true believers, nor did he commit atrocities. It's the same dynamic.)

Annan claimed credit for himself and for the U.N. He could be blinded by delusional arrogance, or he could be selling that idea to the Moslem hardliners, the French, and their ilk in order to placate them.

Russert asked Kofi about Lakhdar Brahimi's reference to Israel as a "poison" in the region, and the U.N. boss replied that Brahimi is "a very serious man who has done a lot of work." His credibility is not damaged, Kofi insisted. He insisted that Brahimi was talking of the perception in the Islamic world that Israeli policy is "undermining the efforts" to find peace everywhere in the region. He told Russert that some Arab's have suggested that the U.N. "resolve the Israel-Palestinian issue first, then move on." He would like to see Israel and Palestine follow the U.N. "roadmap" to peace which calls for two states. (It's now his roadmap!

Annan declared that his son, who received Oil for Food payoffs, "had nothing to do with the Oil for Food program." Other principles in the scandal were clean because they "worked for the U.N. for several decades." Kofi pushed it all aside: "I'm not sure that this is important. In the end, what is important is that the investigation of Mr. Volker get to the bottom of this." [Former Fed Chairman Paul Volker heads the investigation for the U.N.]

Russert, on the attack with most guest, read in monotone the headline of an Op/Ed asking what Kofi knew and when did he know it, in regards to the Oil for Food corruption. He read from the piece itself as if he were doing so to get it over with, in order "to give you [Kofi] a chance to respond.'

Annan got a pass this morning.


0 comments
 

Who will be the Democratic nominee?


Who will the Democratic Party run against President Bush this Novembers? If the true believers speak for all, it is critical to them to rid the White House of President Bush. The party's Powers-That-Be must then be looking beyond JF Kerry. Kerry cannot win, and they have to know this.

Kerry's base, if you can call it truly his, is the Anybody But Bush crowd; it is fairly sizable, with some estimates putting it at 43-percent of Americans. Kerry cannot win with them alone, however; he needs to have some Kerry supporters. To have Kerry supporters, he needs to present something for them to support. But what?

Kerry purports to favor remaining in Iraq, but he favors relinquishing authority to international bodies. Kerry says that he favors tax cuts, but smaller ones and for fewer people. His bellowing about outsourcing has been turned on its side. His gripes about the price of oil have been marginalized. Less Bush that Bush.

He's running on his four valorous months in Vietnam, but that doesn't amount to a call for votes, especially when he threw/did not throw his/someone else's medals/ribbons over the fence/onto the stairs upon his return. Especially when he asserted, in the recently recalled distant past, that he and his Band of Brothers were constantly doing some pretty nasty stuff.

But there can be arguments about those things. What is clear is that Kerry is not clear. He is not anything. There is not reason for anyone to support him other than that he is not George W. Bush, and the Democrats need more than this in a candidate. Anyone else is not George W. Bush, but someone else might have something to recommend him or her.

Remember, the President's base is excited about George W. Bush; it is not merely a ragtag group joined as Anybody But Kerry. President Ronald Reagan had this following tenfold, and the senior President Bush borrowed from that for his first election.

Bill Clinton developed his following -- 43% -- in 1992, but the quixotic candidacy of H. Ross Perot ensured that this was enough. For his reelection bid in 1996, he had built his following to nearly half of all voters. (The nation, under Clinton, was split down the middle to that extent.)

Okay, let's look at what the Dems must do if they want to pull this off. First, Bob Shrum and Mary Beth Cahill, both Kennedy advisors, are running the Kerry campaign, in theme and day-to-day respectively. They have make Kerry into something he's not: a centrist. The problem is that while Shrum is good at what he does well; what he doesn't do well is painting liberals as centrists. Shrum knows only how to run progressive/populist candidates: Ed Muskie, George McGovern, Teddy Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Dick Gephardt, Al Gore. (He had nothing to do with Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign.)

The Democratic Party PTB have to look through their bylaws and find a way to throw the convention open. If not just retaking the White House, but defeating President Bush in and of itself, is vital to them, they must find someone else. But whom?


Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) - It would be a good story, but her personal negatives are far higher than President Bush's, and Democrats think she is a wonderful Senator. Period.

Senator John Edwards (D-North Carolina) -"Two Americas" would still work, despite the thriving economy. The line could be: "It's working only for half of us." Inexperience during wartime is a negative, but he could do what Bush did in 2000: select gravitas as his running mate. Bob Graham, notebooks and all, should suffice in that role, or Joe Biden, if they could get him.

Al Gore.- A Democrat friend with whom I had been talking about this threw his name into the mix if only because he was the candidate in 2000 and won the popular vote. But he was running against a tax-cutting governor of Texas, not the Commander in Chief. Plus, Gore's lost several of his marbles in the Democrats' interregnum.

Really, I can think of no one else who might appeal to voters outside the ABB group. If they do not come up with a willing candidate soon, they will lose the election. With Kerry, the ABB crowd will probably prevent a landslide, but the Democrats will lose.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This article was first posted on WatchBlog, Friday.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Addendum. Eric Lindholm at Viking Pundit posts some additional input on this matter.
0 comments
 

Thomas Hamill


He had been a hostage of some thuggee brigade in Iraq for two weeks, but Haliburton contractor Thomas Hamill crawled out a window, chased a military convoy, was rescued, and turned in the two clowns guarding him. He was in Iraq because he was doing what he had to do for his family.

If he looked like Rambo, if he were a mercenary… two examples of childish prose we've seen celebrating tragic happenstance of late from the cesspool of human intellect.

This is good news. It is good news out of Iraq.

Let's see what it does. For his part, Mr. Hamill gets to come home.

0 comments
 

A Conspiracy of "Embedded Operatives"


One William O'Rourke opines in today's Chicago Sun-Times that President Bush is a suitable Commander in Chief in only one war, a political one:
The only war that the Bush administration is fighting with great skill and imagination, aided by wisdom gleaned from past experience, is the war against John Kerry's Vietnam war (and anti-war) record. Bush has had practice: All his previous major national opponents (John McCain and Al Gore) have been Vietnam vets.
Bush has not maligned Kerry's war record, much less that of McCain or Gore, the latter two of whom were included only in an spasm-triggered apoplexy of non sequitur. But O'Rourke continues:
Unlike in Iraq, President Bush has the help of embedded operatives throughout the country, locals willing to be even more gung-ho in the viciousness of their attacks than Bush himself. His troops also include his closest White House confidants, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Bush's language-nanny Karen Hughes. They've been sent out to snap and snarl at Kerry.
These "locals" are what I thought of as the core of Hillary Clinton's old Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. These are citizens with bumper stickers, letters to the editor, calls to radio talk shows, etc. It is not a per se conspiracy, as there is no organization. They are not affiliates of anything formal, least of all the White House or the Bush/Cheney campaign.

O'Rourke quickly deteriorates into incoherence, as do the rest of that lot. That lot. I'd call them the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy to destroy Laura's husband, but I don't see ideology as their motivation. We’re dealing with something more base and thus more pathetic. Ideology is secondary to them, as it is with their candidate.

This would be nothing if there were no solution. Perhaps another electoral loss will take some of the edge off. The only things keeping them from marginilization right now is their favorable press and the Presidential election. If President Bush wins the election and continues to do his job well, we could turn the corner. And the page.
0 comments
 

Rieckhoff on This Week


Army National Guard 1st Lieutenant Paul Rieckhoff, a platoon leader in Iraq, delivered the Democrat's response to the President's Weekly Radio Address on Saturday, which was distributed by JF Kerry's presidential campaign.

In it, he lambasted the President for not supplying troops with adequate equipment, food, and water. He said that our troops demanded "a policy that brings in the rest of the world and relieves their burden." He further agued that he does not expect anyone to be perfect, but that he wants the Administration to admit its mistakes. This is all stuff we have been hearing from Kerry's campaign.

Lt. Reickoff was Steph's guest on ABC's This Week, where he said he would go back to Iraq if called. He is a soldier, he said, and his duty is to serve. This is something the Kerry campaign would definitely want him to emphasize.

He's a soldier involved in politics. He told Steph: "When you're sending our boys and girls over there, you're involving them in politics." He explained that his platoon was required to perform political tasks for which they weren't trained, such as fighting corruption and ensuring public safety. Which sounds like a job for Superman, to be honest. He thinks they should do soldier stuff.

He opposes sending troops into Fallujah and negotiating, he said, because that's not what soldiers do.

He's just the tip of the iceberg, he said. He's talked to several of his military friends who evidently want their own 15-minutes as JF Kerry prostitutes.

He inexplicably noted: "I'm trying to stay as non-partisan as possible." So how did he wind up doing the Democratic Response. He was put in contact with the Kerry campaign.

He said: "Right now, we need more troops, or we have to get out." He does not care if we have to raise taxes on the wealthy to hire more troops: "It's the lower socio-economic class that is bearing the brunt of the burden" of the war.

I prefer to think of our troops as brave and skilled men and women laying their lives possibly on the line for our country, and they are that. One such brave and skilled man acting as a shill for a political nominee cannot tarnish the broader picture, or even his own service, but it would be positive if he hadn't been used in this way. He could have written to the editor of his paper, of national papers, news magazines, etc. This soldier has involved himself directly in a national political campaign on behalf of one candidate, taking a position contrary to the interests of those serving now in Iraq. That is dishonorable.

0 comments
 

The Sunday RSN is LIVE


Today's Rightsided Newsletter, the review of the Sunday shows, has been sent to the sundry global Inboxes and is also now LIVE on the RSN web site: HERE.

The tripod page will give you an annoying "side pane," which is of no value whatsoever to our purposes, so close it.

This week, Russert talks to KOFI™, and General Myers asserts that the Iraqi Republican Guard general will not be the man running the Fallujah Brigade for the Iraqis, only to be seemingly contradicted by Wolfgang Blitzer and CPA spokesman Don Senor.

There's other good stuff in there, and I'll put some additional material in here, such as Steph's interview with the Democrat National Guardsman who delivered the Democrat response to the President's Weekly Radio Address.
0 comments
 

Heard on CNN's Late Edition


Host Blitzer said: "The war in Iraq. Does George Bush or John Kerry have it right? We'll talk to former Presidential candidate and possible vice presidential nominee John Edwards."

Gee.

Edwards might reply: "You know, Wolf, right now, there are essentially two Iraqs..."

0 comments
 

Saleh "will not be the head"


General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was all over the talk shows this morning. He said: "This has been reported very badly over the last several days."

Saleh, the former Saddam Republic Guard general named by the press as the new commander of the Iraqi forces in Fallujah. It's not him, according to Myers. In fact, Sanchez and the boyz in Baghdad are said to be looking at another general.

There are several names floating, Saleh's was one of them, but Myers doesn't think Saleh will be the final choice. They all must be vetted, he said.

0 comments
 

The Sunday Morning Talk Shows



KEY:
MTP: NBC’s Meet the Press with Tim Russert
FNS: FOX’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace
FTN: CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer
TW: ABC’s This Week with former Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos
LE: CNN’s Late Edition with Wolfgang Blitzer

And that's the KEY I use for my Sunday review and analysis of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, mercifully inimitable, for the free Rightsided Newsletter. If you are interested, please visit our web site or send a blank e-mail to rsn-subscribe [AT] tripod.com.


On MTP, host Russert will walk to UN General Secretary [sic, mine] Kofi Annan, hopefully grilling the man as he would an American politician about OIL 4 FOOD. What did he know and when did he know it? How much money did he personally receive?

Russert also talks to Joe Wilson, who is beginning his book tour. His initial claim-to-fame -- talking about Yellow Cake -- have proven inconsequential, and he's surviving in the spotlight on his wife's real name, Valerie Plame.


On FNS, host Wallace will talk to Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell,,, and the one and only Bob Dole, who is evidently still alive. It's still strange to think of the former majority leader as a Senate husband.


On FTN, Schieffer's going military. He'll talk to the Top Gun, Representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Richard Myers, and Senator Max Cleland, who will probably talk about patriotism. He's Kerry's point man on that.


On TW, Steph will talk to John McCain, Arlen Specter, and Howard Dean. "Hey Moe! Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!"


On LE, Blitzer will talk to John Edwards then do a dual discussion with Nebraska's Chuck Hegel and Michigan's Carl Levin. I do not know what productive can come of that.


I've been doing this for five years. There has to be a better way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Steven Taylor's Toast-O-Meter is back at his PoliBlog, and he promises a "tweaked format." Check it out here.
0 comments

5/01/2004

 

The Times digs Koppel


Of course, I did not protest Ted Koppel's recitation of the war dead. It rang, to me, gimmicky, and attempt to lure otherwise serious people into watching his infotainment program. To that extent, I thought it a cheap use of the names of those fallen.

My gripe was with McCain using his position as chairman of the Senate committee which oversees the FCC to threaten Sinclair Broadcast Group, the company that owns eight ABC affiliates and opted not to show Koppel's program.

The NYTimes' Allessandra Stanley wrote a bit of fawning prose about the Koppel program. And to her, it was a protest:
When "Nightline" could not obtain a portrait, the show ran a Department of Defense photograph of flag-covered coffins at Dover Air Force Base, one of many such images that were published over the objections of the Bush administration.
But again, she can write whatever she wants in her The TV Watch column. (This one is dated Sunday.)

But I have no patience for ditzy reporters who scribble on things about which they know nothing. It would have been easy to fact check this.

She writes of some conservatives who viewed Koppel's game as a protest.
Not all conservatives agreed. "Your decision to deny your viewers an opportunity to be reminded of war's terrible costs, in all their heartbreaking detail, is a gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces," Senator John McCain wrote in a letter to the chief executive of Sinclair that was published Friday. "It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic."
McCain is not a conservative.

0 comments
 

Saddam's boyz are back in town?


While Iraqi's cheered, according to Canada's CBC, the United States military turned over operations in Fallujah to Saddam's Major-General Jassim Mohammed Saleh. a commander of the erstwhile "elite" Republican Card under the now-imprisoned former dictator.

Pierre Legrand at The Pink Flamingo Bar and Grill has several posts criticizing the move; to wit:
Too bad the Democrats suck so hard because if they didnt this would be the perfect opportunity to nail President Bush to the wall for going wobbly. We have the guys causing all the trouble bottled up in a city the marines are ready to take them down and we BACK DOWN! What sort of bloody bullshit is THAT???? This is pitiful and what we are seeing signals the deathknell of the US chances for victory. Whats next we replace Bremer with Saddam?
That may note be fair. US Marine Commander General James Conway acknowledges that Saleh and his officers have not yet been fully vetted.

Saddam's not coming back. Most people who served under Saddam were making a living, probably not engaged in torture and genocide. Saleh did not make the deck of cards, and it is likely that he was not on any pre- or post-war arrest lists.

I think this had to be done, to put an Iraqi face on the Fallujah security situation. It is the start of what could be a greater trend of allowing the Iraqis to secure themselves for the first time ever.

Let us hop Saleh is the right man for the job.

0 comments
 

Gen. Abizaid names names


Army General John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, urged other countries to step in with the policing of Iraq:
"I do favor the inclusion of more international troops, especially more Muslim troops," Abizaid told reporters via teleconference from his base in Doha, Qatar. "For example, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia -- they all have very capable and very professional forces that could be added to the stability equation once we move into this new level of political future that develops after negotiations in the U.N., or wherever they may take place."
Pak has said that they would send troops if the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) agreed to a resolution. (Pakistan is the president of the UNSC this month.)

Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero had vowed to remove his troops by June 30 if there were no UNSC resolution authorizing the use of troops, but he changed his mind and pulled them out beforehand. He did not wait for the UNSC to act, drawing a speech of stinging rebuke at the National Assembly from Mariano Rajoy, head of the opposition Popular Party on Tuesday. In the speech, which recorded by C-SPAN, Rajoy accused Zapatero of not playing well with others, dashing international coalitions, ignoring the United Nations, and harming Spain's reputation for trustworthiness. (Note that those are precisely the things which the opposition Democrats have said, erroneously, of President Bush.)

Fortunately, Abizaid did not use JF Kerry's tactic to entice other nations into helping secure Iraq. Several weeks ago, the Democrat candidate said that soldiers from other nations should be dying instead of U.S. soldiers. While none of us would disagree with that on principle, it is just plain stupid diplomacy.

0 comments
 

Late Derby Prediction



Read the Footnotes...

(...and wait for the news in the history books.)
0 comments
 

The PRC reports on prison atrocities


Xinhaunet.com, the web site of the PRC's news agency Xinhua, has finally reported on the treatment of Iraq prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad between last October and December. It seems they got ahold of an article in the May 10 New Yorker which printed what it found in an internal U.S. Army report.

It happens every day in the PRC's prisons and Laogai. The United States military is stopping it and punishing, not rewarding, its perpetrators.

0 comments
 

Assaulting Justice Souter


Last night at 9p, jogger/Justice David Souter was jogging near the Potomac River waterfront in southwest Washington when someone clocked him. He was treated and released in a DC hospital, and the motive is unknown.

So remember, don't take your Constitutional arguments concerning Roe v. Wade or campaign finance into your own hands…

0 comments
 

Touching the Screen


Touch the screen and vote. There is no paper trail thus no means to recount, and California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley -- a Democrat -- has banned it in four California counties, and is now calling for an investigation into Texas-based Diebold Election systems, which company makes the machines.

On any given time, at any given hour, I can walk into a Sheetz convenience store and order an M.T.O. To do this, I walk up to a screen and touch it for various options. I want a cold sandwhich , Italian hoagie ; check lettuce, pickles, cucumbers, green peppers ; provolone , No fries , no drink . I pay for it and one of the Sheetz staff makes the sandwich sets it on the counter. They're inexpensive and Made To Order (M.T.O.), utilizing touch screen technology.

I should have ordered tomatoes and voted for Dennis. Could I have written in dead fish for my hoagie? Not .

0 comments
 

Space Shuttles to Again Fly


NASA tells us that the Space Shuttles -- with their technology from the 1960s and '70s -- will be pasted back together in time to resume flights by Spring of 2005.

Privatize the space industry. No self-respecting company trying to earn a bottom line would tolerate this nonsense. The Board of Directors wouldn't allow it, and the CEO would hopefully be embarrassed to bother. The stockholders would have bailed ages ago, thus the incentive to put the best, safest program together. Competition would keep it cutting edge.

0 comments
 

Mission Accomplished


Good morning. One year ago today, the President landed aboard the U.S.S. Lincoln off the coast of California, gave a congratulatory speech to the soldiers who had just helped topple Saddam Hussein, and mentioned the work yet to be done. Since then, the media have gone to laughable lengths to portray that occasion, that speech, as a: "We're all done in Iraq, safe here" statement by a reckless President. For the longest time, they would not concede that the President did not say that the war was over; rather, he said that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended." That's because it looked as if major combat operations had ended, but the mission in Iraq had not yet been accomplished. So the press stressed the latter.

Troops are once again seeing what could be termed "Major Combat," especially in and around Fallujah and Najaf. The left has now rolled out the "major combat operations" line in his speech, hitherto untouched.

Let me be clear, when the President spoke, major combat operations had ended. The crew aboard the U.S.S. Lincoln, and all those who served in the initial phase of the war, had accomplished their mission of liberating Iraq.

The President has been faulted for not foreseeing or preparing for what has happened in Iraq since. Those faulting him do not understand sociology, psychology, politics, or -- most importantly -- war. There is no way to plan human history before it is ready for the history books. Or even the newspapers.

In his Foundation series, author Isaac Asimov developed a fanciful science which could predict sweeping events of human actions; he called it "Psychohistory." Even in the controlled and planned universe of Asimov's creation, psychohistory was not an exact science. Humans cannot accurately predict the actions of other humans; to one extent or the other, we are all complex, sophisticated individual entities who band in groups, our cohesion to the purposes of which vary.

Is this a case of the press believing that the powerful United States should be able to map the actions of the heathenish Iraqis? Or do they merely fault the Administration for not having planned for the various possibilities?

Preparing for situations does not necessarily prevent them. A suddenly freed people is going to revert to the principles they have know, not to those of the liberators, They adapt the Saddam culture to other circumstances, thus you have the barbarity of the murders of the contractors in Najaf. The mindset has to be changed, and that takes time, which varies from individual to individual, group to group.

This mission is being accomplished.

0 comments

4/30/2004

 

Koppel and the war dead


TacJammer tells Ted Koppel what he thinks -- "BITE ME" -- and lists the names Ted should have listed: those who were slaughtered on 9-11.

They have been listed on TV, at least in part, but that was done long after there were people still dying on September 11. Our troops are still in danger in Iraq.

0 comments
 

Sharpton invited to speak at the DNC


Courtesy of Erick Erickson at Confessions of a Political Junkie -- who has been dreaming that this would be so -- I've learned the great news that candidate JF Kerry has told BET News that the Reverend Al Sharpton is invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention in Boston this July. [BET press release]
On Rev. Al Sharpton as a Speaker at the DNC ...

Kerry: "I hope so. Sure ... That's my call ... If he wants to do it, he can do it ... Let me just say to you ... if he wants to do it, I'd like him to do it. I think he'd do a terrific job. I think he'll add something ... there's no plea necessary. It's my invitation."

On Rev. Sharpton's Impact on the Presidential Campaign Season ...

Kerry: " ... He certainly earned the right to be part of this process, and I think he can be very, very helpful in motivating people, in helping to register people."
And, by the way, Howard Dean fancies himself the next Oprah.
0 comments
 

New Column on the RSN site


The latest column by Jan Ireland, Score Pat Tillman American Hero, Rene Gonzalez Cowardly America Hater, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
Words so often reveal more than the writer intends, and truth can find its way out of the craftiest planted propaganda.

Puerto Rico and the University of Massachusetts were shamed yesterday when their lamentable son Rene Gonzalez sought to wound America as it grieves for football great turned elite Army Ranger Pat Tillman.

Racism and envy were part of the reason Gonzalez called Tillman a "pendejo" (idiot) and a "Rambo" soldier who deserved to die. But the biggest reason of all was the personal cowardice of America hater Rene Gonzalez. [MORE]

0 comments
 

Al Gore and the Young American


Al Gore and other investors purchased Newsworld International from Vivendi Universal, the struggling French media giant, and plans to turn it into a public affairs and entertainment outlet for the 18-34 demographic.

Al Gore says he's not targeting the nation's most popular cable news network, the FOX News Channel, despite rumors to the contrary.
"This is not going to be a liberal network, or a Democratic network in any way, shape, or form,'' the former vice president said.
Is there a wink we're missing?

There are a few that claim that while the FOX News Channel claims to be "fair and balanced," they wink when the say it. It's not true, the claim goes.

Gore no doubt buys into this sloppy line of thinking, so he might be thinking along the lines of: "Well, if Murdoch and Ailes can claim to be fair and balanced, so can the Al Gore News Network!" (NOTE: I invented the name for the new network; what he actually calls it is his business.)

After watching Gore on the stump for the past several years, I cannot imagine the man reserving his fiery vitriol from certain aspects of his life. Unless he is a brilliant actor and genius compartimentalizer, which would make his political life an ingenious fraud.

0 comments
 

John McCain and Ted Koppel


Ted Koppel has decided to use his ABC new infotainment show Nightline to recite the names of the 532+ K.I.A. in the Iraq war and reconstruction effort. Sinclair broadcasting, which eight ABC stations, is not going to air it. From the Sinclair web site:
The ABC Television Network announced on Tuesday that the Friday, April 30 edition of "Nightline" will consist entirely of Ted Koppel reading aloud the names of U.S. servicemen and women killed in action in Iraq. Despite the denials by a spokeswoman for the show, the action appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq. [emphasis in orig]

[ . . . [
We understand that our decision in this matter may be questioned by some. Before you judge our decision, however, we would ask that you first question Mr. Koppel as to why he chose to read the names of 523 troops killed in combat in Iraq, rather than the names of the thousands of private citizens killed in terrorist attacks since and including the events of September 11, 2001. In his answer, we believe you will find the real motivation behind his action scheduled for this Friday. Unfortunately, we may never know for sure because Mr. Koppel has refused repeated requests from Sinclair's News Central news organization to comment on this Friday's program.
Fair enough. Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) -- who chairs the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which oversees the FCC, which controls Sinclair's ability to broadcast -- sent a letter to Sinclair Chairman and CEO David Smith, saying, in part:
There is no valid reason for Sinclair to shirk its responsibility in what I assume is a very misguided attempt to prevent your viewers from completely appreciating the extraordinary sacrifices made on their behalf by Americans serving in Iraq. War is an awful, but sometimes necessary business. Your decision to deny your viewers an opportunity to be reminded of war’s terrible costs, in all their heartbreaking detail, is a gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium it most certainly deserves.
Smith replied, in part:
It is "Nightline's" failure to present the entire story, however, to which Sinclair objects. "Nightline" is not reporting news; it is doing nothing more than making a political statement. In simply reading the names of our fallen heroes, this program has adopted a strategy employed by numerous anti-war demonstrators who wish to focus attention solely on the cost of war. In fact, lest there be any doubt about "Nightline's" motivation, both Mr. Koppel and "Nightline's" executive producer have acknowledged that tonight's episode was influenced by the Life Magazine article listing the names of dead soldiers in Vietnam, which article was widely credited with furthering the opposition to the Vietnam war and with creating a backlash of public opinion against the members of the U.S. military who had proudly served in that conflict

In closing, I would like to quote for you the words of Captain Kate Blaise of the U.S. Military. Captain Blaise served in Iraq as a member of the 101st Airborne Division and suffered the loss of her husband Mike who was killed while also serving in Iraq. In commenting on exactly the type of practice which "Nightline" intends to employ, Captain Blaise had this to say:

"I was watching the news, watching this anti-war demonstration and they were reading off names of soldiers who had fallen in Iraq and they read off my husband's name. That made me very angry because he very strongly believed in what he was doing and they were using his name for a purpose that he would not have approved of."
I've heard the theory that McCain enjoys tweaking the President, a notion which he dismisses, and this seems to be evidence of that. Sinclair owns no stations in Arizona, so McCain should not have interfered in a business decision by Sinclair Broadcasting. That a chairman of the committee overseeing the FCC would so such a thing is disgusting and reprehensible. The government is neither empowered nor does it belong anywhere near such things. The rest of this matter is trivial.

Like Koppel's motivation. He might be protesting the war by taking the ridiculous step of listing the dead before the action is finished. He might also be trying to gather attention for his infotainment show. (I haven't seen his ratings.) Either way, he is dishonoring the dead. His show began as a nice little thing with news of our hostages in Iran in 1980. I do not know why he is still on the air.

Sinclair is a private company.

People, including Koppel, have a right to protest the war, even to dishonor the dead. I have a right to note what they are doing. Sinclair has a right not to air his stunt. John McCain has no right or power to use his elected position to bully a private corporation.
0 comments
 

The French: "Canadians Hate Bush"


This stuff from the French wire AFP is always stimulating.

A new Ipsos-Reid survey conducted for the CTV , the remnants of the government-owned Canadian television system, and the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper had concluded that 83-percent of Canadians responded in agreement to a statement that President Bush "is not necessarily a friend of Canada and doesn't really know anything when it comes to Canadian issues." The French translated the Canadian reaction to that statement as: "[m]ore than eight in 10 Canadians harbour [sic] a strong dislike for President George W. Bush." It cannot be thusly translated, but the French are getting sloppy with the strong dislike they harbor.

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin is meeting with President Bush as I type, trying to undo the damage do to the U.S.-Canada relationship by former Canadian PM Jean Chretient. To be certain, Martin opposed the war; the difference is that he does not fear or hate the United States.

And that's my honest analysis.

0 comments
 

Joe Wilson's Book


Ambassador Joe Wilson's novel, The Politics of Truth: A Diplomat's memoir, was due out today. The NYTimes the damned thing today. You can read that by clicking on the cover, here:



He promised that he would disclose the name of the person in the White House who leaked his CIA operative wife's name, Valerie Plame, to columnist Robert Novak and according to the AP, he names three of them: Cheney Chief of Staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the NSC's Elliott Abrams, and Karl Rove:
"The workup on me that turned up the information on Valerie was shared with Karl Rove, who then circulated it in administration and neoconservative circles," Wilson writes.
White House Press Secretary Scott McLellan had previously ruled all three men out as possible sources.

Wilson's motivation? Book sales, of course, but he wants to "frog-march" the Bush Administration out of the White House. He runs with Rand Beers and Dick Clarke, and has spoken at MoveOn.org events. He's one of the mini-assassins of the organized ABB crowd.

We'll find out soon enough if it contains anything new or interesting.

0 comments
 

Those Pictures of prisoner humilation


On Wednesday night, CBSNews.com, on one of the infotainment shows (60 Minutes II, aired photographs of Iraq prisoners being put in goofy poses by their US military guards at the Abu Ghraib prison. As a CBSNews.com story relates, former CIA Bureau Chief Bob Baer told Dan Rather
"I visited Abu Ghraib a couple of days after it was liberated. It was the most awful sight I've ever seen. I said, ‘If there's ever a reason to get rid of Saddam Hussein, it's because of Abu Ghraib,'” says Baer. “There were bodies that were eaten by dogs, torture. You know, electrodes coming out of the walls. It was an awful place."
Now prisoners are made to assume goofy and humiliating poses.

At the White House, from Reuters:
"We cannot tolerate it and the military is taking strong action against the individuals responsible for these despicable acts," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
According to the Associated Press, Army Reserve Staff Sergeant Chip Frederick, one of those implicated in the humiliation, told his family in an e-mail that "[w]e've had a very high rate with our styles of getting them to break; they usually end up breaking within hours." Barely authorized psychological warfare?

Britain's lefty broadsheet Guardian Unlimited Friday complains about the lack of coverage this has received but argued that the photographs "could prove a tipping point in the war in Iraq."

Just like the Sixteen Words, Dick Clarke's book tour testimony, and Valerie Plame-gate could destroy the President. Yeah.

We have some overly enthusiastic soldiers who conducted themselves in a way contrary to the code observed by U.S. servicemen. Punish them and avoid hyperbole. It may be reprehensible, but it is most certainly not barbaric.

0 comments
 

New column on RSN site


The latest column by Dennis Campbell, Candidate Reaffirms his Support of Slavery, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter site:
WASHINGTON - We caught up with Sen. John Kerry as he prepared to debate fellow Democrat Stephen Douglas for the right to challenge likely Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 presidential election.

We wanted to clarify Sen. Kerry's position on slavery, the most divisive issue in American politics. Republicans will campaign on a strong anti-slavery platform, while Democrats are equally staunch in their support of the "peculiar institution."

Yesterday at a noontime rally, Sen. Kerry defended the rights of slaveholders in the face of
mounting criticism from Christian clergy, who call slavery immoral and an affront to Christianity. [MORE]
A little bar will open to the left of your screen when you visit the page with the column. Close it. It's harmless but useless, someone's "bright idea."

0 comments
 

Ronald Reagan U.


The school will be 200 miles northeast of Denver, but Nancy's nixed the name. It's not their name to use, and his name remains private for such purposes for as long as the President or Mrs. Reagan lives.

0 comments
 

Air Support


Good Morning! Last night, a good friend stationed with us USAF at the Ali Al Salam Air Base wrote me (on his distribution list) apologizing for a virus he might have inadvertently passed around:
"Go figure, we spend zillions of dollars and have Anti Virus software running all the time but this crap slips through.
I tried to be reassuring:
Think of it this way. For all the trouble which can be caused by computer viruses and Iraqi insurgents, they don't get air support. - Mark
It's true.
0 comments

4/29/2004

 

To win (reelection), the Prez has to lose (Iraq)


That's an interesting assertion made by Daniel W. Drezner, whom we might know from his exactly eponymous weblog, in Thursday's TNR.com.

The operative graph [link]:
Ordinarily, presidents are rewarded for doing their jobs well. In Bush's case, however, quiet in Iraq would allow Americans to focus on their pocketbooks. While the economy--and Bush's approval numbers on the issue--have rebounded from lows, the president remains far weaker on domestic issues than on international affairs. Democrats can still claim that Bush is the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a decline in the number of jobs. The latest Gallup poll shows a 54 percent disapproval rating on Bush's handling of the economy. Bush's best hope for reelection is for the electorate to focus on his leadership abilities--and one way for that to happen is for there to be trouble in Iraq.
I'm afraid not, though it does make sense. If he is going by the worn tradition that Republicans poll worse than Dems on the economy, that is a part of the conventional wisdom which he earlier suggests might not be operative this cycle.

If the economy continues to rally, his concomitant numbers will rise. As far as the Dems pointing to the total job loss for the entire administration -- "Herbert Hoover, maaaan" -- that argument is already flat on its face. Kerry harps, Pelosi spits, but with an job creation like the nation is currently experiences, and 9-11 and the bursting of Clinton's bubble on which to blame the previous losses, the President will be fine.

The argument that the President needs things to go poorly in Iraq so that he can demonstrate his leadership ability is also, I think, faulty. Remember, if things do go poorly in Iraq, candidate JF Kerry and his allies can more forcefully use the dread Q-Word: QUAGMIRE. They can sing the Vietnam song, and few voters are going to wait for the nuance.

If the President can successfully give Iraq to the Iraqis and the economy says strong, he has the election in the bag. (He may anyway, should the Democrats go through with nominating JF Kerry.) The President can then score his leadership points through the war on terror and maybe -- this one is sweet, in a perverse way -- forming some global alliances to wave in JF Kerry's face.

Life ain't so bad. We don't have to lose an arm to win.

0 comments
 

New Column on RSN site


The latest column by Justin Darr, Liberals are Unpatriotic, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
There they go again. Another Liberal has decided that loud must somehow equal right. This time Hillary Clinton has decided to join the ranks of Al Gore and Howard Dean by screaming herself into a hysterical frenzy at a pro-abortion rally. Other than making America finally understand why Bill looked outside his marriage for companionship, Hillary's tirade about how she is tired of Republicans calling Liberals "unpatriotic" makes no sense. No Republican has called the Democrats unpatriotic. They have questioned the Liberals dedication to national defense, their commitment to the War on Terror, and the motivations for their Socialist policies, but not their patriotism. Liberals may want to blame the Republicans for their public perception of Anti-Americanism, but the Democrats actually are having a problem with common sense. [MORE]


0 comments
 

The Testimony of the President


To be fair, the 9-11 Commission appeared behind the President and Vice President this morning, rather than them appearing before the commission. In the Oval Office, with all that the power the room implies, the commissioners had a "conversation" with the President.

From his remarks afterward:
I want to thank the Chairman and Vice-Chairman for bringing the commission here and giving us a chance to share views on different subjects. And they had a lot of good questions. I'm glad I did it. I'm glad I took the time. This is an important commission, and it's important that they ask the questions they ask so that they can help make recommendations necessary to better protect our homeland. It was -- I enjoyed it.
Do not forget that just a month ago, the press had the Dick Clarke book tour appearance crushing is chances at reelection. That did not work out, so they determined that Condoleezza Rice's testimony would make or break his reelection chances.

Evidently the President answered most of the questions and did so authoritatively. The perception pretty much all around is that it went well, as the opposition has resorted to its fall-back position of continuing to question why the President and VP were questioned together. (I suspect that EJ Dionne will have some other sort of criticism and sniping. I have to credit him with a superior imagination.)

What I hope can happen now, and it can, is that the commission put this circus which began with the public hearings and the Dick Clarke book tour behind them. They took a lot of substantial testimony before that circus, and some afterwards. If they can concentrate on that and eliminate Jamie Gorelick's fingerprints as much as is possible, this could be productive.

0 comments
 

New Poll (Manet still has brush in hand)


From VOA:
The New York Times-CBS News poll found that 47 percent of those surveyed believe the United States did the right thing in invading Iraq, down from 58 percent in March and 63 percent in December.
The same poll has his general approval rating down and the one for his handling of the war in Iraq down as well.

Take the poll when we've finished.

No one took a survey of art lovers to rate Edouard Manet halfway through The Execution of Maxmillion. Wait 'til Saddam's work is undone.

0 comments
 

New Column on RSN site


The new column by Isaiah Z. Sterrett, No Doubt About It: Muslims Can Handle Freedom, is live on the RSN web site:
LAST WEEK I wrote a column in which I argued that liberals have started addressing conservatives as neoconservatives because the word conservativewithout the divisive prefix of neono longer frightens the American public. By labeling the Bush Administration neoconservative, rather than merely conservative, liberals are trying to undo all of the positive steps conservatives have taken to improve our image. [MORE]


0 comments
 

Patterns of Global Terrorism Report


In their annual report, the State Department reported that the last year in which there were fewer terrorists incidents than in 2003 was 1969, some twenty years before the fall of the Soviet Union facilitated the rise of modern terrorism.
[Top State Department counterterrorism official, Cofer] Black also said al-Qaida "is no longer the organization it once was. ... Most of the group's senior leadership is dead or in custody, its membership on the run and its capabilities sharply degraded." He said more 3,400 al-Qaida suspects have been detained worldwide.
The war on global terrorism is being won, and brought together by President Bush using the good will after September 11, the world is winning it.

0 comments
 

Testifying in Private


The French wire AFP reports today:
The president, who initially fiercely opposed the commission's creation, grudgingly agreed to the session on condition he not be sworn to tell the truth, that Cheney accompany him, and that there be no transcript or recording.
That's the French, who report:
But a poll published Thursday showed Bush's approval ratings in a slump, his race with Kerry a dead heat, and highlighted growing doubts about his handling of the war in Iraq.

And former counter-terrorism aides have publicly called into question Bush's response to the growing threat from Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network after he took office in January 2001.
That's French analysis, and it's so misguided that it is almost stunning. But it's what the French people are led to believe, and the mullahs are saying similar things to their charges in the mideast.

Back to the testimony. Fred Barnes stated earlier this week that the President should not testify at all, that the panel was too discredited. I think the President's testimony will give the panel some of the credibility it has lost since it kicked of the Dick Clarke Book Tour last month. The circus we saw was only a small portion of the work they did, so if they could put that aside and excise, to the extent possible, Jamie Gorelick's participation from the final report, they could offer something potentially valuable.

One should not throw the baby out with the bathwater, even if such bathwater is particularly putrid. I hope the President and Mr. Cheney can allow them to get serious again.

0 comments
 

Election Law Broken in South Dakota Senate Race


Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-South Dakota) ran a phone ad campaigning pointing fingers and blaming Republican challenger John Thune for starting the negative campaigning.

Daschle did not include a message stating that he approved of the message, as required by federal election law to distinguish for the public between soft and hard money advertising.

Democrats said oops, while Republican called it blatant hypocrisy with Daschle's initial pledge to run a positive campaign:
"Their hypocrisy is unbelievable," said Thune's campaign manager, Dick Wadhams. "It's either blatant disregard for the law or incompetence."
How stupid is Daschle's campaign? Every official political ad, seemingly but Daschle's, has contained the disclaimer.

The ads were pulled.

0 comments
 

The state of the nation is…


John Kerry just finished spreading his message of malaise to enraptured audiences in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan, talking not of the current job situation, but of the jobs lost since the burst of the Clinton bubble, especially those in manufacturing.

President Bush heads to Michigan and Ohio next week to talk about the current condition of the economy.

The Democrat is appealing to defeat, while the Republican is reflecting victory.

Meanwhile, the economy grew 4.2% between January and March, as businesses invested money in their infrastructures. Growth was 4.1% in the fourth quarter of 2003, and this is the first time we have had three straight quarters with 4%+ growth in a decade.

But Kerry reports that we are miserable, and he has an half-baked index to "prove" it.

0 comments
 

Gore gives $4m to the DNC


Like most Democrats, Al Gore is not excited about his party's presidential candidate, JF Kerry.
"I didn't support John Kerry. President Carter didn't support John Kerry. President Clinton didn't support John Kerry," Gore said. "John Kerry earned the nomination of this party. He won it the hard way."
He claims to have $6.5-million left from his failed 2000 Presidential run. Of that money, he's giving $1-million each to the DCCC and the DSCC, the party committees which work on winning House and Senate seats respectively.

He's giving $4-million, he says, to the Democratic National Committee in order to help Kerry's Presidential effort, simply because the candidate is not President Bush. DNC spending this year is restricted by the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, so it will not help Kerry as much as the numbers claim.

No word as to whether he gave the maximum $2,000 to Kerry's campaign machine. He could also have paid his subordinates, if such he has, to donate $2,000, thus skirting the law and increasing the assistance to Kerry.

0 comments

4/28/2004

 

Infiltration


Super-secret Dem bratty protestors are seeking to infiltrate the ranks of volunteers for this Summer's Republican National Convention in NYC.
"I think they don't understand either just how much of New York City is not prepared to welcome them," said Amanda Hickman, who described herself as a community gardener from Brooklyn. "I don't think that has clicked."
Some aging kid, age 37, has a web site designed to get troublemakers to infiltrate both the RNC and the Democratic National Convention in Boston. The Boston boys are seen as virtually immune, as they already have their volunteers.

0 comments
 

PA Redistricting Plan Stands


We ALMOST got the courts out of the legislative function of redistricting.

After the 2000 census, the Pennsylvania legislature redrew the maps of Congressional districts to reflect the loss of two seats. The Republicans controlled both chambers of the legislature, so the maps were redrawn to reflect the will of the people through their representatives.

That's my Republican way of saying that they redrew the districts to favor the GOP. The Democrats complained that Pennsylvania voter registration is about evenly split between the two parties so the redistricting should have reflected that.

The Supreme court decided 5-4 in the case of Vieth v. Jubelirer that Commonwealth Senate Pro Tem Bob Jubelirer get his way and the plan stands.

Justice Antonin Scalia -- writing for Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas -- upheld the Pennsylvania redistricting map and wanted to overturn the Court's 1986 redistricting case of Davis v. Bandemer, 478 US 109 (1986), which allowed the courts to meddle in legislative redistricting. (Rehnquist and O'Conner had dissented in that case.)

The view had only four votes, but Justice Anthony Kennedy sided with them to allow the Pennsylvania redistricting to stand but to keep Davis v. Bendemer.

The ACLU, arguing against the plan, maintained that the Constitution does not allow for such plans which might let a minority of voters to control a majority of Congressional seats. The plan, of course, does not such thing, and the Constitution makes no mention of political parties.

Last week, the SC declined to hear an appeal of Texas' redistricting plan.

0 comments
 

McDermott's Pledge


Representative Jim McDermott (R-Washington) was seventeen when President Eisenhower signed the bill into law adding the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954. He said he had forgotten and gone back to saying the pledge as he did "in the 6th grade" when explaining why he recited the Pledge for the House of Representative, Tuesday, without those words. But roll the tape, McDermott paused briefly while other members said "under God," then resumed "with liberty."

Representative Jeff Sessions is vocally chastising McDermott, who gained the appellation "Jihad Jim" when visiting Baghdad in late 2002. Last December, he said that the capture of Saddam Hussein was politically timed.

It seems to me that the old man is a tad mean-spirited and a bit disconnected with reality. There are people in most groups the size of Congress who cause trouble merely to watch the effects.

He should not lie about his motivation.

0 comments
 

WANTED: People who aren't there


I thought it would be nice to Al Jazeera, public access for terrorists.

Something called the Islamic Resistance in Iraq has offered a $15-million reward each for the capture of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, US Commander in Iraq, Lieutenant-General Ricardo Sanchez, and his spokesman, Brigadier General Mark Kimmit.

They're distributing leaflets in Fallujah, and some of the deadenders are no doubt looking for Rummy behind the mosques.

0 comments
 

Clinton's Vial of Powder


Someone not identified sent a letter and a vial of powder to former President Bill Clinton's in Harlem. It was not anthrax.

No comment from this end.

0 comments
 

Hot Judicial Nomination


The President is not backing down to Schumer or to any of the other liberal Senators on the Judiciary Committee. The President has nominated Brett Kavanaugh to sit on the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

Brett Kavanaugh is the White House attorney who helps select the President's judicial nominees, somr of whom were labeled right wing ideologues, dead on arrival. Ken Kavanaugh was one if Ken Starr's lead Whitewater attorney.
Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah and the committee chairman, extolled Mr. Kavanaugh as a graduate of Yale Law School and a law clerk to three judges. Mr. Hatch also said the American Bar Association had rated Mr. Kavanaugh "well qualified" for the judicial post, on the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Mr. Hatch said it was wrong of opponents to portray Mr. Kavanaugh as a right-wing ideologue. He has devoted a majority of his career to public service, not ideological causes, Mr. Hatch said.
If Kavanaugh's nomination tracks like the President's past "controversial" nominees, there's an outside chance that he might not get his hearing until next year. Arlen Specter will be chairman of Judiciary.

0 comments
 

Thursday's Joint Appearance


This little AP piece says it all:
White House -- President Bush says Thursday's appearance before the 9-11 commission will be a "good opportunity" to help in the panel's work. He says he looks forward to what he terms "the discussion."

Bush will not be under oath, and there'll be no recording or transcript, when he and Vice President Cheney are questioned together behind closed doors at the White House.

Bush says he expects the panel to ask about "what happened leading up to" 9-11 and administration anti-terror efforts in general.

Questioned by reporters as he met with Sweden's prime minister, the president side-stepped a question about the lack of a transcript. And he wouldn't say why the White House insisted he appear jointly with Cheney.
The 9-11 Commission was empanelled, according to their web site to "prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks." Despite the three rings added for the circus when the Dick Clarke book tour kicked off last month, this is not an investigation of wrongdoing. For the President to participate, it should not be a game of political gotcha. This is the President of the United States of America, and despite the antics of Administrations left behind, the job is not that of a male lead in a dark comedy film.

He and the Vice President will be there to describe what happened and what is being done to prevent future attacks. If this effort is to be successful, we can't have we can't have pests like EJ Dionne and David Corn dealing faux-indignant to covert what was intended to be a serious effort into a slapstick attempt to shoot substance into flailing campaign.

0 comments
 

UN Resolution on WMD


I am linking to the story from the French wire AFP to prove a broader point.
The United States could get a major victory at the UN Security Council on a new resolution aimed at keeping weapons of mass destruction (WMD) out of the hands of terrorists.
I can write "Working with the international community, President Bush is asking for approval…" What else is new? Our President has always shown internationalists tendencies, short of surrendering sovereignty, even in the face of obstruction.

The French do not report that Great Britain is a co-sponsor of the legislation.

Pakistan, an erstwhile (?) purveyor of nuclear tech through citizen A.Q. Khan, has expressed its concerns that one of the five permanent members of the UNSC could us its permanent veto to exempt itself from the resolution.

From the AFP:
But the measure would still pass with 14 votes in favour on the 15-nation council, even if Pakistan abstains. The United States has called for a vote this week, before Pakistan takes over the Security Council presidency in May.

Hoping to get Islamabad's support, the United States revised language to make the measure non-retroactive so that Pakistan would not be held accountable for the spread of the technology by its nuclear mastermind A.Q. Khan.
In a way, this is a positive sign. President Bush took a necessary risk when he brought Pakistan into the world community after 9-11, and it is good to see them calculating their interests and behaving responsibly. After all, the United States would not sign off on a resolution proscribing the sale of military secrets to the People's Republic of China if it were not non-retroactive so that we would not be held accountable for the facilitation of a sale of such secrets by President Clinton.

0 comments
 

On Wictory Wednesday


It has been established that JF Kerry threw/didn't thrown his/someone else's medals/ribbons over a fence/onto some stairs to protest the Vietnam War/display his love of country. But he'd sooner suddenly bring up the President's already-documented service in the Alabama National Guard.

… tick, tick, tick, tick…

Click RIGHT HERE to be directed to the page where you can become a Bush Team Leader, an official part of the campaign. You can also join by donating at the campaign's SECURE SERVER.

This effort is undersigned by WW founder PoliBundit and the entire cast of Wictory Wednesday bloggers (page a bit to item, to #3).

Let's see this through.

0 comments
 

The Mod Squad


Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter has fended off a Republican primary challenge from the "Republican wing of the Republican Party," conservative Representative Pat Toomey. Specter had led the race all evening by about a 52% - 48% margin, but the gap narrowed to 51% - 49% by morning.

Specter is a member of the Senate GOP Mod Squad, so called because of their self-proclaimed MODeration, with Maine Republicans Susie Collins and Olympia Snowe, Ohio Senator George Voinovich, and Rhode Island Senator Linc Chafee. (Vermont's Jim Jeffords was a premier Mod Squadder until he quit the party for a big deal and subsequent anonymity in the Summer of 2001.)

Specter faces Democrat Representative Joe Hoeffel, who makes Philadelphia Representative Chaka Fattah look like a rabid right winger in the Pennsylvania Dem delegation. There should be no problem there, and hopefully the Doomsday scenarios of Specter at Judiciary will prove false.

In another close race, Representative Bill Shuster (PA=9) fended off a GOP primary challenge by Mike DelGrosso to pull off his own 51% - 49% squeaker. There was no real reason for DelGrosso's challenge, as both candidates were self-proclaimed conservatives, but he was running in a district tickled to have a bona fide primary election after having been represented virtually unopposed by Shuster's dad for 25 years.

Specter, in proclaiming his victory early this AM, said that the party should put its little squabbles in the past and unify to reelect President Bush. We'll reelect President Bush despite Specters troublesome governance, but now Pennsylvania has a lame duck old man, possibly the Republicans; answer to Howard Metzenbaum, all but certain to return to Washington. They do not call him Snarlin' Arlen entirely in jest.

0 comments

4/27/2004

 

The latest...


With 43% Statewide, Specter leads Toomey, 52%-48%.

It's over. The "T," as we call it -- Top and down the middle of the Commonwealth -- is not carrying Toomey by the margin he needed.
0 comments
 

The latest...


With 30% Statewide, Specter leads Toomey, 52%-48%. Toomey's support in the conservative center of the Commonwealth, however, is softer than he had hoped.

The Dems are seeing a surge by candidate Lyndon LaRouche, but it's too little/too late.

0 comments
 

PA Senate...


With 11-percent of the Commonwealth's precincts reporting -- all in the Philadelphia area -- Arlen Specter is leading Pat Toomey 53% to 47%. Specter has to pretty much dominate that region, his strong spot, if he is to match what Toomey is expected to do in central and western Pennslvania.

Of course, no totals of votes were given. Turnout was said to be light, and if it was, that also works against Specter.

0 comments
 

early Pennsylvania results...


Okay, the results are coming in from the east of the Commonwealth -- Philadelphia, etc. -- and Shuster is leading Toomey by eight points. This is the liberal part of the State, of course...

In the Democrat primary, results from the same area, Kerry is leading with 60-percent of the vote. The party's nominee has to do better than this.

Early, early results.

0 comments
 

During the Vietnam War


The Associated Press has published what President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and candidate JF Kerry were doing at the time of the Vietnam war. It's not an overtly biased account, but it is problematic.

There might be an inaccuracy, though. The AP concludes of Kerry:
Kerry's three war injuries -- all minor -- were enough to allow him an early return to stateside duty. After petitioning for honorable discharge six months early in 1969, Kerry ran for a House seat in Massachusetts, but later gave up his bid for the Democratic nomination. He joined Vietnam Veterans Against the War and became its leading spokesman. During a protest in April 1971, Kerry threw his war ribbons over a fence at the Capitol.
Has it been established whether Kerry threw/didn't throw his/someone else's medals/ribbons over a fence/onto some stairs?

0 comments
 

The high cost of gasoline


Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naim deputy U.S. Secretary of Energy Kyle McSlarrow duked it out at a public energy security conference over whether the high price of gasoline was caused by the overregulated and overburdened U.S. refining system or by the high prices of crude oil. The United States, of course, took the Kerry approach and blamed the Saudis and the price.
``There is no general shortage of crude oil in today's market -- supplies are readily available,'' Naimi said.

Instead, he pointed to ``balkanized gasoline markets'' that required dozens of different gasoline blends to meet local clean air U.S. requirements.

To increase refining capacity in the United States, Saudi Arabia is prepared to spend $70 million to $100 million to obtain environmental and regulatory permits required to build two new U.S. oil refineries, the first such construction in decades.
The last refinery built in the United States, the Lousiana Refining Division, began production for the Marathon Oil Company in Garyville, Louisiana, in 1976.

McSlarrow argued that the high cost of crude oil has taken the incentive to refine from U.S. Companies.

The following is from Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - December 6, 2001 [link]:
No new refineries have been built in the US in the past 25 years. And petroleum industry experts say anyone would have to be crazy to launch such an effort -- even though present refineries are running at nearly 100 % of capacity and local gasoline shortages are beginning to crop up.

Why does the industry appear to have built its last refinery?

Three reasons: Refineries are not particularly profitable, environmentalists fight planning and construction every step of the way and government red-tape makes the task all but impossible. The last refinery built in the US was in Garyville, Louisiana, and it started up in 1976.

Energy proposed building a refinery near Portsmouth, Virginia, in the late 1970s, environmental groups and local residents fought the plan -- and it took almost nine years of battles in court and before federal and state regulators before the company cancelled the project in 1984.

Industry officials estimate the cost of building a new refinery at between $ 2 bn and $ 4 bn -- at a time the industry must devote close to $ 20 bn over the next decade to reducing the sulphur content in gasoline and other fuels -- and approval could mean having to collect up to 800 different permits. As if those hurdles weren't enough, the industry's long-term rate of return on capital is just 5 % -- less than could be realized by simply buying US Treasury bonds.

"I'm sure that at some point in the last 20 years someone has considered building a new refinery," says James Halloran, an energy analyst with National City Corp. "But they quickly came to their senses," he adds. [note: They claim their source as Investors Business Daily]
I doubt the Treasury Bond analogy is still applicable, but the point has to be taken.

We have a problem, and cheaper crude oil is not going to solve it.

0 comments
 

GOP economic Priorities


Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and the House Republicans tody outlined their legislative agenda for spring and summer: cutting taxes and slashing regs. It sounded like a campaign promise of good things ahead, but they will be in a position to write and pass actual legislation to do these things.

We'll figure it out then; as for now, it's talk...

0 comments
 

Kerry's Nowhere in Ohio


Ohio is a battleground, almost certainly a must-win for candidate Kerry, where the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports he has nothing.
He has no field offices. No paid staff. And Kerry bumper stickers are harder to spot than faded "Gore-Lieberman" ones.

Cuyahoga County's Democratic Party headquarters - down the street from the Slovenian National Home in Cleveland, where Kerry appears this afternoon - displays placards in its windows reading, "Elect Dennis Kucinich President."

By contrast, President Bush's re-election campaign, which has had the luxury of time and money to get organized here, fills a Columbus office with 12 paid staffers and acres of signs and bumper stickers. The campaign says it has already signed up 24,000 volunteers, ready to pound on doors for the president.
People are telling Kerry he doesn't have to party 'til after Boston in August.

Things do not look good for the Kerry juggernaut.

0 comments
 

Charlie Cook on Toomey-Hoeffel


What if. Say conservative Representative Pat Toomey upsets incumbent liberal/moderate Senator Arlen Specter in today's Pennsylvania GOP primary. He would then take on Democrat nominee Joe Hoeffel, whom we can assume Specter would defeat easily, but against whom a nominee Toomey and the Republicans would have to work, expending time, money, and effort.

In his Off to the Races e-mail column today, National Journal's Charlie Cooks looks at such a scenario.
[M]ost Democrats… argue -- and most independents observers agree -- that Hoeffel would have an advantage over Toomey if the Allentown Republican knocks off the incumbent in today's GOP primary.

Apart from the simple fact that the state seems to be trending Democratic, Hoeffel would begin with a strong advantage in the Philadelphia suburbs, including his homebase of Montgomery County, as well as Bucks and Delaware Counties. Historically, this has been Republican territory. But Al Gore won all three counties in the 2000 election and Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell won
them in the 2002 gubernatorial contest.
It seems to whom to be trending Democratic? Sure, Pennsylvania voters elected a Dem governor, Ed Rendell, in 2002, but that was more a contest between a good campaign and a bad one. Toomey should not have the problem against a bland Hoeffel.
Like so many suburban counties outside the South, social and cultural issues are driving many suburban voters away from the Republican Party. This is mirrored in the way those same issues tend to be pushing small town and rural voters away from the Democratic Party.
That may be a decent national observation, but… In Philadelphia, this may possibly be true to an extent, but I doubt it is so in the Pittsburgh area in the west.
The tough question for the Toomey campaign in a general election is this: Where outside of your congressional district will you do better than George W. Bush did in 2000, when he took 46 percent while running as a much less ideological candidate than you are today? Where will Hoeffel do worse than Gore?
Put Bush vrs. Gore 2000 away. This race bears no resemblance to that one save the general party labels. (Hoeffel comes from the left of Gore, and Toomey from the right of President Bush.)

Where in the Commonwealth should the campaigns best allocate their resources? That was Mr. Cook's larger question, and if I were in Toomey's campaign, I'd push in the region surrounding the Lehigh Valley and in the West, near Pittsburgh. Hoeffel ought to focus on Philadelphia, its suburbs, Harrisburgh, Erie, urban PA. Or he can go sleep if off in Pennsylvania Dutch country.

0 comments
 

Afghanistan Executes One


In Afghanistan, one Abdullah Shah was convicted of, according to the Associated Press, "killing one wife by pouring boiling water over her body and murdering his infant daughter by bashing her repeatedly against a wall." He was a nasty guy -- read the linked story -- and he was executed with a bullet to the head on April 20. It was first reported today.

The execution itself is not the big story, as I see it; more significant is that that it took place at all. The United Nations officially considers the death penalty to be a violation of human rights, and the first post-Taliban government in Afghanistan was set up by our good friend, U.N. special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, and Algerian Sunni who brings to mind Henry Kissinger for reasons of the man's maddening aura.

This means that Lakhdar Brahimi can rightly (for him) say that Lakhdar Brahimi has blood on his hands.

What goes around…

0 comments
 

Kerry Lost It


"YAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!"

As I noted last night, Kerry's feeling the heat from the medal/ribbons mine/his thrown/not thrown adventure. He melted down ABC's Good Morning America, and blogger J.B, Corrigan has the play-by-play HERE. You don't want to miss it.

0 comments
 

The Future of the Party?


We have seen it written that today's primary race between liberal Republican Arlen Specter and conservative Representative Pat Toomey is about the future of the Party, who is welcome in the Party, universes colliding in a majestic spectacle of magnificent plumes of fire cascading across the splendiferous hegemony of one-size-fits-all political hegemony.

To be decided by the 35% of Pennsylvania Republicans who are motivated to go to the polls, Which opened at 7a. We voted in a fire hall at 8 o'clock, then my wife purchased one of their apple dumplings for $2.50.

"I'm glad it is not raining," said my wife as we left the building, referring to what the prognosticators had served her the night before, sufficing as a forecast.

I nodded instinctively.

The sun was out, the skies were largely blue, and we had left the polling place ladies chanting: "I think that I shall never see/ A poem lovely as a tree…" They had gone to school when such literature was taught. These days, that poem would be assigned only to establish that it's okay a man, in fact, to be named "Joyce." (Never mind that my ancestor died in World War I and was not married to someone named Ken.)

World changers? Nah. But the "conventional wisdom" again seems too myopic. "Toomey can't beat Joe Hoeffel in November." It was the thesis of the Specter campaign in the waning days, and it did not work for us. It left me hearing music from another time: 1976, when we were told that Ronald Reagan was too conservative to beat the Democrat nominee.

Reagan did beat that same nominee, albeit four long years later. We, as a nation, had to live through four years of President Carter before we proved the conventional wisdom wrong. I am not of a mind to sit through four more years of Arlen Specter…

0 comments
 

Powell never considered resignation


Fueled by the questionable reporting in Bob Woodward's latest novel, the Washington press decided on its own that Secretary of State Colin Powell considered resigning over purported disagreements on the matter of the Iraq invasion. Remember, they've carefully painted Powell as the lone man of principle in a sea of neocons, ultimately duped by "the man."

Powell has already rejected the racist theory of his being a stupid go-along, and he has now said that he did not consider resigning. [Reuters link]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```

Taegan Goddard links a report that Powell might be moving to run the World Bank after the President's first term.
0 comments
 

Part of the Revolution


Good morning! It's almost time for my wife and I to travel to a firehall to vote. This sun is out, things look find, and the revolution is almost underway.

0 comments

4/26/2004

 

Deaths in the hunt for WMD


If you are part of the top-secret unit designated to search for Saddam's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) -- the Iraqi Survey Group, Iraq is too often a deadly place. At least three were killed when a bomb went off, according to Iraqi witnesses, when they entered a house.
The military initially claimed that a detail of U.S. Army soldiers were about to raid a suspected bomb making factory when two were killed after an explosion.
But the search must go on. Good luck and godspeed. [UPI link]

0 comments
 

Kerry has been hit


When the media raised questions about the President's National Guard service, JF Kerry took the high road, saying that it was not an issue and he was not going to make it one. Perhaps this was because he had something in his closet that he did not want his opposition to extract to counter National Guard questions from the candidate himself.

When the media raised questions about Kerry and his (or someone else's) medals or ribbons being thrown, or not being thrown, by Kerry on his own or at someone else's request, Kerry began to demand proof of "whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it. That's what we ought to have."

The media raised the questions about the medals. His commanding officer in Vietnam brought up the Purple Heart.

Kerry has been hit, and badly. A campaign built on patriotic service in Vietnam being the ability to lead has nothing if that already questionable justification is removed. MAYBE.

You see, Kerry's campaign is centered around his state of not being George Bush. That has not changed, so he still has his campaign, for what it was worth. But he might soon lose all semblance of being about anything else.

What Kerry can do is wear those medals with pride. That would be political dynamite, speaking at campaign events wearing his military awards.

But where are they?

0 comments
 

Another new column on the RSN site


The latest column by Barbara J. Stock, Muslim Terrorists--Are They Arabian Knights?, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
Oh, for the days when knights wore shining armor and came to the rescue of damsels in distress. They slew mythical dragons and searched for the Holy Grail. The world has a different kind of knight these days. King Arthur would take an axe to the Round Table if he were alive today.

Today, there is a kind of "knight" in Middle Eastern countries that is held in high esteem but he doesn't don armor--he wears a bomb-vest. He doesn't mount a magnificent steed but steals a police car and stuffs it with explosives. This noble knight tricks ten year old boys with gifts of toys and sends them off to become unknowing, tiny-mobile- killing-machines. This "knight" is not a brave and honorable man, but a coward who kills children and then celebrates his great victory. [MORE]


0 comments
 

New Column on RSN site


The latest column by Judson Cox, Questioning Kerry's Patriotism, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
John Kerry has accused Republicans of questioning his patriotism. Why not question Kerrys patriotism? Should not a candidate for the Presidency of the United States be patriotic? Should he not love and be loyal to the land he hopes to lead? I say yes, and I will question Kerrys patriotism.

Sen. Kerry has a record of engaging in activity that falls just short of treason; he has aided and abetted enemies of the United States. [MORE]


0 comments
 

Veep smacks Kerry around


Vice President Richard B. Cheney today assumed the mantle of Kerry Critic-in-Chief. This is good for several reasons, the most obvious being the unseemliness of the President replying in kind to candidate JF Kerry's political attacks. Another reason is that it forces the Democrats to return fire against the vice president, not the President, which is not what a campaign wants to do.
"It's time for Dick Cheney to call off the Republican attack dogs," said Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe.
Okay. McAuliffe's a lame duck as it is.

Cheney's day before the Supreme Court, including Justice Antonin Scalia, in that bit about his energy panel notes is tomorrow, so he could also be taking the offensive now so as not to seem defensive. An aggressive ticket is better than a purely reactive one.

This makes Kerry's choice of running mate all the more important to Democrats. When Kerry wishes to seem Presidential, even on the campaign trail, he'll turn to the bottom half of the card. If this is to be his main factor, he will want to take a close look at Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, who will brutally attack anything.

0 comments
 

Clinton Book


Former President William J. Clinton (impeached) will see his book published in June.
"It is the fullest and most nuanced account of a presidency ever written, and one of the most revealing and remarkable memoirs I have ever had the honor of publishing," Sonny Mehta, president and editor-in-chief of Alfred A. Knopf, said in a statement Monday.
As progressive is to liberal, nuanced is to b*llsh*t.

Go into the bookstore and check for JF Kerry's name in the index. Legend has it that Clinton was impatient with indecisive politicos.

0 comments
 

Doomsday in Fallujah


I posted earlier about Coaltions plans for bringing Fallujah forward: hospitals, highways, etc. All they have to do is eliminate the resistance.

I did not mean to diminish the significance of the battle, especially for those who will be fighting it. My prayers are with them.

The Jewish scripture (Old Testament to Christians) tells of the early battles for the Promised Land, wherein the Israelites would wipe out tens of thousands of pagan warriors without losing a single man, which sounds incredible, and it requires belief. The circumsances now are different...

Once Fallujah is won, America will be able to focus on what is going right in Iraq. Living in a short-attention-span theater, this country will again have its massive positive injection, the first since the capture of Saddam Hussein last December.

And none of the returning soldiers will ask candidate JF Kerry to throw their medals around.

0 comments
 

No Elections for Hong Kong


Hong Kong's sorta-constitution, "The Basic Law," guarantees a move toward full Democracy starting in 2007, a year after the Brits gave the region to the ChiComs. Now, the Politburo Standing Committee of the Communist Party of the People's Republic of China, all 800 dead souls, voted that there will not no elections in 2007 or for the foreseeable future.. Current Chief Executive Tung Chee-Hwa is an aging boyfriend of Beijing,

0 comments
 

"ticked-off radicals"


That was my term for the ladies who marched on Washington in support of the practice of aboriton last weekend. I've just read a nifty piece by Kathryn-Jean Lopez in NRO, and I feel as they were upon us:
At a pre-march rally on Saturday night at the D.C. Armory by RFK Stadium, California congresswoman Maxine Waters told George W. Bush to "go to hell." Going to hell with him, said Waters, should be John Ashcroft, Don Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice. In a brief, non-impromptu speech, that's what a member of the United States Congress chose to say. (You'll be amused — or horrified — to know she was introduced as "the future president of the United States.")
Have they escaped their ideological compartment? Nah.

Read the Lopez piece HERE.
0 comments
 

Kerry's own religion


The Vatican defines what is an is not the Catholic Church. The Vatican states that pro-aborts should not ask to receive the Eucharist. JF Kerry is pro-abort and asks for (and receives) the Eucharist on Sunday in direct opposition of the Vatican's ruling. Kerry is a Catholic in direct opposition to the Catholic Church.
The Paulist Center attracts Catholics uncomfortable with some of the Vatican's orthodox teachings or who otherwise feel alienated from the Roman Catholic Church.

The congregation includes gay couples, whose adopted children are baptized there, unlike in some other Boston parishes. In November, its leaders refused to read aloud during Mass from a letter opposing gay marriage, as requested by the Massachusetts bishops.

The congregation is not geographical, but ideological, drawing people from as far as away as New Hampshire, said Drew Deskur, the center's music director and a parishioner for 25 years.
The Catholic Church is not a "big tent," to use Lee Atwater's phrase for the Republican Party.

Kerry needs to make like Henry VIII and form his own church, with Teresa and Teddy.


0 comments
 

In Fallujah…


From this Knight-Ridder piece Monday, we learn more of what is happening in and around Fallujah, scene of bitter battles, Bush's last stand, make-or-break for US forces, costing him the election, etc.
Marines at the office, set up between the Marines' base at Camp Fallujah and the city itself, were issuing new identification cards to Iraqi police and civil defense officers - 600 have been given out so far - in a bid to get the Iraqi security agencies functioning again.

Nearby, about 100 sets of shovels, wheelbarrows and axes were piled in a dusty courtyard - part of a Marine effort to, slowly, spread some cash around Fallujah and put the idle back to work. The idea is to hire Fallujans, paying them perhaps $2 a day, to clean up the rubble around the city of 250,000 left by the street battles.

Later, if it's safe, Navy engineers called Seabees will sweep in with front-end loaders to clear out major damage, such as bombed buildings and walls.

Bigger American plans include a new bridge over the Euphrates River, two large secondary schools, two new clinics, an addition to the Fallujah General Hospital and a bypass to the so-called Cloverleaf Highway that links Baghdad to Ramadi and other parts of the province.
But, of course, the American forces must still take full control of the city:
Commanders at 1st Marine Expeditionary Force headquarters describe their campaign to re-establish control over the city in a more nuanced way than using superior air and ground power to storm inside.
We've heard the term "nuanced."

So has the LATimes' Ron Brownstein, who decries candidate JF Kerry lack of nuance when he told Tim Russert that, yes, he supported the President's promises to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon:
So jaws dropped across Washington when Kerry responded with just one word after host Tim Russert asked him on "Meet the Press" whether he supported Bush's promises to Sharon.

"Yes," Kerry said.

"Completely?" Russert followed.

"Yes," Kerry said again.
So Kerry is lacking nuance in Brownstein's book, and, as I noted yesterday, the WashPost's Dana Milbank accuses the President of "skillful use of language and images" in selling the Iraq war to the public. This despite that the President has been derided as unpresidential for his lack of such skill.

0 comments
 

Kerry's Medals/Ribbons



In a 1971 interview with WRC-TV, archived by the Nixon Administration, candidate JF Kerry said, according to the NYTimes:
On the program, an interviewer asked Mr. Kerry to explain what was happening in a photograph of a man hurling a medal, apparently during a protest. Mr. Kerry responded that the veterans had decided that the best way to "wake the country up" about the war was to "renounce the symbols which this country gives, which supposedly reinforces all the things that they have done, and that was the medals themselves."

"And so they decided to give them back to their country," he added.
How many of the "medals themselves" did Kerry say he gave back?

"I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine."

The Cybercast News Service (CNS.com) does a good job of describing what happened on ABC's Good Morning America this morning:
"I never asserted otherwise," Kerry said on Monday -- moments after ABC played part of the 1971 interview in which Kerry indicated he threw his medals over a fence.

"And back then, ribbons, medals were absolutely interchangeable...We all referred to them as the symbols..." Kerry continued. "So the fact is that I have been accurate precisely about what took place. And I am the one who later made clear exactly what happened."
Medals and ribbons used interchangeably, he threw his medals and not his ribbons, and Kerry's starting to feel the heat.
"Good Morning America" anchor Charlie Gibson said he was there 33 years ago when Kerry threw medals over the fence. "I saw you throw medals over the fence, and we didn't find out until later (interrupted) that those were someone else's medals," Gibson said.

Kerry, not listening to the end of Gibson's statement, said, "Charlie, Charlie, you're wrong. That is not what happened. I threw my ribbons across. And all you have to do..." [Gibson tried to clarify that Kerry threw someone else's medals over the fence, but Kerry would not give him an opportunity.]

Kerry eventually clarified that he did throw two medals (not his) over the fence at the request of two veterans.
The story that he threw someone else's medals over the fence, not his own, has been around for a while. But here he says he threw his own ribbons and someone else's medals, though I assume the statement that the terms "medals" and "ribbons" are used interchangeably was still in operation. In fact, Kerry said this to Gibson:
Kerry said what he did in 1971 was unpopular and polarizing: "I threw my ribbons over; I threw the medals of two veterans who asked me to throw them over -- after the ceremony, completely separate. And I'm the one -- if I had something to hide -- I'm the one who made it known exactly what happened. To me, it's one and the same [ribbons, medals] -- and I'm proud of it."
Again, ribbons and medals are "one and the same" to Kerry, yet he distinguishes between tossing his own ribbons and the medals of others.
"We threw away the symbols of the war. I'm proud I stood up and fought against it -- proud I took on Richard Nixon. And I think to this day there's no distinction between the two [medal/ribbons]."
suppose it depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Kerry called this a "phony issue" and blamed it on the Bush campaign seeking to cover for the President's National Guard service. In its story, the NYTimes carries Kerry's water::
Republicans, nervous about questions regarding President Bush's Air National Guard service, have raised the issue to revive accusations by some veterans that the discarding of medals dishonored those who served and died in the war.
With Gibson, Kerry seemed to agree with the accusations:
Kerry said he didn't want to throw medals or ribbons over the fence to begin with. "I thought we ought to lay them on a table and put them in front of people in a way that wouldn't be as challenging to many Americans. Other veterans felt otherwise. They took a vote...they voted to throw. I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals."
Ribbons, medals, what's the difference 'twixt friends?

This is relevant especially because Kerry has made his service in Vietnam and the awards awarded therefrom

As the Amish might tell us: Throw the candidate over the fence some medals/ribbons.

… tick, tick, tick, tick …

0 comments
 

High-Tech Stuff


Good morning. This is the President's "high tech" week, when the President will promise to give everyone high speed internet access and hydrogen fuel tech.

This is something one does to win votes, as this crippled society has been condition to expect love and largesse from their government, which means from the taxes of corporations and other individuals.

Some good:
On broadband, the name for the high-speed Internet connections over phone, cable and satellites, Bush said in a speech last week that America is "lagging a little bit." To encourage more broadband connections, he believes users should not be taxed, and that the government should encourage competition among providers.

Bush has already signed into a law a two-year extension of the Internet Access Tax moratorium, which expired last fall. Now, he's calling on Congress to pass legislation that would extend the moratorium to broadband and make it permanent.

The House has passed a moratorium on user taxes levied against consumers who subscribe to broadband; the Senate is scheduled to address the issue this week.
It's not quite my notion of an unassailable Wall of Separation between 'Net and State. Taxation is arguably the most important part of this.

0 comments

4/25/2004

 

Democrat Outrage!


This one is amusing.

The NYTimes ran a story about a KKKlansman who murdered a black sharecropper. Ugly stuff. Well, the accompanying photo in the paper was not a snap of the klansman; rather, it was a shot of Colorado Senatorial candidate Pete Coors, a Republican.
“It could have been worse,” Watson added. “Pete could have been identified as John Kerry.”

Chris Gates, chairman of the Colorado Democratic Party, demanded an apology.
So, she joked that it was better for a candidate to be compared to a racist murderer than to candidate JF Kerry. It's hyperbole, sarcasm.

The Colorado Democratic Party demanded an apology. The Kerry campaign said that this type of comment turns people off from politics.

Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan said of American politics this Sunday morning on CNN's Late Edition: "You guys are going through your tribal warfare, and it doesn't make sense to talk logically until after November." When we're getting it from Bandar, it must look pretty dang bad.

0 comments
 

Pro-Abortion March


Several hundred thousand ticked-off radicals marched in Washington, DC today in support of the practice of abortion. One account had TV star Whoopi Goldberg waving a coat hanger.

President Bush supports the right to abort only in cases of rape or incest, which is a line he draws, or when a woman's life is in danger. Vice President Dick Cheney talked to the press Saturday:
"It doesn't matter if you're Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, male or female, black or white, ... north or south, east or west, all that matters is your respect for the claim of every life," Cheney said in a 10-minute speech to the National Right to Life Committee Educational Trust Fund.

"To be part of this cause is to believe that every mother carrying a life, that every child waiting to be born deserves understanding," he said.
If a society becomes more enlightened as it develops, why are we still having this debate in the year 2004? Why have we made the capital punishment of the most evil of murderers a relatively painless affair while we have some fighting in court for the right to kill babies as a ghastly way as they are being born?

I truly hope, for the sake of humanity, that this debate is not about women's rights or male domination or any of that. I hope beyond hope that it is about a difference of opinion over when human life begins.

0 comments
 

Ahmed Chalabi


This Iranian National Congress boss can be trusted even less than can be Bob Woodward or Saudi Prince Bandar. Someone said that it was the neocons at the Pentagon who so trusted him before the war, but this was from the people who talk of "the neocons at the Pentagon."

At the end of his appearance on Fox News Sunday this AM, he said that the "Iraq people do not understand occupation." I'd counter that many of them do not understand the balance of rights and responsibilities of living in a semi-free society

He said that the President's biggest mistake was not setting up an Iraqi authority in Iraq from the start. This was when the "neocons at the Pentagon" trusted him, and thus he could have been the man in charge, the heir to Saddam Hussein. He wanted that one.

Chris Shays (D-Connecticut) came on FNS next and remarked of Chalabi: "He's not trusted in Iraq, yet he's part of the government." And his nephew is slated to lead the prosecution of Saddam.

0 comments
 

The greatest team in baseball this season


It's safe to say that, come October, the consensus choice of baseball fans from Tokyo to Tampa, Boston to the Bronx, will be the New York Yankees. It will be obvious.

It's early.

That being said, as a Yankees fan, I feel nothing but humility as I type this. Last weekend, the lowly Boston Red Sox defeated the Yankees, three out of four. This weekend, the Sox swept.

The Red Sox have whipped the Yankees in 6 of 7 games this season.

The catcher and a centerfielder who wasn't even supposed to make the team this year are the only ones hitting the baseball. The only decent starter is a 40-something. Sure, Mo Rivera remains the greatest closer in baseball, but he can't do his job -- protecting leads -- if there is no lead to protect.

So I humbly direct you to this post from major Red Sox fan Jaws at JawsBlog. He writes:
Sox Win! Sox Win! Red Sox win 2-0!

The Bronx Infidels™ have been defeated again!

Thus, the Boston Red Sox have swept the Bronx Infidels for the first time in the Bronx since 1999!

Time to get out the brooms to sweep the Bronx Infidels™ (and their fans) away!

Yankees Suck!
He is entitled his jubilation, and I cannot begrudge him that.

It has been a long time since 1999, and it has been even longer since 1918.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ADDENDUM: As Jaws noted in the comments, he is not Red Sox fan; rather's he's an Indians fan. My dad was a Cleveland Indians fan in the '50s, partly to be different from his father, a big Yankees fan. It's from my late grandfather that I got my love of the Bronx Bombers.

So, Jaws and I are conservative bloggers who root for different baseball clubs. Hey, Lee Atwater said we were in a big tent.
0 comments
 

They Chat on TW


I'm back, returned from the drippy gray which hangs like a suspended hazy dome over a landscape which appears to want out of it as badly as do I.

Uh, yeah.

Picking up where we left of, after Steph's chat with Lakhdar Brahimi, it was the TW panel discussion. These things are interesting, as its usually a few government officials sitting with George Will and Fareed Zakaria. Facing the panel is George Stephanopoulos, who can call up video clips by tapping the flat panel sitting in front of him like a raised classroom desk.

Senators John Kyl (R-Arizona) and Joe Biden (D-Delaware) were the guests, and Kyl immediately took on Brahimi's assertion that one should never use military force: "It is the case that at the end of the day [in Iraq], there is going to have to be military action."

Biden suggested that Najaf has to be liberated in such a way as to remove the bad guys without damaging the mosques. He called this "physically impossible" then, without prompting, allowed that he did not know what he was talking about.

He also wants to get Sistani to speak up, assumedly against Moqtada al-Sadr.

George Will opined: "We know who the enemy is: 2,000 to 5,000 insurgents."

Fareed Zakaria countered that the real problem was "not the 2,000" insurgents; rather, it was the ordinary Iraqis who cheered them on.

Will returned that the celebrants are not the problem: "It is the men with rocket launchers and machine guns."

Biden then remarked that Iraqis were afraid to go to the market or to cross the street. He suggested that if a "massive infusion of power is necessary to increase to increase security for the average Iraq," we should use "everything" we have now so that our soldiers can come home later.

This is the world of JF Kerry, where very little is relevant to the actual topic at hand, and thank God that President Bush sits in front of the decision-making process. Whether he makes occasional mistakes or not, he has the course plotted. All systems go.

0 comments
 

Steph talks to Lahkdar Brahimi


They sat in facing chairs in a darkened room, with Lakhdar Brahimi, U.N. Special Envoy to Iraq, striking me as a Eurocrat in the same way that Henry Kissinger. Brahimi, though, is a soft-spoken Algerian. Neither are Eurocrats.

Brahimi is fresh off a loosely anti-Semetic remark last Wednesday, though Steph did not inquire. He did, however, offer that "Israeli policy is war; Israeli policy is brutal, repressive. They are not interested in peace." He passed this off, however, as the feelings of some people. He had said basically the same thing himself on Wednesday.
"There's a lot of hatred because the very violent and repressive security policy of the Israeli government as well as this determination to occupy more and more Palestinian territory."
He said it was not up to him whether Ahmed Chalabi was a member of the new Iraqi government, but he offered his own opinion that people like Chalabi with political parties "should stay out of government." (The United States did not have political parties at the beginning of our Republic, but factions are bound to form in any healthy democracy.)

"There is never any military solution to any problem." This sounds similar to what was said last year by M. Chirac and the poet de Villepin, except that Chirac promptly sent several additional battalions to the Ivory Coast. But Brahimi is a dreamer: "I am a diplomat. I believe that there is always a better solution than shooting." Which may be so if you can convince a group of angry-to-the-death people that his is the case.

He explicitly refused to answer Steph's question concerning whether the U.S. military could act, as in any future Fallujah, without permission from Iraq's new government.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani greatly impressed Brahimi, and his description of the man surprised me. I expected a glorified mullah, but Brahimi described Sistani as "highly respected… highly learned…highly well-informed." Sistani is a voracious reader, he explained. "He sounds like somebody who would like to help Iraq stand on its own."

Steph pointed out that Brahimi is involved in these negotiations between the various Islamic sects in Iraq, while he himself is a Sunni. Brahimi answered, "It doesn't come into my thinking that I am a Sunni. I am a U.N. man." (It sounds almost Kerry-esque, though for not for Kerry's reasons. Brahimi assures Steph that he is a believing Sunni. There is a certain intellectual quality to Brahimi that is just not there with Kerry, but that's not a per se compliment.)

Steph noted to Brahimi that: "You must see Sisyphus" in your efforts. Brahimi said, "Yes that rock does seem to want to stay up there."

Sisyphus, according to the Greeks, was that mythical fellow sentenced by the Gods to spend his eternity rolling a rock up a hill only to see it roll to the bottom after the goal had been achieved. But as Homer had it, Sisyphus was also a clever man who outsmarted the PTB for a time to avoid his punishment. That's the Sisyphus I see in Brahimi.

0 comments
 

The Rightsided Newsletter is Posted


The Sunday Rightsided Newsletter, with the summary and analysis of the Sunday shows, has been sent to the various global Inboxes -- and its live on the RSN page: HERE. A little John McCain and Carl Levin, a lot of Bandar, etc.

There was no room left for Steph's interview with UN dude Lakhdar Brahimi -- Bandar's a bulky guy -- so that comes up in this space soon. I'll write it up now, listening to the Yankees. I can report that they are not yet losing to Boston, in the bottom of the 3rd.

0 comments
 

Bandar on Clarke on MTP


Real quick, this is taken from the RSN (rough copy), with Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultain talking to Tim Russert on MTP:
Russert hassled Bandar about the 150 Saudi relatives of bin Laden who flew out of the United States after 9-11. Russert insisted that this occurred when Americans were still under the flight ban. Bandar said that they were not. Bandar explained that he had called the FBI to ask if it could be arranged to fly these people out lest they be the victims of natural hostility. The FBI put him in touch with an Administration official named Richard Clarke, who saw no problems with the request. Russert did not follow up at all on Dick Clarke's role in this.

But Bandar characterized the books that have been written about the Saudis flying out of the United States: "In French, it's 'hogwash.'" Pardonnez-moi?


0 comments
 

The President Becomes Articulate


After his recent press conference, we heard the chatterers declare it the most inarticulate, clumsy even in the history of the republic. But some Americans adored Bush, they lamented, despite his awkward and backward mode of communication.

I sighed myself.

Dana Milibankof the WashPost seized me unprepared this morning when he opined:
With skillful use of language and images, President Bush and his aides have kept the American public from turning against the war in Iraq despite the swelling number of U.S. casualties there.
Do you get it? The President cannot communicate well; however, when people like him despite the way he is botching all that he touches, it has to mean that he is articulating skillfully.

It's an impossible dichotomy which cannot be actual.
Political strategists and public-opinion experts say a good part of this resilience of public support for Bush and the Iraq war stems from the president's oratory. They say Bush has convinced Americans of three key points that strongly influence overall support for the war: that the United States will prevail in Iraq; that the fighting in Iraq is related to the war against al Qaeda; and that most Iraqis and many foreign countries support U.S. actions in Iraq.
Which strategists and "public-opinion experts"?

The United States has prevailed in Iraq; the fighting in Iraq is crucial part of winning the war against terror; and most Iraqis and many foreign countries not only support U.S. actions in Iraq but participate in it. It did not take our newly eloquent President to make these things obvious to me, but it did take him to make them so.

Bookmark the Milibank article so that you can retrieve it the next time some doltish goof begins to lampoon the President's communications skills. Milibank thinks the President is a masterful communicator using his impressive gifts to fool us all.

They cannot have it both ways.

0 comments
 

The Sunday Morning Talk Shows



KEY:
MTP: NBC’s Meet the Press with Tim Russert
FNS: FOX’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace
FTN: CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer
TW: ABC’s This Week with former Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos
LE: CNN’s Late Edition with Wolfgang Blitzer

And that's the KEY I use for my Sunday review and analysis of the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, mercifully inimitable, for the free Rightsided Newsletter. If you are interested, please visit our web site or send a blank e-mail to rsn-subscribe [AT] tripod.com.


This is interesting.

On Friday night, I noted that journalist Bob Woodward and Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan were telling different stories about the same series of events: Whether or not Bandar was told about the invasion of Iraq before was Secretary of State Colin Powell. One of them as lying, but which one? Bandar or Woodward? Woodward or Bandar? Neither often tells the truth.

Well, Bandar and Woodward will be host Tim Russert's guests on MTP this morning, and they will hopefully end this insufferable intrigue.


On FNS, host Wallace talks to Representative Chris Shays (R-Connecticut), that New England Republican whom I remember most recently for having penned a letter detailing Dick Clarke's insouciance regarding the terrorist threat during the Clinton Administration, but Clark is yesterday's news.

He has dueling campaign chairs, Marc Racicot for the President and Jeanne Shaheen for Kerry.

His final guest will be Iraqi National Congress president Ahmed Chalabi, who is an arguably more noisy liar than is Woodward, who is also yesterday's news. His nephew, however, was named to prosecute Saddam Hussein for war crimes.


FTN promises to be a dismal affair, with Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Carl Levin (D-Michigan). Perhaps McCain will liven things up by tearing someone limb-from-limb.


On TW, it appears that Stef will lead with one of those panel discussions, with Senators Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and John Kyl (R-Arizona) and anti-Semitic U.N. moderator Lakhdar Brahimi. (I can hear Brahimi now: "No, George, I was not being anti-Semitic. However, you see, the Jews…" A global government is bound to be populated by unelected anti-Semites.)


Wolfgang, on LE, will have Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Dick Lugar (R-Indiana) and ranking Dem Joe Biden (D-Delaware). (I haven't seen Biden since he told Schieffer on FTN a few Sundays ago that he had convinced Chirac to join the coalition given certain conditions were me. That went nowhere, and Biden crawled under a rock.)

Another guest will be Bandar. Also, Qatari (pronounced: GUTT-ER-ee) Foreign Minister Hamad Bin Jasim will talk about something. And Blitzer will talk to Karen Hughes, I assume as a contrast to Bandar.

~~~~~

I also want to talk about a story in which President Bush is accused of using brilliant oratorical skills. This from Dana Milibank of the WashPost. These are the same people who accused the President of being a linguistic dunderhead after his press conference.

More on that this afternoon.

0 comments

4/24/2004

 

To whom does the world look?


Take Palestine, the land of the perpetual feud played out by young men with rifles on the one side and young men with bombs strapped to their bodies by cowardly old men they call leaders. From out the chaos, they allegedly look for a solution, but to whom do they look?

The United Nations? The European Union?

From tomorrow's New York Times Magazine:
[Palestinian cabinet member Dr. Saeb] Erekat is a moderate figure and claims to remain hopeful, but even he admitted that without a commitment from the United States for renewed negotiations -- few Palestinians I spoke with during the month I recently spent in Israel and Palestine said they believed the European Union or the United Nations could play a central role -- neither Israelis nor Palestinians would get any closer to peace.
Contrary to what Kerry and the Democrats have repeated for over a year, the United States is respected globally like never before. There is an element of fear, perhaps distrust of our motives, but we are the most capable diplomatic entity in the world, much moreso than under the previous administration.

I don't know that Erekat is a moderate, unless compared to Hamas, but he's most definitely not a Paul Wolfowitz neocon. (Which, by the way, is a term the media has abused to the point of obliterating its actual meaning.)

To whom does the world look? Unless they want oil for food, and the accompanying revenues, it is not to the United Nations. Or to France.

0 comments
 

New on the blogroll


Welcome The Oracle of Jim, fallen from the firmament on this 24th day of April, to the Political Annotation blogroll. So far, he has looked at the ACLU and the chip on its shoulder, as well as the myopia and paramnesia of liberals concerning economic history.

And Jim put this blog in his blogroll, which I noticed in my referral log. I appreciate this.

If anyone here reading would like to exchange blogroll lnks, let me know.

0 comments
 

New Column on RSN site


The latest column by Dennis Campbell, Teflon-Free Clintons: A Lot Sticks, But Little Comes of It, is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
Remember Pat Schroeder? She was a congresswoman from Colorado during President Ronald Reagan's administration.

What she is best-remembered for is her frustration at the inability of Democrats to make charges of misconduct against Mr. Reagan stick.

"He's the Teflon President!" she lamented.

Well, Bill and Hillary Clinton definitely are not Teflon-coated. They are just the opposite: Lots of stuff sticks. What distresses is that so little comes of it. [MORE]
This one should have been live this morning, but there were sever problems, which reminds me that I ought to do something else with that. In due time.

The Red Sox have now taken five our of six games from the Yankees so far this year. I'm hurting.

Do you or don't you get what you pay for?

0 comments
 

Kerry's Health


ABCNews.com's "NOTED NOW" informs us:
Senator Kerry visited Dr. Zarins at Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Saturday morning, as a follow-up to his shoulder surgery. Campaign staff claimed to be unaware of Kerry's appointment earlier today, but spokesman David Wade now says he had "an appointment" and insists Kerry's shoulder is "doing great."
Meanwhile, according to a Kerry '04 press release, the Navy did not include his medical records with the batch they sent him, so the candidate "reconstituted the military medical records from his personal files." Which means, they are whatever he wanted them to be at the time.

Dr. Gerald R. Doyle, Kerry's personal physician since President Reagan's second term, reviewed these records Kerry had put together, and declared that Kerry was okay.

I want to know about his prostate cancer. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colorado) told Coloradoans several months ago:
Doctors have assured me that after treatment for prostate cancer, the recovery rate is 98 percent. But I believe Coloradans deserve a 100 percent guarantee of service."
Kerry does not mention his cancer, which is a legitimate concern. We know he earned a Purple Heart for being scratched, but not about his more serious current problem.

0 comments
 

Kerry and Church Law

:
Not naming names, the Cardinal at the Vatican who oversees sacraments like the Eucharist, Francis Cardinal Arinze, declared of pro-abortion politicians seeking to take communion: "If the person should not receive it, then it should not be given. Objectively, the answer is there."

Ted Kennedy pronounced: "This is an opinion by one member in the Vatican circle … but he's not speaking for the Pope. That's a major difference." On matters involving the sacrament, Cardinal Arinze is not merely "one member in the Vatican circle," and in the most common sense, he does speak for the Pope.

Then we get this quote from an LATimes story:
Some Catholics argued that Kerry must live to the letter of church law, in public and in private, supporting the prohibition on abortion — or lose the right to Communion and other church privileges. Others accused church leaders of taking too narrow a view of Christian values, saying Kerry proves his faith in other ways, including his support for the poor.
Catholic clergy and the church hierarchy do not oppose abortion merely because it is "church law." It's not "because the Pope says so." And it's not a matter open to debate.

I've heard priest after priest, friar after friar, bishop after bishop, Cardinal after Cardinal explain that innocent human life is fundamental to Christ and thus to the Church. The Eucharist, in which Catholics believe, through a process called transubstantiation, they partake of the actually body and blood of Christ, is their most holy sacrament. This is fundamental, the say, to Catholicism.

The Times article, as exemplified by the paragraph above, is so troublesome precisely because it treats this matter as a secular controversy and church opposition to abortion as a political choice. The Eucharist is treated as just another thing that Catholics do.

I'm going to suggest again that JF Kerry do what King Henry VIII of England did before him. He has a dispute with the church, so he should start his own. The Anglican Church at its inception was identical to the Catholic church save that it was led by the king who could do whatever he wanted. That sounds right for Kerry.

0 comments
 

Socialists who dislike taxes


The BBC runs a story about Scottish socialists protesting a "Council Tax." One would think that a socialist would favor any form of tax, just as a devout libertarian would reject any form of tax on its face, but the case is that the Scots-socialist want only the wealthy to pay the tax. Which sounds a bit like the Democrat Party here in the States, or Arlen Specter.

0 comments
 

Teresa Heinz's tax records


Erick Erickson of Confessions of a Political Junkie and I have been discussing what to do about Teresa Heinz's tax records. His argument was that we should see them, to check her donations to tax-exempts which could be benefiting her husband's campaign. We should know how she is using her ketchup-derived largesse in ways which circumvent campaign law.

My take was that she was not seeking an obvious, not obviously breaking a law, and taking part in the political process in a way in which very wealthy people sometimes do.

His post on Confessions, is an admission to himself that, yeah, she's entitled to some privacy, but he can't help it: he wants to see the records anyway.

Erick's one of the sharpest bloggers going, so I don't feel bad when I admit that part of me agrees with him. Let's see 'em, te-REH-za! If you're Ken Mehlman, you want them to be released, as it is an issue that can only play in your candidate's favor. With the Kerrys attempting to portray themselves as your average, American couple (see this Saturday Washpost piece), this type of behavior on Ms. Heinz's part blows the lid off that strategy.

Plus she'd be playing to the political campaign culture of blah, blah, blah, blah -- get out your flags and photographs of John McCain.

So I've no objection to Mehlman or Erick, or anybody else, requesting that Theresa show us her slip. If not, we can ask why not.

0 comments
 

Kerry's Anti-War Record


Earlier, I posted that candidate JF Kerry still carries the shrapnel from yesterday's battle, and injury he took while fighting for his country. The New York Times continues to fan the flames surrounding his latter, less-than-honorable activity after he received his third Purple Heart and shipped home.

The talk, of course, is of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, a band not so much of brothers, but of misguided Maoist punks. Kerry's latest on this matter was on last Sunday's Meet the Press, when he said he disagreed with some of his harsh language, missed his dark hair, and was, at the time, honest.

The Shrum planned seemed to be to use his war record to take his anti-war record off the table. It did not work, so we'll see what's Shrum's Plan B.

0 comments
 

Kerry Carries Shrapnel


Candidate JF Kerry still carries shrapnel from the wound which earned him his second Purple Heart award, his doctor tells us after reviewing 35 pages of the candidate's medical records.

The story indicates that the records relate that Kerry's first wound, for which he received his first Purple Heart, "was treated with an antibiotic dressing after the shrapnel was removed."


0 comments

4/23/2004

 

Woodward says Bandar lies


Bob Woodward wrote that Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld told Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan about our war plans before anyone had told Colin Powell. Powell call this "insane." Rumsfeld denied it. And then Bandar denied it. Then Woodward asserted that Bandar had called him in the middle of the night to chastise him for the book, but Woodward finally convinced him that the story was accurate. Bandar told Larry King that Cheney and Rumsfeld had told him that the plan was not yet final.

Woodward then told CNN's Wolf Blizer Friday that Bandar was a liar.

Who is lying, Bandar or Woodward? Woodward or Bandar? Bandar or Woodward?

Whom should we trust, Bandar or Woodward? Woodward or Bandar? Bandar or Woodward?

What a choice, and if I had to make it, I'd hope that there were a small capsule hidden in my watch in case of capture.

0 comments
 

Brahimi's problem


UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, the man entrusted with working out an interim government for Iraq, told the France's Inter radio Wednesday:
"There's a lot of hatred because the very violent and repressive security policy of the Israeli government as well as this determination to occupy more and more Palestinian territory," said Brahimi, a U.N. undersecretary-general and Annan's top envoy on Iraq.

Brahimi stressed that an eventual solution to Iraq was tied to the situation between the Israelis and Palestinians.

"The problems are linked," he said. "There is no doubt that the great poison in the region is this Israeli policy of domination and the suffering imposed on the Palestinians as well as the perception of all of the population in the region, and beyond, of the injustice of this policy and the equally unjust support ... of the United States for this policy."
U.N. General Secretary [sic, mine] Kofi Annan on Friday tried quickly to distance himself a millimeter or so from his lieutenant's remarks through spokesman Fred Eckherd:
The U.N. spokesman was pressed several times on whether the United Nations believes Israel is spreading "poison" in the region.

"It's a politically complex issue," Eckhard said. "Mr. Brahimi was expressing his personal views. ... The secretary-general's views, as expressed over the last seven years, do not contain the word `poison.'"
Brahimi was merely stating what would be the official views of the United Nations Security Council if the United States did not exercise its veto on anti-Semitic resolution upon anti-Semitic resolution.

Israel will protest.
Israel's deputy U.N. ambassador Arye Mekel said his country was "very disturbed" by Brahimi's statement which "puts the objectivity and fairness of the top U.N. officials in question and increases Israel's suspicion about the motivation of the United Nations."
The United Nations has not been objective and reasonable for several decades, and it has gotten much worse since the fall of the Soviet Union. Failed states seeing no counter to U.S. power sometimes seek to band together and obstruct for its own sake.

Artificial world bodies with prefabricated powers are antithetical to human progress. Brahimi is a symptom.

0 comments
 

Flag Draped Coffins


If the families find it violative of their privacy, or the President finds it same, it is certainly President Bush's prerogative to do so.

The world does not seem to end when the pictures are published.

My wife noted, "The war is worth fighting, but it most certainly isn't cheap." The left have accused the President of banning the publication of the photographs to keep the pictures of flag draped coffins out of the press, lest we become impatient with the war.

When I see a flag-draped coffin, I'm both saddened and proud. And grateful.

Why do I always then have to think of Michael Moore and those whom he dishonors with his breath through his many necks?

0 comments
 

From the Weekly Australian


Roy Eccleston, Washington correspondent for the Weekly Australian writes in Saturday's edition:
WITH large areas of Iraq in chaos, more than 700 US troops dead, and intense criticism of his failure to do more against al-Qa'ida in the first months of his presidency, George W. Bush might have expected to see his re-election campaign take at least a temporary hit.

Instead, Bush appears to have weathered one of the worst periods of his presidency with aplomb, and even increased his margin over Democrat challenger Senator John Kerry, according to two polls this week.
Well, what is the President running against? Does anyone truly know? (The Ultimate Null)

0 comments
 

"Conservatives attack Arlen Specter"


From the NYTimes:
Many conservatives have attacked Mr. Specter for voting against the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, against the nomination of Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court, against school vouchers and against some tax cuts. He has also angered conservatives by supporting abortion rights, opposing a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and pushing for what they consider wasteful spending.
So, many conservatives have attacked Mr. Specter for being a liberal.
Many liberals have attacked Mr. Santorum for voting for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, supporting ANWR, supporting President Bush's conservative judicial nominees, favoring the lives of the unborn, and voting for the President's tax cuts.
That second quote is mine -- having just typed it -- and it makes as much sense as does the Times quote.

Conservatives attack liberals, liberals attack conservatives.

0 comments
 

The War is Kerry's Conundrum


Many in the ABB ("Anybody But Bush") crowd, who make up the largest part of candidate JF Kerry's supporters, want out of the war yesterday. They see the Democrat candidate's position/s as being "fuzzed" (Nader's term) at best, pro-war at worst, as reporters this piece in the Boston Globe.
Leaders of progressive [liberal] groups who are backing Kerry despite reservations about his Iraq stands say they doubt Nader will peel away significant support from Kerry in the fall election.
So does Kerry jettison Nader by going full-fledged anti-war, thus assuring that he loses the election? Or does he continue vacillating, thus hemorrhaging more to Nader and assuring that he loses the election?

It's quite a conundrum.

0 comments
 

A Dichotomy of War


To paraphrase Iraqi pseudo-cleric Moqtada al-Sadr: "If you don't leave me alone, my friends are going to intentionally kill themselves."

Then there is Arizona Cardinals safety Pat Tillman, an Army Ranger.

Never has the difference between punks and men been made more clear.

0 comments
 

Catholic Kerry maintains pro-abort stance


At a rally Friday morning, candidate JF Kerry said that religion and politics do not mix. This was his defense of his pro-abort stance in the face of Frances Cardinal Arinze, the Vatican's prefect of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

At a news conference Thursday, Cardinal Arinze was asked whether priests should refuse the sacrament of the Eucharist (communion) to politicians who are favor the legal practice of abortion. Arinze answered:
"Yes," he replied. "If the person should not receive it, then it should not be given. Objectively, the answer is there."
On the EWTN television network's Web of Faith program this week, Father John Trigilio, PhD, answered a general question regarding a Catholic politician who maintained that he was pro-life personally but pro-choice in governing circumstances.

"I think that person is fooling himself," Tiriglio answered. One cannot compartmentalize his basic beliefs.

Dr. Tiriglio pointed out, also, that a person who votes for any pro-abortion candidate commits a "culpable sin."

To keep this in context, Tiriglio is an expert on the church, the author of several books, and abortion is not on his lips often. Like Cardinal Arinze, he's a Catholic.

As I have suggested, I think it time that John Kerry follow in the footsteps of England's King Henry VIII and form his own church. It will be more difficult, because unlike the old English monarch, Kerry has no followers and cannot compel anyone to join his church. But at least he'll leave the Catholics alone to be Catholic.

0 comments
 

Toomey vrs. Specter - let's do this


Pennsylvania's primary election will be held on Tuesday, and NRO has stepped up its attacks on liberal Republican Senator Arlen Specter, who faces a difficult primary challenge against conservative Representative Pat Toomey.

On their page Friday, we see a new article, Timothy P. Carney's “We Remember Our Friends”, about Specters past and present campaign contributors, including Richard Ben-Veniste, Denise Rich (Marc's ex, Clinton girl), and Teamster's boss Ron Carey.

Then they devote a full section of the NRO page, Election 2004: PA, to links to stories on this race. Carney's Specter Hurts Bush and John J. Miller's piece on Toomey's recent surge in the polls from Thursday, Paul Kengor's Thursday piece casting the primary contests in the terms of the abortion debate. And reprints of John J. Miller's report on Specter from last September, as well as Ramesh Ponnuru's call to arms from March.

To be sure, Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary is a major event in the recent history of modern conservatism, with implications which reach right into the heart of the federal judiciary. Tuesday's outcome could conceivably be felt decades from now.

The nightmare scenario amongst some establishment Republicans has lib Dem Representative Joe Hoeffel knocking of Toomey in November. Even if this would be the case, and Pennsylvanian's choose a radical lefty over a solid conservative, the Commonwealth's Senate delegation would move slightly to the left and the nation would have a more conservative Republican as chairman of Senate Judiciary.

The ranking Republican on Judiciary is Chuck Grassley, who could be chairman of Judiciary only if he gave up chairmanship of the Finance Committee. That's not going to happen, and Specter is next. Knock Specter off, and we have Jon Kyl (R-Arizona). Kyl's life ACU is 97 of 100, to Specter's 43.

To my fellow Pennsylvanians: Let's do this.

0 comments
 

The ban on Ba'athists


With the coalition lifting its ban on some Ba'athist army officers and teachers from serving in official capacities, our old friend Ahmed Chalabi tells us that it will "create major problems in the transition to democracy."

It's understandable bitterness like Chalabi's which created the "bad information" problems with which the Bush Administration is currently being taunted.

The problem with eliminating these people from service -- from throwing the baby out with the Ba'ath-water, so to speak -- is that it removes talented, unideological people from a mix wherein their talents are needed.

Chalabi likens it to "allowing Nazis into the German government immediately after World War Two." That's a simple analogy which I'd buy if you could compare Iraq to Nazi Germany from top-to-bottom, but part of what separates Nazi Germany from other dictatorial regimes is their ideology of pure hatred directed against a particular group of people, the Jews. If Chalabi can show me a system of Ba'athist death camps designed to eliminate a hatred group, and a body of harsh and cruel law applying against that group, then we're looking at a particular, irascible hatred and the Ba'athists must not serve as punishment and prevention from the hatred and anger remaining. If these people were mundane cogs in a workaday dictatorial regime, they can be rehabilitated by opportunity.

And I've not yet had my coffee.


0 comments

4/22/2004

 

A call for Gorelick to testify


Eleven Republic Senators -- Kit Bond (Missouri), joined by Bob Bennett (Utah), Conrad Burns (Montana), Saxby Chambliss (Georgia), Norm Coleman (Minnesota), John Cornyn (Texas), Pete Domenici (New Mexico), Trent Lott (Tennessee Mississippi), Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), Don Nickles (Oklahoma), and Ted Stevens (Alaska) -- have signed a letter Thursday calling on 9-11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick to testify before the commission about her role in strengthening the wall between the CIA and the FBI during the Clinton Administration.

Meanwhile, Gorelick's role on the panel was questioned early in the panel's work by former acting FBI Director Thomas J. Pickard, who had asserted that Gorelick "resisted efforts by the FBI to expand the counterterrorism effort beyond simple law enforcement tactics and agencies."

And according to this Thursday Washington Times piece, Gorelick can still take part in writing the final report:
Al Felzenberg, spokesman for the commission, said Ms. Gorelick's recusal applies to the time she was deputy attorney general at the Justice Department, so she is free to take part in the investigation and drafting of the report for anything that happened after she left.
I think they are taking seriously this "brethren on the commission" nonsense. It is a temporary investigatory body, it seems, not the SCOTUS.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

As a nice lady named Charlotte pointed out in the comments below, Senator Lott represents Mississippi, not Tennessee. I know this well, and my mistake has nothing to do with the former GOP leader being from Mississippi and the current from Tennessee. Rather, it is something dysfunctional in my brain. It has to be. I have made the mistake in the past, sometimes in time to catch it myself. Not always. It depends on how many things I am doing or thinking at once; when this reaches the double-digits, mistakes are sometimes made. I'm sorry, Charlotte.
0 comments
 

Kerry Crashes Pool Party


At a Tuesday night pool party in Miami, John Edwards was billed as the featured guest, but candidate JF Kerry crashed:
Looking out at the audience as Edwards stood several paces behind him, Kerry offered up some humor as well: "What a gathering of talent, good looks, brains ... I'm just talking about John Edwards and me."
It's been said that Edwards is a good looking guy, but there could be boisterous debates about Kerry's true intellect.

0 comments
 

John Kerry's SUV


Candidate Kerry, newly remade as this season's Captain Planet, INSISTS:
"I don't own an SUV."
Oh, no? Who owns that Chevrolet Suburban?
"The family has it. I don't have it."
Teresa bought it with her ketchup fortune. Besides, it's a Chevy.
"We're going to keep jobs in America and help the industry be more competitive with foreign manufacturers that are building those cars today."
Splunge.

0 comments
 

New to blogroll: Café Hayek


An Alex Singleton post at the Adam Smith Institute weblog has alerted me to the Café Hayek blog:
Cafe Hayek is run by two lecturers from the Economics Department at George Mason University in Virginia: Prof. Russell Roberts and Prof. Don Boudreaux
.
Their blog is topical, covering topics like how the market will correct overzealous offshoring [outsourcing], and why with trade policy why we should avoid Keynes's phrase: "In the long run, we're all dead."
The outsourcing post is a take I had not heard: that outsourcing sometimes leads to higher costs, and the market will naturally sort it out.

Capitalism is a fundamental law of nature.

0 comments
 

Dem's know: no one knows Kerry


It is becoming obvious to people of both political stripes: though not all would use this term, candidate JF Kerry is the Ultimate Null. He has no personal base of support -- his following made up almost entirely of the A.B.B. crowd -- because he isn't anything. He has promised to define himself, but he is doing so only by attacking the President.

In his WashPost column column today, bearded liberal columnist Richard Cohen insults the President ruthlessly, remarks that Kerry is stalled, and laments:
But so far he [Kerry] has yet to articulate a message and get into rhetorical fighting shape.
Never fear. Cohen has some advice for Kerry:
If I were running the Kerry campaign, I would simply show over and over again Bush's response at his news conference about why he insists on appearing at the Sept. 11 hearings with Vice President Cheney. Bush had no answer -- none whatsoever -- and even a follow-up failed to get a response. (My follow-up would have been to ask if they were going to dress identically.) The look on Bush's face was both telling and scary. He simply had no acceptable answer.
Would that be Kerry's self-definition?

That the President and Vice President are testifying together before the 9-11 Commission, and in fact the 9-11 Commission itself, are not making its appearance on the voters' radar screens. (Note the military metaphor.) The President could render the commercial moot by simply answering. Maybe it is because, as Bob Woodward said on Hardball, it is because Dick Cheney is a genuine conservative and thus has a low opinion of human nature. (Woodward said it. That's his opinion regarding conservatives.)

Either way, at least Cohen is looking at his party's candidate and seeing: NOTHING. The Ultimate Null.

0 comments
 

A new column on the RSN Web site


The latest column by Justin Darr, John Kerry and the UN: an Army of None, is live on the RSN site:
John Kerry's speaking style has all of the excitement and appeal of listening to electric egg beaters. While Mr. Kerry's supporters may call his style "nuanced" (meaning if you do not like it, you lack intelligence), everyone else who has been forced to sit through one of his sleeping pills of a presentation calls it boring. However, when Mr. Kerry speaks of the United Nations, he gets so enthusiastic that he will actually break from his normal droning monotone, and show some verbal inflection! It sounds something like this, "Bzzzzzzzzzzz The U.N. is good, and America sticks! Bzzzzzzzzzzzz." Another fine speech, Senator. [MORE]


Check it out.

0 comments
 

Bush and Missouri


Charles Hammond Jr. wondered aloud in a comment below about how the President will fare in Missouri: "It's also been considered as quite important to any campaign." It has been a bellwether State, to be sure.

I have heard it said that if Kerry were to select Missouri Congressman Dick Gephardt as his running mate, he would win the State. I don't think Gephardt can deliver the State; perhaps Dick can deliver his St. Louis district, but that would probably go Kerry anyway.

Gephardt is not a Statewide candidate, and his ability to deliver union support is questionable after what happened to him in Iowa.

Bush won Missouri by 3.3% last time, March was the month of greatest job growth in the State since Ronald Reagan was in the White House. If I had to call it right now, I'd put it in President's column. And that's 11 electoral votes.

And, Charles, don't write off Illinois. Chicago is problematic, of course, what with Daley and the dead vote -- but the most powerful federal elected official from the State, Speaker Hastert, is a Republican who will be on the campaign trail for the President. That's 21 electoral votes.

It's easier than the media make it sound.

0 comments
 

About that NYTimes Editorial


A Thursday editorial in the NYTImes feebly chastises JF Kerry for not releasing all of his military records from the time he served in Vietnam, and it blasts his wife, Teresa Heinz, for not releasing her tax records.

The tax records are irrelevant, but the military records are not.

The Times editorial opens:
Senator John Kerry's two tours of combat duty in Vietnam should have prepared him well for the political firefight…
I knew that he had served five glorious months on a boat, but I was not aware of his second tour. Was this when he got back on the boat, after having gotten off?

The final paragraph is bothersome:
One of the few sources of comfort for voters in this endless presidential campaign is that there is time to learn what they need to know about the candidates before the conventions in late summer. As the newcomer to the national election stage, Mr. Kerry has more to tell, and more to lose by not doing so early enough that any questions can be asked and answered before his nomination. Why delight critics, and irritate supporters, with a bout of stonewalling that's hardly worth the fight?
Okay, "what they [voters] need to know about the candidates before the conventions in late summer." There is nothing the voters need to know about the candidates before the conventions in late summer, when they become their parties' nominees. What the Democrat voters needed to know was what they needed to know about Kerry before the nominating process was essentially complete. Terence McAuliffe, unfortunately for the Dems, removed that opportunity with his insane frontloading of their primary process. They need a new nominee.

The editorialist could also have meant by that statement that the voters have already learned everything they needed to know about the candidate by the time of the conventions, that there is nothing else they need to know. That puts an arbitrary time limit on the discovery process. After all, voters did not learn that then-candidate George Bush was arrested for D.W.I. when young until the election was almost upon them. (Okay, that was a little bitter sarcasm.)

I don't see the big deal about the ketchup-coated tax records of that woman, Ms. Heinz. Unless there might be an F.E.C. violation, in which case, it should be prosecuted forthwith.

0 comments
 

Mary McGrory: R.I.P.


Syndicated columnist Mary McGrory, 85, died Wednesday night of unspecified causes at George Washington Hospital in DC.

Easily stereotyped but doubtlessly talented, her passing was mourned by such luminaries as WashPost grand-articulator E.J. Dionne and NYTimes wordsmithstress Maureen Dowd.

Also, in a move which some have called racially motivated, America voted Jennifer Hudson and Fantasia Barrino off the island, or whatever, on the popular television program American Idol.

0 comments
 

Happy Earth Day!


Erick Erickson at Confessions of a Political Junkie links a San Francisco Chronicle Op/Ed by a co-founder of Greenpeace who thinks that, until the enviro movement gets the science right, there is "no reason to celebrate Earth Day for millions of people around the globe."

Eric notes: "Like Secretaries Day a/k/a Administrative Professionals Day, Earth Day is a crap holiday."

0 comments
 

Sierra Clubs Survives, Still Goofy


The 112-year-old Sierra Club, purporting to be concerned primarily with the world's natural environment, avoided an attempt by anti-immigration forces to garner seats on the quasi-political group's board. With a record 22.7-percent of the group's members actually voting, the anti-Bush forces retained control of the board, defeating the anti-Bush, anti-immigration crowd. The latter group wailed that population control was a major environmental issue, so we can assume that they are also part of the "save a tree, kill a baby" collective.

Five of the board's 15 seats were contested in the voting which began in March. One could vote via USPS or e-mail, and the results were announced yesterday.

0 comments
 

New column on the RSN site


The latest column by Isaiah Z. Sterrett, Use of Term 'Neocon' is Good Sign For Bush is live on the Rightsided Newsletter web site:
THE DIFFERENCE between liberals and lemmings is becoming increasingly unclear. Left-wing columnists, especially, have a mysterious gift for writing exactly the same things as their colleagues. If one writer decides to start shrieking about a certain issue, so will all the others. It is a perpetually hilarious phenomenon.

For the past few weeks, the liberal argument has consisted of calling President Bush and members of his Administration "neocons," or, "neoconservatives." Neoconservatism, of course, is the movement which calls, in part, for an activist foreign policy aimed at spreading freedom throughout the world. (Just from that definition, you can see why liberals don't care for it.) [MORE]


0 comments
 

Specter and Electoral Myths


In this morning's NRO, Timothy P. Carney examines some of the myths behind the GOP Establishment's painfully myopic support of liberal Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) in his primary bid against conservative Representative Pat Toomey.

Is the party for conservatives? Or must we all move to the middle to retain our place?

0 comments
 

Who will be the Dem nominee?


Good morning. As we've discussed, John Kerry is an unfit presidential nominee. The Democrat Party PTB may be beginning to rue the day they let Terence McAuliffe frontload their nominating process, leaving them with an untested dud candidate.

With that in mind, President Bush might not face Kerry in November. Kerry could implode on his own, or the Democrat PTB could force an implosion, leaving the party free to pick an emergency candidate at their convention this July.

Who will that be that Democrat candidate? Some have suggested Hillary. I have held in the pat that she would not be the nominee since she is not electable, but I think the dynamic has changed slightly. Hillary motivates the ABB crowd, as they are mostly Clinton partisans, and she is capable of attracting voters on her own, something which Kerry is seemingly unable to do.

What of New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson? He can start fresh, the GOP will have limited time to check his record for anything, and he is a bright man to that extent. But he's Hispanic, and typical Dem voters might not go for that.

John Edwards? The Democrat PTB obviously don't think he's ready, but the impression that he could win would override that.

Al Gore? My gawd, no! He's a disgruntled Howard Dean these days, and I'll leave it to you to form that image.

Who do you think?

0 comments

4/21/2004

 

Bob Woodward's Novel


This is from tomorrow's Rightsided Newsletter


Bob Woodward's novel. Of his latest novel, Plan of Attack, Bob Woodward tells us that he has written history. He has certainly had the White House's cooperation, but what he has written is another of Bob Woodward's books. He retrieves individual perceptions of events from half-baked interviews and weaves them into a tale designed to titillate rather than report.

Take the beginning of his interview last September 20 with Don Rumsfeld[transcript]:
Rumsfeld: Okay, a couple of things before we start. I am not great with dates or times and I don't have a lot of notes that can be helpful. The last time we met you asserted things, saying, "You did this or you said that," as though you knew what I did, and you were wrong a lot.

Woodward: I apologize for that. It was based on NSC notes and what other people said.

Rumsfeld: Other people, exactly. And your assumption is, if somebody says that to you, that it is correct. Therefore you assert it to me. That causes me a lot of problems, because then I have to stop and say, "No, that's not right." Almost everything you asked me was premised with an assertion that was either incomplete or wrong, and it changed the whole nature of it. You'd be better off with me if you asked those questions about the premises in the question you want to ask.
In the interview, though, Woodward continued to lead with assertions extrapolating what he chose from Rumsfeld's reaction or lack thereof.

In his book, Woodward alleges that the President began planning the war in November on 2002, showed the plan to everybody but Colin Powell by January of 2003, had Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers brief Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar without telling Powell.

Powell denies it -- "This is becoming insane," he said -- but his problem is that it fits the media's preconceived notion that a distinguished "minority" like General Powell would serve the likes of this administration only as a house servant. Powell, they cried and Woodward is too happy to try to confirm, ambled through his job clueless to the machinations of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz. The press can say, "Told you so." And its based on dubious work by Woodward.

Also in his boo, Woodward asserts that President Bush secretly and illegally diverted $700-million which Congress had earmarked for fighting the war in Afghanistan to planning the war in Iraq. On FOX News' Hannity & Colmes show Tuesday, Rumsfeld told Sean Hannity</