Am I A Pundit Now?

Permanent Blogging At WILLisms.com!

2005-10-13T17:11:00.000-05:00

Well, I have gone from guest blogger to permanent blogger at WILLisms.com!

Will Franklin graciously agreed to have me aboard there, and the possibilities are overwhelming. The traffic I will have there is twentyfold what I have here, so this is definitely a step up.

Until further notice, I am a pundit now!

Guest Blogging At WILLisms.com!

2005-10-02T23:23:00.000-05:00

Once again, Will Franklin has extended to me the honor of guestblogging at WILLisms.com.

Once again, I question his sanity and judgement.

Carnival Of Revolutions

2005-09-26T22:24:00.000-05:00

Revolution!

There has been some big news from the Axis of Evil this week, as good cop North Korea announces plans to renounce its nuclear weapons, while the International Atomic Energy Agency is referring bad cop Iran to the UN Security Council for its intransigence over its nuclear programs. Look for terrorism partners North Korea and Iran to swap the good cop/bad cop role severals times over the next few months - the two seem quite adept at coordinating their activities.

Also, check out the Handbook for Cyber-Dissidents from Reporters Without Borders. This is a must-read for the novice democratista anywhere in the world rebelling against the idea that it is the right of the government to tell you what to think.

Armenia

Armenian activitist are torn over whether to support a referendum on November 20 regarding amendments to the constitution. The amendments, which would limit the authority of the presidency, particularly the President's ability to fire the Prime Minister at will, would smooth the way for integration into Europe. However, Onnik Krikorian states that many feel that "the present government lacks the legitimacy to amend a constitution that does not function not because it is flawed but because there is the lack of the rule of law in Armenia."

There is more on the constitutional referendum here.

Burma

Iran is not the only country of late facing referral to the Security Council. Burma, one of the most repressive states in the world, and a sponsor of terrorism as well, may be up for referral also, according to Publius Pundit.

Cuba

The Bad Hair Blog introduces us to 'Universidades sin fronteras'(Universities without boundaries), a dissident movement within Cuba seeking freedom of association and expression for Cuba's college students. This movement is sponsored by Rolando Rodriguez Lobaina, who was recently arrested for his activities and then released a week later by Cuban authorities. That is a remarkably short time for incarceration in the Gulag that is Cuba, and Fausta states that "Lobaina’s release from prison, only a week after his arrest gives credence to the power, passion, and conviction of the growing international youth network outside of the island, aspiring for recognition of human rights and educational reform in Cuba. The quick mobilization and response to Lobaina’s detention by groups such as 'Raices de Esperanza'and 'El Comité Internacional de Jóvenes por la Democracia en Cuba' raised enough eyebrows to sufficiently concern the communist regime, and proves that the voices and actions of Cuban sympathizers outside of the island are being heard and making a difference."

Global War On Terror

Al-Qaeda issued a broadcast lauding the "defeat of the Zionist occupation" in Gaza, and stated that Hurricane Katrina was Allah's wrath upon New Orleans, a 'city of homosexuals.' The statement also praised Zarqawi's work to "defend the honor of the pure Muslim women in the robbed land of Iraq." Via the indispensable MEMRI.

Iran

A Daily Briefing On Iran has a roundup of articles regarding Iran's imminent referral to the UN Security Council.

European military attaches walked away in protest from a military parade in Tehran. The EU members agreed that, if the parade including any slogans that attacked their allies, they would walk out. Sure enough, Iran marched Shahab-3 missiles by them with banners saying 'Death to America' and the Europeans walked.

Palestine

A large explosion of rockets killed during a Hamas demonstration killed 15 this week. Hamas blames Israel, naturally, but the PLA blames Hamas. The Head Heeb points out that the PLA would have given kneejerk support to the claim Israel was behind the blast if it were true. The fact that the PLA blames Hamas' own negligence belies the truth of the matter.

The IDF has engage in air strikes and arrests to root out the sources of Hamas rocket attacks into Israel.

Kirk H. Sowell warns us that the PLA is tattered and in disarray, and has authority over virtually nothing and no one. To quote the Jerusalem Post, "The Palestinian Authority is crumbling, its leader Mahmoud Abbas is too weak to enforce law and order, his Fatah party is in disarray and Hamas is taking control of the Gaza Strip, Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin said on Wednesday during a rare on-the-record briefing with military reporters...
"The Palestinian Authority is barely functional," Diskin said at his headquarters in Ramat Aviv. "(Abbas) has no apparatus to control Fatah. He is a general without soldiers. Giving him more weapons won't give Fatah strength. He needs more motivation."

Preaching a message of doom and gloom for the prospects of a positive times ahead, Diskin said the Palestinians were making enormous efforts to acquire rockets and other weapons in the West Bank, smuggled in from the Sinai. He also said the Shin Bet believes Islamic extremists who follow an al-Qaida ideology were still targeting the Sinai resorts and that Israelis should stay out of there... "

Kirk's blog also presents excellent weekly roundups of events throughout the middle east.

Yemen

Our friend Jane Novak of Armies of Liberation certainly seems to be getting under the skin of the Saleh regime of late. Jane has been blogging regularly on the tyrannical nature of Yemen's government, and the press there is attacking her, calling her a Zionist, as well as "a Mason, a Yemeni man in disguise, a Hashemite, working for the CIA, working for the Socialists, residing in al-Arabait, and a Docile Student of a Monkey Monk." If one can be judged by the enemies one makes, Jane is a fine upstanding citizen of the world. It is also a testament to the power of blogs that now even hidebound reactionary states feel the need to respond to them.

Yemen too has a part to play in the Global War on Terror, and has not endeared itself to neighboring Saudi Arabia, which complains that "all weapons and explosives used by the Qaeda fighters were bought and smuggled from Yemeni arms markets. Confessions of those arrested shown that they use Yemen as a source of arms and transfer them over the border.”

Moreover, the evidence is piling up that Yemen is a major transit point for terrorists infiltrating into Iraq.

And President Saleh supports Iran's nuclear program.

The Carnival of Revolutions Home Base can be found here, at WILLisms.com. Thanks Will!

Hamas Facing Reality?

2005-09-21T18:20:00.000-05:00

Hamas leader Mohammed Ghazal stated that the Hamas charter "is not the Koran" and indicated that the terrorist group might some day amend its charter to remove language calling for the destruction of Israel.

This is a stunning development, the single sole tiny indication of moderation of any kind by this murderous cabal.

(h/t LGF)

The Case For Permanent Bases In Iraq

2005-09-20T12:45:00.000-05:00

The United States has 120 FOBs, or forward operating bases in Iraq, and plans to build 14 permanent bases there, including airbases (there is even an alleged 'Camp Bushwhacker' somewhere in Iraq). Via GlobalSecurity.org we can see the major bases already established there:

Take a look at the powerful strategic position Iraq possesses on the world map. Historically Iraq has been strategic not just for the middle east, but for the whole world - it is literally the crossroads of the ancient world. Alexander crossed here on his way to India, and at the height of its power the Roman Empire extended down the Tigris and Euphrates right to the Persian Gulf itself.The silk road had its terminus here.

It was just about impossible to travel east or west through the fertile crescent without crossing through what is now Iraq:

Iraq remains just as geographically and politically strategic today. Axis of Evil senior member Iran is pinned between Afghanistan and Iraq - both held by American troops. On Iraq's flank is junior associate member of the Axis of Evil, Syria. This puts a tremendous incentive upon both of these regimes to be on their best behavior. While protecting the critical oil fields of Iraq, American and Coalition troops are well-poised to quell any mischief in oil rich Saudi Arabia and Kuwait as well, thus stabilizing the major energy resources of the entire world and putting them beyond the machinations of terrorists. Moderate and weak Jordan enjoys shade from this umbrella of protection, as do the Gulf States.

Its location also makes Iraq great piece of flypaper. If you had to pick one country in the middle east to serve as the center of gravity for jihadism, Iraq would serve nicely. Lodged between the respective headquarters of shia and sunni jihadism, Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iraq would be the absolute perfect locus to tie down terrorism if we could somehow pick up Egypt and place it right next to Iraq as well. The symbolic value of controlling Baghdad, seat of the ancient caliphate, and Najaf, theological center of shi'ite Islam, should not be underestimated. Granted, this is not the type of strategic advantage one looks for - the Pentagon would prefer not to fight any insurgency at all obviously. And the argument that if we don't fight them in the streets there, we will be fighting them in the streets here is quite a stretch. If al-Qaeda ever obtained an air force or navy powerful enough to force its way to our shores - which is what it would take to deliver sufficient numbers of jihadists to wage an insurrection here - then car bombs will surely be the least of our worries.

But,let's try to squeeze whatever possible lemonade we can out of this lemon . . . having lots of jihadists dying while fighting experienced American and Iraqi forces is arguably better than having jihadists spread all over the middle east causing mischief in places not expecting violence, or subverting, co-opting or forming partnerships with the tyrannies still at large there. Or planning attacks against the U.S.

We need permanent bases to properly house our troops and improve operations, and to avoid the utter disaster that befell South Vietnam once it collapsed. Losing Vietnam allowed the genocide in Kampuchea to begin. Who knows what equivalent horrors (or worse) would be unleashed if Iraq falls.

Permanent bases will go from being the anchors that keep Iraq stable and free, to being powerful projection points throughout the entire region once the insurrection is quelled. In time, I suspect the average Iraqi will no more resent a permanent American presence on their soil any more than the average German or Japanese does. Far from being the neocon imperialist nightmare envisioned by the overly-imaginative Left, permanent bases in Iraq will be tangible evidence of our continued commitment to a free and prosperous Iraq, and don't let the symbolic value of that for Iraqis and all the peoples of the region be underestimated either.

Linked to Outside the Beltway's Beltway Traffic Jam - thank you!

North Korea Says 'No Nukes'

2005-09-19T07:28:00.000-05:00

North Korea has agreed to give up its nuclear weapons, in return for an affirmation by the United States that it has no nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula, and that the U.S. has no intention to invade North Korea.

Is the North serious? Who knows.

It should not matter. The MSM should trumpet George Bush's phenomenal and unprecedented foreign policy triumph here--though of course they won't. Even if the agreement unravels (as it most likely will) the press habitually focuses on the image of success rather than the substance of it, and so the editorial pages of major newspapers across the land should be lobbying for Bush to get the Nobel Peace Prize. The Left wing should be patting Bush on the back for this major victory in the War on Terror.

Does that sound ridiculous? Just imagine if Bill Clinton had achieved something like this.

Perhaps though, in the most optimistic scenario, this is two members of the Axis of Evil down, one to go. Keep hope alive!

Palestinian Troglodytes In Action

2005-09-13T01:13:00.000-05:00

Speaking of 'tolerance', here is a picture of Palestinians burning an abandoned synagogue in Gaza (via Powerline).

They destroyed three other synagogues as well.

Touching--isn't it?--the respect and toleration these muslims have for other cultures and peoples? Isn't it marvelous to see this religion of PEACE and LOVE serving mankind?

May I throw up now?

The Liberal Tolerance Myth

2005-09-12T15:08:00.000-05:00

Alright, this is perhaps an odd way to bring up this topic, but bear with me.

Greg Gutfeld's latest bombshell over at HuffPo really has a lot of commenters in an irate lather. One commenter in particular said that he hoped to meet Greg in a dark alley. Greg responded in his DOUBLE SECRET HIDDEN BLOG (in his bio) that he didn't know whether he should bring a knife or a condom to the alley. Better bring both just in case!

Anyway, clearly this commenter is addled with hatred for Greg Gutfeld, and I am curious as to why a HuffPo commenter, no doubt with his liberal bona fides in order, would express a desire to do violence to Gutfeld.

Where is that vaunted liberal tolerance?

Don't liberals bleat endlessly about how tolerant they are? Aren't we supposed to be tolerant of everything, including those we disagree with?

Including conservatives? If not, why not?

After all, if tolerance only means toleration for those things which you already accept, that is not tolerance. That is agreement. Tolerance, properly, means putting up with those things with which you disagree. For example, if you are a liberal democrat who thinks civil unions are a great thing, you are not tolerating homosexuality. You are accepting of it, and perhaps even condone it. You do not earn liberal brownie points for being 'tolerant' of homosexuality if you see nothing wrong with it.

Yet look at how vituperative liberals get when confronted with those things they actually do disagree with. The ire directed at evangelicals, Republicans and of course George W. Bush has reached dreadful lows never seen before in American political life. If you merely voice support for the administration in any way, you too like Greg Gutfeld have joined the evil and criminal cabal that runs this country. You have blood on your hands. You are a Bushbot.

You deserve to be beaten up in an alley.

To emphasize just how silly the liberal myth of tolerance is, let us properly apply it. We are supposed to be tolerant of those things with which we disagree. Are we then supposed to be tolerant of al-Qaeda? Nazis? Child molesters? Murderers? Liberals will quickly find ways to extract themselves from being bound to these examples. After all, they don't really believe this tolerance crap any more than conservatives do.

The liberal tolerance myth is emblematic of liberalism itself. Liberals don't extend the hand of tolerance really, they merely pat themselves on the back with it. It isn't important to actually be tolerant, it is only important to be perceived as tolerant. That, my friends, is liberalism in a nutshell.

Corruption Killed New Orleans?

2005-09-07T22:50:00.000-05:00

How corrupt is Louisiana? Billy Tauzin once observed that "half the state is under water, the other half is under indictment."

This history of corruption may be the proximate cause of the unravelling disaster that ultimately destroyed New Orleans. Policemen participating in looting rather than stopping it is merely the tip of this iceberg.

Senator David Vitter had called for federal investigations into several Lousiana public utilities, among them the Orleans Parish Levee Board.

The Levee Board was supposed to provide repairs and oversight of the levees. And so to further that end, they invested in, guess what . . .

Casinos!

That's right. Rather than raising taxes or floating municipal bonds to secure the levees, the Levee Board invested in a myriad of projects having nothing to do with flood control, with an eye towards feeding the patronage machine and rewarding political supporters.

Where did the revenues go? No one seems to know.

The Canada Free Press asks an interesting question regarding this:

Could New Orleans’s descent into quasi-revolutionary chaos be an indirect result of racketeering, kickbacks and procurement fraud by Democrat insiders with ties to a fast-growing organization called `La Francophonie’?

And get this:

CIDA [which funds La Francophonie]was founded in 1968 by the ex-president of Power Corp. of Montreal, Maurice Strong, a paranoid, billionaire depopulationist who claims "rich, industrialized countries (America and the Anglosphere) are the greatest threat to the survival of the planet and therefore he, Maurice Strong, has a duty to force them into line. In the 1990s, Strong went on to become the godfather of the $trillion Kyoto trading scandal, with the financial clout to execute his dreams for La Francophonie.

Via the invaluable John Batchelor show, featuring journalist Charles Gasparino of Newsweek.

Fixing The Katrina Memes

2005-09-06T21:31:00.000-05:00

I have to hand it to Hugh Hewitt, he was right. The Left's reaction to Katrina, rather than being a bounteous outpouring of that famous liberal compassion, was instead the Wellstone Memorial redux.

Hugh advised that if your opponent is making a fool of himself, don't interrupt, so to speak. While of course there is wisdom in that, it is also prudent to amplify for all to see the foolery in which your opponent engages.

I think the blogs have taken the lead in seeing that the odious memes cropping up about Bush's handling of this disaster have by and large not taken root. In fact, Wes Pruden tells us that the disaster fallout has not harmed the President's standing with the American people.

An ABC News Poll tells us that

Americans are broadly critical of government preparedness in the Hurricane Katrina disaster -- but far fewer take President Bush personally to task for the problems, and public anger about the response is less widespread than some critics would suggest:" Two-thirds of those polled say the federal government should have been better prepared to deal with a storm this size, and three-quarters say state and local governments in the affected areas likewise were insufficiently prepared.
Most Americans, 55 percent, also say President Bush does not deserve a significant level of personal blame for problems in the federal response to the crisis. And while 44 percent do assign him blame, only about half of those, 23 percent overall, blame the president "a great deal."

It is now becoming apparent that the Feds responded in a timely and appropriate fashion. The levee is already repaired, and engineers are now pumping water out of New Orleans. FEMA seems to be the exception however, apparently the feds here waited until after the storm hit to call up homeland security agents.

It has also become clear now that Governor Blanco, in her failure to call up the National Guard, or really do anything other than break down and cry, is the main cause of the looting and savagery that befell New Orleans.

As for Mayor Nagin, I think the picture of the buses sitting empty in flooded parking lots pretty much demonstrates in graphic fashion his culpability.

There are rumors that Nagin has resigned.

Neil Boortz demonstrates how assigning blame is far more important to the Left than actually fixing the problem.

Ben Stein shows how ludicrous it is to blame President Bush for the largest catastrophe to ever hit the United States.

Paul Krugman, as expected, has eschewed facts and common sense to reach the conclusion that the whole thing is Bush's fault. Powerline and Rightwing Nuthouse do a tag-team takedown of the worst pundit in America. The title of 'pundit' should be reserved for those with at least a tenuous grasp on facts and reality. Krugman needs to have his title revoked posthaste - he has reduced himself to a sorry self-parody of a frothing liberal hack.

Am I politicizing the issue here? Hardly. Correcting the habitual lies of the Left is not politicizing, but rather de-politicizing the issue.

There is nothing 'political' about the truth.

Linked to Outside the Beltway's Traffic Jam, and to PoliBlog's Longday Linkfest. Thanks!

Filling the Rehnquist 'Slot'

2005-09-06T08:14:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, President Bush announced that Judge Roberts would be nominated for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court now that William Rehnquist has died.

John Roberts, former clerk to Rehnquist, will be a pall bearer at the funeral.

This spares us all from a third confirmation hearing, and the Left seems relieved that neither Scalia nor Thomas will be nominated for Chief Justice. We are likely to see opposition to Robert's nomination begin to wilt.

The Left also thinks that Roberts is now filling the Rehnquist 'slot' rather than the O'Connor slot, and so we can now expect Democrats to demand a squishy nominee to replace Sandra Day, to preserve the 'delicate balance' of the Court.

There are no 'slots', and there is no 'balance' that needs to be maintained--the President simply has the obligation to fill an empty seat on the bench, with whoever is qualified to interpret the Constitution. He is not charged with finding a carbon copy of each Justice to be replaced, nor is he charged with pleasing his political opponents.

Thus, it would be a mistake for the President to announce a nominee until Roberts is safely on the bench. If Bush moves too soon, he allows the Democrats to compare and contrast the two for 'proper balance'--as if that should be the President's main concern in choosing a justice. Putting Roberts on the bench allows the President to state that the first seat open, vacated by Sandra Day O'Connor, has now been filled. He is then freer to nominate someone demonstrably to the right of Roberts is he so chooses, as is his right. Announcing another nominee before then just muddies the issue.

Postscript:Look for the Democrats to stretch out the Roberts nomination as long as possible, and then to demand that Bush announce a nominee. They will have more power to try and nuke someone they don't like if they can compare her to Roberts. I am betting Bush will pick a woman, not because he happens to think that should be the prime qualification, but because he has many well-qualified and base-pleasing women he could nominate.

William H. Rehnquist, R.I.P.

2005-09-03T23:34:00.000-05:00

Making a tough week even tougher, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has passed away.

Condolences to his family, friends, and the Court.

Hey, Katrina Crackpots, S.T.F.U.

2005-09-02T06:25:00.000-05:00

I am saddened and disgusted by the knee-jerk carping in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Just disgusted. It is absolutely ghoulish to be flinging blame when the recovery has not even really begun yet.

Of course radical Islamists see this storm as God's revenge. So do some radical Christians. Well, at least saying God caused it is placing blame where it belongs, so to speak.

This following parade of clowns has no such excuse:

Kevin Drum says it is the fault of conservatism. I used to respect this guy.

The Huffington Post is of course attempting to corner the market on all obnoxious blather, starting with the Queen Of All Twits herself, Arianna. Her Highness blames the disaster on the Iraq War.

One of her Mediocre Minions chimes in with one of the most vapid and brainless rants ever uploaded to the internet.

Wow, here is a HuffPo blogger you have actually heard of! Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.unfortunately is given a platform simply because of his name, which he sullies by blaming Bush for the disaster.

Meanwhile in Europe, Green Party member Jürgen Trittin blames the disaster on our failure to ratify the Kyoto Protocols.

Wait, it gets worse! Randi Rhodes says that Bush wants to use Katrina to kill Democrats.

I have just one message for these people:

Ken Says: I hereby place this image into the public domain - please copy it and distribute it liberally.

Also, just yesterday I told Will Franklin that it was too early to try and drain this cesspool, but while blog surfing last night my own mental levee just sorta broke. I couldn't take it anymore. Sorry Will for breaking my quasi-pledge to you, but a kind of grief and anger took over. This is not the America and the world I thought I knew.

Update: I see Chrenkoff put together a better list than I did.

Linked to Outside the Beltway's Traffic Jam.

Update II: Patrick Ruffini shows us that the insanity has infected the Democratic National Committee. Not the Democratic Underground, but the DNC itself. Unbelievable.

Update III: Captain Ed is challenging bloggers to hold off from partisan bickering for a while. CQ is my favorite blog right now, and as much as I respect the Cap'n I am afraid I cannot abide. Here is what I wrote in the comments:

As much as I admire the sentiment behind your idea to hold off on any partisanship, I cannot simply stand by and let the other side paint our President as an incompetent--or worse--without fighting back. I refuse to cede the ground to those who would plant this meme. I refuse to go back to the old days when the leftists could put out any dishonest message they liked without having it challenged.
I challenge them on their bogus assertions-- and the ugly strains of racism, conspiracy theories and corporate greed now cropping up like weeds need to be exposed as the quackeries they are before they choke the discourse completely.
I refuse to hand them the debate agenda.

Katrina Devastation

2005-09-02T02:59:00.000-05:00

Update: They rescued Fats Domino!

Katrina Wakeup Call

2005-09-01T08:22:00.000-05:00

I didn't think I had anything to add to the Hurricane Katrina story, and so I hadn't blogged about it, until now, because a dark thought hit me.

We now know what it is like to lose an entire american city.

I am not comforted by the outpouring of aid and compassion by the American people - I fully expected that. Americans always do this, it is our modus operandi, and so there is nothing extraordinary about it.

I am even less comforted by the sizable segment of the American population that thinks the War on Terror is fake, misguided or wrong. Hurricane Katrina was unavoidable, but weapons of mass destruction purposely destroying an American city is quite avoidable.

If we are vigilant. If we are all vigilant.

Ken Says: Instapundit has posted a wide array of organizations accepting disaster relief funds.

Able Danger Hearings Soon

2005-09-01T02:12:00.000-05:00

According to the NY Times, Arlen Specter is going to hold judiciary committee hearings on Able Danger on September 14.

Hat tip here to Just One Minute, which has done a very thorough job covering this story - if you are interested in the many twists and turns this story has taken to get to Capitol Hill, that is the place to start.

Syria's Days Numbered?

2005-08-30T22:13:00.000-05:00

Three Syrian security chiefs and the head of Lebanon's presidential guard were arrested yesterday in connection with the assassination of Rafik Hariri.

Anti-Syrian politicians in Lebanon including Walid Jumblatt have fled the country, fearing an assassination campaign by Damascus/Hezboallah/Iran. Hariri's son Saad has been in Paris for two weeks, fearing an attack if he returned to Lebanon.

The sophisticated and in-depth forensic investigation of Hariri's death is getting close to proving that Bashar Assad ordered his assassination. There are rumors of wiretaps proving that Damascus ordered the killing.

This is momentous - it is an act of war by Syria upon Lebanon.

John Batchelor had one question on his show regarding this situation: how long will it take Israel's 1st Armored Division to go from Eilat to Damascus?

Hither And Yon

2005-08-30T19:14:00.000-05:00

Yeah, like Michael Yon has never heard that one before.

Being the laggard that I am, I did not discover who Michael Yon was until last week. I found his blog, and read it from beginning to end - maybe the best damn thing I have read on a blog yet.

The upshot: we are winning the war in Iraq.

Maybe if more journalists in Iraq emulated Yon and actually left the hotel bars once in a while, we would get a more realistic view of what is happening there.

Cindy Sheehan, Media Fake

2005-08-29T19:53:00.000-05:00

Via LGF we find this tender and spontaneous moment between Cindy Sheehan and Al Sharpton . . .

. . . and a dozen or so of their closest friends in the media - is that David Duke somewhere in the background?

Need any more evidence that Cindy Sheehan is an utter fake? Well, check out this account from a conservative infiltrator at Camp Casey. Cindy Sheehan is not a grieving mother - she is a leftist media creature with handlers and her own public relations firm.

Rightwing Nuthouse also asks a great question: where are all the protestors?

5th Columnist Inside HuffPo

2005-08-29T17:40:00.000-05:00

Great. After I completely bailed out on the Huffington Post, I discover that there was one blogger there worth reading.

This is some of the funniest stuff I ever read on a blog. This guy skewers and deflates a lot of the sanctimonious mediocrities posing as 'bloggers' on HuffPo (which is, basically, all of them) and for some reason Arianna puts up with it.

Greg's posts are always a twofer, because the tight-sphinctered comments by his detractors are nearly as funny as his posts.

I think Arianna hasn't gotten rid of this guy yet because she would be too embarassed to admit she made a mistake in handing him the keys to HuffPo.

Don't forget to check out his DOUBLE SECRET HIDDEN BLOG contained in his bio.

Men Smarter Than Women?

2005-08-28T21:30:00.000-05:00

There is a new study claiming that men, on average, are five IQ points more intelligent than women.

I don't buy it. No doubt feminist groups will be working overtime to discredit the methodology of this study, and will attack even the possibility that men might be naturally smarter than women. But even if the methodology were proven sound, I would discount it.

We simply can't--and shouldn't--act as if one of the genders is smarter than the other. You never deal with an entire group of people in your life encounters, you deal with individuals one at a time. And individuals are just that, single souls with their own characteristics and personalities that are quite capable of lying anywhere along the bell curve. As a man it would not behoove you to treat any given woman you meet as less intelligent than you are just because of her gender, you would simply be cheating yourself and cheating her.

The ugliest possibility of this type of study, if proven true, is that there will be calls for some kind of remedial social engineering to level the playing field. Or calls for some kind of paternal legislation aimed at protecting our supposedly less acute sisters. The mind reels with all sorts of horrid reactions to this type of discovery, nothing good can come of it.

Blogocracy

2005-08-28T17:20:00.000-05:00

"God made all Men, Samuel Colt made them equal."

Gunpowder, and the cheap arms that use it, is one of the great levellers of history. It devastated the feudal system that depended on the expensive arms, armor and training of the feudal knight.

It gave power to the people.

Blogs are the information age equivalent of gunpowder - blogs are the great equalizers that are tearing down the gates controlled by the elites.

What is the entry cost of starting a blog? Nothing. Not one penny. It costs nothing to maintain a blog, or make it grow. It has been said that the freedom of the press belongs to those wealthy enough to afford one. No longer. Blogs are extremely democratic, in that there are no barriers to entry, and all are welcome to try their hand at it.

Not only are blogs democratic, they are also an inherently 'conservative' device, in that the blogosphere is a strict meritocracy governed by the laws of the market. You can only gain traffic and spread your memes if you write something worth reading. Whether by entertaining, informing or outraging their readers, bloggers have to fight for traffic.

When you get rid of the editors and the marketers standing between the reader and the writer, you see the real face of whoever it is communicating with you. Far from pretending to be objective, bloggers make a point of coming at you with a certain attitude. And so the the difference between a top-down, inauthentic elitist philosophy such as liberalism compared to the bottom-up, real philosophy of conservatism becomes clear. I will put the quality, sincerity and readability of the big rightwing blogs up against the leftwing blogs any day. No contest - Captain's Quarters, Powerline, Vodkapundit, Volokh, and Instapundit simply blow leftists like Atrios and You-Know-Who out of the water. I defy anyone to make the case otherwise.

Run, Rudy, Run!

2005-08-27T13:08:00.000-05:00

I voted in Patrick Ruffini's straw poll for Rudy Giuliani last month - and was surprised to see that George Allen was beating him (and everyone else) at the time. Ruffini has now closed his latest straw poll, and Giuliani has surged to take the lead with 30% of the votes.

Why vote for Giuliani? The guy has demonstrated that he can get the job done under pressure, and unfortunately I think the odds will be fifty-fifty that our next president will be called upon to display just such fortitude.

He is not ideologically pure. Far from being a detriment in his case, I think it makes him a pragmatist. He breaks with Republican ranks on issues when necessary, and not for the purpose of sucking up to the press as does John McCain.

He will win. I don't care who the dems put up against Giuliani - Rudy will beat them with natural charm, charisma, quick wit and well-tuned political ear. He was on his way to drubbing Hillary Clinton in the New York senate race when he had to pull out, and he will trounce her again if they face off in a presidential run.

As for Giuliani's 'baggage' - please. We live in the post-Clinton era, and Democrats have lost any right to harp on anyone's personal failings.

Rudy Giuliani is a candidate that will really get the Republicans fired up in a way none of the other candidates can, save Condoleeza Rice (Ruffini's 'fantasy candidate' winner) but - I believe Condi when she says she does not want to run. I don't think she will.

In the end though, choosing Rudy is really a gut thing for me. I just trust the guy.

Sad, Sad, Sad

2005-08-27T04:44:00.000-05:00

While perusing Michelle Malkin's site, I noted three stories in a row - leftist protestors at Walter Reed Hospital, fake news stories about a fictional veteran, and beatings of two soldiers in Seattle.

What is the connection among these three sad stories? A complete and utter lack of respect for soldiers who protect our liberties.

I wonder when leftist psychos are going to start spitting on soldiers--it is probably only a matter of time now, just to complete the whole 'Iraq is Vietnam' thing, you know.

P.S., there should be heightened penalties for any assault or battery committed against uniformed soldiers or guardsmen.

Drudge Was Right, Unfortunately

2005-08-26T06:44:00.000-05:00

I used to be a big fan of the Drudge Report--until he loaded up his site with so much crap that it started crashing my IE browser. Sorry, I am not switching to Firefox just for the privilege of being able to visit Drudge.

Anyway, beware to any unwary blogger that links to Drudge before his stories are proven true. I was disgusted by the possibility that this story, originally posted on Drudge a day or two ago, might be true.

Sadly, it appears to be.

And Charity Toward None?

2005-08-24T20:16:00.000-05:00

Here is another example of government standing in the way of good citizenship, Big Government Discourages Private Charity by John Stossel.

Thanks to Peter Sakievich for the tip!

Cindy Sheehan's Lib Logic

2005-08-22T05:36:00.000-05:00

Get this: Cindy Sheehan has proclaimed that George W. Bush murdered her son.

Now, Cindy Sheehan has said that she bears no ill will towards whoever it was that actually killed her son. She told reporters during a conference call that she has "no animosity for that person at all."

Can it be any clearer that Cindy Sheehan is not from Planet Earth?

Flat Tax Cure For Oppression

2005-08-21T19:39:00.000-05:00

I have always thought that the federal tax code 'disenfranchises' citizens by being so large and complex that no ordinary citizen could possibly take the time to properly understand it.

I don't mean literal disenfranchisment by being deprived of the vote, but a disenfranchisement of a citizen being alienated from their own governing process by a set of laws so impenetrable, that taxpayers must often hire a guru such as an accountant or tax lawyer just to figure out what to pay the government. In effect, you must pay an accountant or lawyer 'tax' just for the privilege of not screwing yourself over while figuring out what you owe. It is a form of minor oppression, but an oppression nonetheless, that puts a 'priestly caste' between the citizen and an understanding of their own government.

Take at look at the sheer size of the United States Code sometime. Or the CFRs, the Code of Federal Regulations. We live in a technically advanced society governed by the rule of law, and I understand that the size, breadth and depth of federal law is necessary. The downside of this is that it makes good citizenship harder and harder all the time, because it becomes harder and harder for the good citizen to even know what the rules are that governs his conduct.

Therefore the simplicity of the flat tax alone is a virtue sufficient to recommend it, regardless of what other disadvantages it may have. The tax process is the average citizen's most direct contact with the federal government - and so what a wonderful starting place for simplification it is.

Breaching the gap between citizen and government is only one of the myriad benefits of flat taxes, as explained in this analysis by Will Franklin.

Iraq Is No Bosnia

2005-08-20T02:34:00.000-05:00

Via Dean Esmay, and via AMERICAblog we find some quotes of Republicans against the war in Bosnia collected by the Blog-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named.

This is somehow supposed to be a damning indictment of Republicans who are now hawkish on Iraq, committing the ultimate sin of hypocrisy. I am not sure this cuts in favor of the liberal opponents of the war however. These are much the same folk that were leading the cheers for Clinton's war - why are they any less hypocritical for now being anti-war? Isn't this list of quotes an admission that liberals now are no more honest about their concerns than Republicans were then? Isn't that tantamount to saying the entire thing is about politics and nothing else? They doth protest too much, and this list of quotes is also an admission that these types of criticisms are finding their targets.

Big, huge, whopping, critical difference between the Bosnian war and the Iraq war: the Iraq war is necessary for national security, economic and humanitarian interests, while the Bosnian war was of questionable value in saving lives and served absolutely no national security interests whatsover.

Not even the Europeans thought it worth lifting a finger over.

Ken Says: I was opposed to the air war in Bosnia because I didn't think it was our war to fight. At the very least our NATO buddies could have chipped in with a few goddam air strikes of their own - it still rankles me how useless the Europeans are when it comes to such things.

But, when the war started I shut the hell up, supported the troops and our President. Just what any decent American would or should do.

'Incurable Moral Cretinism'

2005-08-17T17:39:00.000-05:00

James Lileks on Cindy Sheehan and her ugly ideology.

Who Hates Hillary?

2005-08-16T23:09:00.000-05:00

Via Patrick Ruffini we find a Kos Kid poll, 'Who Do You Hate In '08' querying visitors about their least favorite dem candidate in '08.

Guess who is winning/losing? That's right - Her Majesty, Hillary Clinton.

What a dilemma for poor Hillary. She has a choice of either alienating the Democratic base and the 'grassroots' folk who actually raise a lot of money, or embracing a liberal ideology that doesn't have a chance in hell of actually winning.

Ruffini also points out Hillary's new alliance with Rupert Murdoch of all people, which has another Kos Kiddie all upset too, quoth - "Hillary, the pro-war neocon (see her speech to AIPAC; it's on her website) is nothing less than Joe Lieberman in a pants suit."

Hillary is a 'neocon'? Compared to Noam Chomsky, maybe.

Carnival Of Revolutions

2005-08-15T04:58:00.000-05:00

Revolution!

'Revolution' no longer means trading in the old tyranny for a new tyranny. Nowadays, it means glorious democracy. However, the path to democracy often leads to dead ends, false turns and steps backward. Sometimes big steps backwards such as developments this week in Iran.

For those of you keeping score at home, I present this week's Carnival of Revolutions:

Armenia

A Step Forward.

Onnik Krikorian at Oneworld Multimedia examines the Likelihood Of Revolution In Armenia, and tells us about the launch of the Armenian Independent Media Center, a very welcome development.

Belarus

A Step Forward.

Gateway Pundit reports that Lech Walesa has given Belarus, the 'most repressive state in Europe', a piece of his mind.

Georgia and Ukraine

A Step Forward.

Krikorian also tells us about the growing democratic solidarity between Georgia and Ukraine, and their further orientation toward the West.

Iraq

A Step Backward.

The Sharpener gives us coverage of some disturbing developments, following up on revelations of a fundamentalist takeover of Basra as reported by the late Steven Vincent.

Palestine

A Step Backward.

Different River compares the impending Israeli pullout from Gaza to the ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia.

Syria

A Step Forward.

Kirk H. Sowell brings us an interview that uncovers some surprising Syrian arab views regarding America. Is the term 'Syrian arab' redundant? Hardly. The main thrust of the interview deals with Syrian Kurds.

Yemen

A Step Backward.

Jane continues her important coverage of unfolding events in Yemen. President Saleh moves to improve his image, while at the same time possibly giving refuge to Iraqi ex-Ba'athists in al-Qaeda run training camps. Not new this week, but I cannot help but also post to the dramatic photos of Yemeni riots at WILLisms.com.

All in all, not the best week for democracy.

Upcoming Hosts:
August 22: Coming Anarchy
August 29: One Free Korea
September 5: Thinking-East
September 12: Quid Nimis

Thanks to Will Franklin at WILLisms.com for the privilege of hosting this week's Carnival of Revolutions.

Insults, North Korean Style

2005-08-14T23:10:00.000-05:00

Via The Scotsman (is there a cooler name for a newspaper anywhere?) we discover the NK News Database of North Korean Propaganda.

It even includes the KCNA insult generator!

If you have ever read the priceless diatribes at KCNA, the official propaganda arm of the North Korean government, you know that what the Scotsman article says is true - the North Koreans routinely issue unintentionally hilarious nonsense.

NARAL Succumbs To Truth

2005-08-12T09:45:00.000-05:00

Apparently NARAL is withdrawing its repugnant ad attacking Judge Roberts.

This, my friends, is a victory for the Factual Revolution.

Not so long ago, this ad would have gone unchallenged. The most a conservative could do in protest was write a letter to the editor of their paper hoping it gets published, or hope that lone conservative pundit George Will talked about it on tv.

Now, blogs and talk radio can call down a firestorm of outrage against the lying demagoguery that liberal interests so routinely engage in. Such protests get results, because now Democrats can no longer duck the question of whether they agree with such messages.

This will not prevent fringe groups like NARAL from trying such tactics again. They have no other tactics. Other more reasonable tactics, such as telling the truth, are anathema because the truth is not exactly helpful to their cause.

Heroes On The Right

2005-08-11T20:41:00.000-05:00

. . . and heroes on the left.

Betsy Newmark posted her 12 favorite people on the right 'including politicians, pundits, bloggers and media people.'

How about your favorites from the right and left, of all time?

Mine goes something like this - righties:
Ronald Reagan
Max Stirner
Ludwig von Mises
Charleton Heston
Margaret Thatcher

Lefties:
FDR
Harry S Truman
JFK
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Christopher Hitchens

. . . and uncategorizable:

Friederich Nietzsche

. . . and my favorite of all time is Abraham Lincoln. But is he right, or left? I haven't even tried to add the collective Founding Fathers to this list - they are not mere mortals to me anyway.

The commone themes for me here are courage, genius or cojones. Thus, Lincoln is first followed by Reagan because they had the most of all three.

Able Danger Overture

2005-08-11T01:15:00.000-05:00

According to Curt Weldon (R-7th Dist., PA), the feds had Mohammed Atta and three other 911 terrorists under surveillance and failed to pursue them in any meaningful manner because Bill Clinton feared another Waco-type backlash. Using data mining techniques, a special Pentagon unit named 'Able Danger' uncovered the 911 terrorist cell, tried to have them taken out, and were stopped by Clinton administration lawyers.

This story is just really getting started, and already it stinks to high heaven:

911 Commission members are now admitting that they were briefed on Able Danger - which they had all denied up until now. The Commissioners knew about Able Danger and left it out of their report. Does not pass the smell test.

Jamie Gorelick, architect of the inane 'wall' that protected Atta & Co. from law enforcement, was one of the 911 Commissioners charged with investigating why Atta & Co. were not stopped.

Sandy Berger may have been trying to cover up Able Danger by stuffing notes into his socks.

I have a feeling we are going to be hearing a lot more about Able Danger in the near future. Kinda reveals the Plame affair as the complete non-story it is by comparison.

Bipartisan Victory: Lots O' Pork

2005-08-10T19:32:00.000-05:00

The only thing that seems to unite Republicans and Democrats: bringing home the bacon.

Today, in Montgomery Illinois (just a few potholes away from where I am writing) President Bush signed the new highway bill, which weighed in at a monstrous $286.4 billion.

Bush said he compromised Congress down from $400 billion!

Is anyone else out there annoyed by this violation of first principles by 'fiscally conservative' Republicans?

Ken Says: I dunno why but I feel like I gotta explain myself on this. I am socially liberal, so one of the main reasons I support socially conservative Republicans is because they believe in fiscal responsibility. Or so they say. If they knock this pillar out from under me, it blows away a whole bundle of reasons why I support them. It is much more than an issue of balanced budgets. Limiting the size of government is the best check we have on creeping socialism. It is the best way to keep the free play of markets and entreprenership going strong. A smaller government must, by necessity, be less powerful and thus more deferential to liberty. The only thing that competes with limited government for space on my political radar screen is national security. I hope the Republicans don't take it away from me or, god forbid, the Democrats appropriate it. Not much danger of that, but the Dems have to wise up one day, don't they?

Lifesaving Peanut Butter

2005-08-09T19:33:00.000-05:00

Best thing I have heard about in a while:

'Plumpy'nut'.

Via PrestoPundit.

Changes For The Worse

2005-08-08T04:41:00.000-05:00

Eternal optimist that I am, I do not believe that there is some lost golden age in American politics that we should be trying to recover. Our best days are ahead of us, not behind us. I really believe that, for all the horrible things happening in the world right now. The world as a whole has never been more at peace, closer to worldwide affluence, or a better place to live.

Having said that, there are a few things in American politics that have changed for the worse over the last few decades, and most are more recent developments. I blame a Democratic party in systematic decline for most, not all, of the sour developments in our political system. The Democrats' heyday came when they brought down Nixon. Bloated with arrogance, the Democratic party forgot its identity, grew soft, lost power, and then lost its mind. Our political culture has become coarse, ruder, more childish, and largely bereft of substance due to the implosion of this once-great party. They are going down, and they are taking a lot of the good things from our political culture with them.

Remember what politics in the U.S. used to be like? Here are some examples:

There was a time when the opposition party would refrain from criticising the president when he is away on foreign soil.

There was a time when ex-presidents refrained from criticising or critiquing the president in power. Clinton has been fairly good at this, even supporting the administration on a few things and hanging out with Bush 41 (which I think is kinda cute actually). Bush 41 himself was exemplary in this department when Clinton was president. Now we have a certain miserable ex-president who is uncouth and rude (and even refused to extend condolences on Reagan's death. Talk about bitter).

There was a time when Supreme Court nominee hearings were not a political circus.

There was a time when opposition obstructionism was the exception rather than standard operating procedure. There was also a time when the president's appointments would never face even the threat of a filibuster.

There was a time when the Democratic party was embarassed by its fringe elements, instead of being controlled by them.

There was a time when the terms 'hawk' and 'liberal' were not like oil and water.

There was a time when liberals actually proposed tax cuts.

There was a time when liberals would rise to the defense of all minorities - now this excludes appointments made by Republican presidents.

Are the Republicans at least partly responsible for the coarsening of the political culture? Sure. I think the impeachment of Clinton was a big mistake, was unwarranted, and only made that cad even more popular.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway yet again!

Defending Dean

2005-08-08T03:40:00.000-05:00

I am kinda dense in a lot of ways and so I missed the Conservative Blog Taxonomy when it came out, oh, nearly a WEEK ago.

But I gotta respond to it because of a few things that are just wrong with that notorious post.

First off, Volokh gets criticised for 'flashes of viciousness'. News to me. The guy seems sober as a judge and not given to fly off the handle. My guess is that I read Volokh more regularly than this blogger, and I have yet to see him write anything remotely 'vicious'. Note too that fellow Volokhian David Bernstein posts about the Conservative Blog Taxonomy also, but not to defend Volokh, but rather to point out the rather brusquely intolerant way Michelle Malkin was treated, complete with reference to her anatomy.

And then there is the part about Dean:

Dean Esmay is popular among right-wingers as one of those centrists who just happen to hate liberals and Democrats. A proud dry drunk, he works out his unresolved childhood issues of being raised in a union household by writing about his crackpot theories on HIV/AIDS, feminism, and capitalism."

First off, a moonbat blogger complaining about another blogger's 'crackpot theories' is a bit rich don't you think? And note this disturbing new trend among 'tolerant' liberals toward harping on the perceived personal weaknesses of those they would otherwise defend (such as those in addiction recovery, or ahem, such as protecting the sexual identity of homosexuals - unless they are conservative journalists).

I don't think Dean hates liberals and Democrats. He would tell you if he did - he posts on the concept of hatred itself and he admits he does hate. Dean is the most intense blogger I know, on a wide range of subjects. Go forth, and participate: I think Dean also has the best comments in the blogosphere.

Update: Gah, no sooner do I post this, than I see that Dean himself is responding to these ridiculous attacks on him.

War On Terror A 'Total War'?

2005-08-08T02:40:00.000-05:00

The War on Terror is a new kind of total war. It is not Sherman's March to the Sea, the Siege of Leningrad or even the Tet Offensive in terms of military scale or involvement.

Yet it is a total war, in that it requires a total concentration of the proper resources to fight this war, with human intelligence, international cooperation, law enforcement, and bribery, assassinations and perhaps even extra-constitutional means of extracting information all put to proper use. We need to be even more asymmetrical than our asymmetric enemy. We still need the military option, but it is only one weapon among many. The Pentagon had the right idea in deemphasizing the 'war' aspect of the GWOT because it plays up too much on the military as the solution. Much of the ridicule this concept received was unjustified.

It is cliché, but true: if we change the way we live, the terrorists have won. Prior worldwide conflicts such as World War II demanded huge changes in lifestyle for the people. Paradoxically, in the War on Terror the people maintain their morale by not changing their lifestyle, which would be an admission to the enemy that they can really affect us as a group. Nor is there as much need to even change the status quo on the homefront, this conflict is not nearly as intense or extensive as World War II, Korea, or even Vietnam. I am sure that the World War II generation felt that conflict was far more intrusive into their lives than this War on Terror.

This is not to say that the War on Terror is a trifle compared to past wars. Unlike those wars, our very home is now threatened. And threatened no less by the possibility that the most dread force of all, nuclear weapons, might be detonated here in America. The threats posed to us, the nature of its delivery system, the origin of the threat, the selected targets--everything is different about this war.

Our new enemy is an elusive shadow, not an army of mechanized divisions, and he must be fought in the shadows. If we can't find the shadow, we must remove his hiding places among the reactionary middle eastern states that harbor him. Our best weapons are ballot boxes, the spread of information and, seriously, protest babes. And so not only are the challenges of this new war quite different, the solutions are different as well, and not the old-style 'total war' sledgehammer approved of by some. This war requires a scalpel instead. We are, after all, defending ourselves against a cancer.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway. Thanks!

Peter Jennings R.I.P.

2005-08-08T01:02:00.000-05:00

I am gonna miss this guy.

I never agreed with a damn thing he ever editorialized on, but this man fit the part of anchorman to a 't', he was even a bit dashing. He seemed like a genuine and affable guy, and he was the consumate pro, very steady.

Condolences to his family and friends.

Plame Game Who's Who

2005-08-05T21:44:00.000-05:00

Kevin Aylward at Wizbang is taking a lot of grief from newly-minted liberal security hawks over his posting on Joe Wilson's "Who's Who In America" entry.

The entry of the 2003 edition lists Valerie Plame as his wife, but fails to mention that she worked for the CIA. Ergo, it is irrelevant to the case, or so the Bush opponents say.

Or is it? It seems odd that a 'covert' operator would use either her married name or her maiden name - not much of a cover really. Add this to the fact that she drove through the gates of CIA headquarters every day to go to work, yes, at a desk. Link her name to a former ambassador (through the Who's Who, of course) and you have pretty much uncovered Steed and Mrs. Peale.

What the die hard believers in the "Rove is a criminal" camp fail to see here is that this entry in the Who's Who is not dispositive of anything by itself. It is but another brick in the wall of shame Joe Wilson has built for himself. However, Wilson's grandstanding may well have brought someone, who knows who, to investigate Wilson and do a little background research on him. If they come across the ubiquitious Who's Who In America, the entry there has his wife's full maiden name, along with their anniversary date. A little investigation into her, then, and it apparently becomes very easy to find out she works for the CIA, judging by the number of people without security clearances in Washington that knew this long before Novak ever 'outed' her.

In any event, a listing like this in such a common book is more inculpatory than exculpatory as far as Wilson's integrity goes. Why link your 'covert operator' wife's name to yours, if you are an ambassador? Ambassadors and the CIA are often considered to be the same thing . . . why erase all doubt?

Ken Says: I think the vociferous nature of the comments on Kevin's post really shows how much the left has invested in this whole thing. Watch out for Post-Non-Indictment-Stress Syndrome among a lot of people if Fitzgerald doesn't deliver something.

A Pitfall For Saudi Tyranny

2005-08-03T11:49:00.000-05:00

The Opinion Journal today features excellent insights into Saudi succession by Simon Henderson.

Henderson's piece is called 'Saudi Brezhnevs', and it is an apt title on several levels. Henderson points out the importance of weighing the age and seniority versus the relative infirmity of the Saudi princes in gauging who will rule Saudi Arabia in the coming years. Henderson rightly predicts a quick succession of aged kings resembling the fast turnover of Soviet leadership post-Brezhnev.

That is not the only similarity with the Brezhnev progeny. The Saudis now face this problem for the very same reasons the Soviets did: their polity is a tyranny where seniority and Machiavellian power plays count for more than winning support directly from the people.

Add this to the roster of institutional advantages democracies have over tyrannies: vigor in mind and body are prized in our candidates for office, who can be replaced when they lose these attributes. Not that physical problems are a disqualification - FDR conquered nazism from a wheelchair. But he was able to maintain the energy necessary to the tasks up to the very end of his tenure (some say it killed him early) and of course he had his wits about him.

In a tyranny however, physical and even mental impairments are no bar to rulership - anything goes. One likes to think that Darwinian principles applied to political systems will weed out such structural weaknesses, and that the demonstrably inferior model of tyanny will wither away in favor of democracy.

Much as the Soviet Union did.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside The Beltway.

Blogging Styles

2005-08-01T12:42:00.000-05:00

As you may have noticed, my blogging here is a haphazard and sporadic thing at best.

You might also notice that I have no ads here, and so my interest in blogging is strictly personal, with no pecuniary gain at stake. Thus I feel no pressure to blog unless necessary.

I decided a while back that I would not blog unless the mood hits me - I am opposed to blogging just for blogging's sake - and so you will see many blank days here where I have no new posts.

Lately I have not been posting much because nothing really outrages me. I am still surrounded by outrages, that never really changes, but nothing really strikes me as being a blogworthy outrage. Venting is my usual motivation for creating my famous bloviating rants, and so absent the outrage, no rant.

This is just a little statement of purpose here, and an explanation to those who think I am lazy (I am that too) and those who are disappointed that I blog so infrequently (there must be one or two of you out there).

Just my blogging style, that's all.

Hillary's Coronation Will Have To Wait

2005-07-27T06:44:00.000-05:00

Hillary's path to the White House is looking a bit treacherous these days.

Last Monday, at the annual summer meeting of the Democratic Leadership Council, Hillary Rodham Clinton called for a "ceasefire among warring factions of the Democratic Party."

The DLC was a great innovation for the Democrats, and it helped put Bill Clinton into power in 1992. But other than Bill's reelection, the Democrats have lost every White House, House and Senate election since, and many Democrats blame the DLC. They accuse the DLC of being 'Republican-Lite', pandering to big business, and acquiesing to Bush adminstration policies on the War on Terror.

They have a point. Why vote for a pale imitation of the Republicans, when you can vote for the real thing?

So Hillary ordering the rest of the Democratic party to stifle their ideology and fall in line behind her did not go down well with the Democratic base. It appears that Hillary has pushed her 'inevitability campaign' a bridge too far, and it now alienating a large part of the Democratic party. It was inevitable that parts of the party would eventually savage her in the name of a purer ideology - but Hillary and her strategists probably did not count on it beginning this soon.

My guess is that Hillary will be forced to creep Leftward to stem this assault. Her impressive poll numbers and standing in the party will not be enough to preserve her from the caterwauling Deaniacs - and Dean is more or less in charge of the party now.

The Democrats have proven that they value liberal ideology over electoral victories, and it would take a masterful politician to find that golden mean between Leftist bona fides and practical centrism without arousing the ire of the true believers.

Hillary Clinton is too clumsy a politican to pull that one off.

Kyrgyzstan Extends Use Of Airbase

2005-07-26T08:14:00.000-05:00

Donald Rumsfeld has secured ongoing use of an airbase in Kyrgyzstan for "as long as the situation in Afghanistan requires," assured Major General Ismail Isakov.

PoliBlog makes a great point about this - "it is remarkable that the US has even temporary military bases in a place that once was part of the Soviet Union."

Who'da thunk we'd ever see this in our lifetimes?

Did North Korea Just Blink?

2005-07-25T22:18:00.000-05:00

Delegate Kim Kye-Gwan has said that North Korea is ready to denuclearise the Korean peninsula.

I don't believe it for a minute, but at least the North Koreans are saying the right things now.

Fallaci On The London Bombings

2005-07-25T22:05:00.000-05:00

Mystery Achievement has the latest essay from Oriana Fallaci regarding the London tragedies of late, via Roger L. Simon.

She had previously been silent on these tragedies, and would like everyone to know that her silence was not acquiesence. She removes her former silence in her usual powerful way when it comes to the fate of 'Eurabia'.

Plame Misdirection

2005-07-24T19:43:00.000-05:00

This little tidbit was picked up at the blog-that-must-not-be-named as an example of Republican 'lies', the lie supposedly being that Valerie Plame was not a covert agent because she openly went through the gates of CIA headquarters every day.

Supposed CIA official Larry Johnson says that "there are thousands of undercover CIA employees who drive through the three gates at CIA Headquarters in McLean, Virginia everyday." Thus, supposedly establishing that Plame could have gone to work at CIA headquarters every day and still be a 'covert operative.'

Only one problem: CIA headquarters is in Langley Virginia, not McClean, and Langley is where Plame worked. McClean houses CIA operations, and is not their analysis center. You would think a CIA official opining on the all-important Plame affair would know this.

Pro-Lifers Worse Than Jihadists?

2005-07-24T08:01:00.000-05:00

One of the saddest aspects of the domestic front on the War on Terror is the fact that a great many Americans see fellow Americans as a greater threat than al-Qaeda to the well-being of our nation.

For example, we now have liberals describing pro-life christians as an 'American Taliban'.

Case in point is Cynthia Tucker, in the article 'Right To Privacy Is True Target Of American Jihadists.'

One wonders if Cynthia Tucker knows anything about the real Taliban. I've got news for her. When it came to human rights under the Taliban, lack of access to birth control was pretty far down on the list of indignities. Try this one on for size: Cynthia Tucker would not be allowed to attend school under the Taliban regime. She would not be allowed to write for a newspaper. She would not be able to drive. She would not be able to dress as she liked in public or listen to music. Call me silly, but these seem to be far more fundamental abridgements of human liberty than the right to have sex without consequences.

Tucker is trying to shame the "extremist edge of the religious right," by pointing out to pro-life christians that they are behaving just like our hated enemies the Taliban.

This is how twisted and warped liberal thought has become. Pro-life christians overwhelmingly support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They believe in a republican form of government, and the freedom of speech. Tucker might be surprised to learn that pro-life christians actually believe in a secular government, and the freedom of religion. The real Taliban would not see a whisker's difference between Cynthia Tucker and a southern baptist as they made plans to blow them both up.

But, merely questioning settled law that abortion is legal makes them just like the Taliban. Only worse, because the Taliban are out of power many thousands of miles away hiding in the caves of Afghanistan. The American Taliban on the other hand, might be living right next door . . .

The silliest aspect of Tucker's analogy is that, apparently, before the Roe v. Wade decision came down in 1973, this nation was living under "something akin to Sharia, Quranic law that restricts women's rights."

How sad it must be to have one's worldview entirely focused through the distorted narrow prism of abortion rights. How sadder still it is to demonize so many of your fellow citizens based upon that view.

A Founding Mother Writes

2005-07-23T06:48:00.000-05:00

I am reading David McCullough's biography of John Adams, for which McCullough received the Pulitzer Prize. Indeed, it is a riveting read, and really captures the harrowing desperation and inspiring philosophies of the age.

The letters written by the important players of that age are truly amazing documents. Folks then were so well-educated and literate, and letter writing was such a respected art form, that writers today seem like hacks by comparison. Well, today's writers are hacks compared to them. Here is a quote from the book:

These are the times in which a genius would wish to live. It is not in the still calm of life, or the repose of a pacific station, that great characters are formed. The habits of a vigorous mind are formed in contending with difficulties. Great necessities call out great virtues. When a mind is raised, and animated by scenes that engage the heart, then those qualities which would otherwise lay dormant, wake into life and form the character of the hero and the statesman."

Wow. That was not written by the great John Adams, it was written by his wife Abigail in 1777, trying to convince her son to accompany John to France.

Truly, a lost art.

Juan Cole Stumbles On Facts

2005-07-20T19:19:00.000-05:00

Juan Cole is a history professor at the University of Michigan, widely quoted as an expert on the Middle East, and no friend of the Bush administration.

For a history professor, he sure has a problem understanding chronologies, as this article 'Making Cole-Slaw Of History' shows. Via Real Clear Politics.

The Roberts Strategy

2005-07-20T17:58:00.000-05:00

Bush's ideal nominee for the Supreme Court would be an originalist, with a long paper trail on such issues as abortion, affirmative action and property rights.

It is clear that Bush was not going to get this golden nominee. The political waters are too poisoned, and the Democrats would welcome the fundraising avalanche and demagogic windfall that would come with such a nominee.

Bush has come up with a brilliant 'plan B' nominee however. Judge Roberts seems perfectly poised between conservative respectability and 'far-right extremism': palatable enough to moderates, without providing a definite bull's eye to the Left.

Roberts really presents the Democrats with a dilemma. Though they would never admit it, Democrats strategists know that the extremist bickering aimed at Bush is hurting them with the public. It hurts them all the more when such bickering is seen as mindless obstructionism. And yet, their own hard-Left base demands obstructionism for any candidate to the right of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Bush has given them enough rope to hang themselves, while still getting his nominee onto the bench of the Supreme Court. Bush has a great opportunity to further marginalize the Durbins, Shumers and Boxers of the Senate, along with their MoveOn.org svengalis. Moreover, the choice of Roberts seems to be delighting Bush's own base - it is a total win-win.

Makes you wonder: did Rove pick this guy?

Yemeni Dissident

2005-07-18T16:45:00.000-05:00

Dean Esmay is asking that we bloggers boost the status of this post by Jane by linking to it.

Jane is chronicling the death threats and harassment against Yemeni dissident Abdulkarim al-Khaiwani. Yemen is your standard-issue middle eastern tyranny.

I am coming to this issue really late by blog standards, but it is worthy to highlight this, and one motive here is to keep the light shining on the issue of democracy in Yemen.

Boxer Counter-Petition

2005-07-17T02:20:00.000-05:00

Boxer Watch warns us that Barbara Boxer has started an online petition demanding a timetable for an exit from Iraq.

So, they started a counter-petition to Bush to tell him that is not a good idea. Nothing like giving the terrorists a timetable to work from.

Heh, I think we know which way Bush is leaning on this one but go sign anyway!

Guestblogging At WILLisms

2005-07-15T08:10:00.000-05:00

I have been invited to guestblog at WILLisms.com, which means either I have finally arrived as a pundit, or Will Franklin has lost his freakin' mind.

I report, you decide.

HuffPo At Two Months

2005-07-11T04:58:00.000-05:00

Well I gave the Huffington Post a shot. I go there regularly to read the stories and leave lots of comments, so I guess I have as much experience with the place as anyone. After 2 months I gotta say that most of the bloggers there are no-names that have no business blogging, the headlines are often overly pumped up and misleading if not outright inaccurate, and many of the commenters give DU a run for their money when it comes to putting their worst prejudices (and manners) front and center.

I think HuffPo tries too hard. Arianna is swinging for the fences, trying to bring down an administration, or at least humiliate it, the way Drudge did. Why reinvent the wheel? Her efforts are a bit too transparent however. Here is a rather telling quote from the blogmistress herself:

Here at the Huff Post we plan to chronicle the Bush administration’s deeper and deeper descent into siege mentality. What are the hallmarks? Denial, defensiveness, doubletalk, robotic reiterations of stale talking points, wild counterattacks, a pathological fear of admitting mistakes, and an utter inability to change course -- even when the current course is taking us right over the cliff. Practically reads like an employee manual for Bush administration staffers, doesn’t it?"

Wow, talk about creating a template.

Notice how Arianna has preordained a 'deeper and deeper descent into siege mentality' which is obviously Arianna's dearest wish. One guesses this HuffPo wish will come true, whether it conforms to reality or not.

Ugh, does she have to be so transparent about this? Can't there at least be a nod to objectivity, detachment, or disinterestedness in the selection or presentation of a story? Fox News at least pretends to be Fair and Balanced, and Drudge actually is fairly egalitarian about the stories he chooses, he plays the contrarian now and then. Arianna however, feels the dire need to orchestrate every ping in the Echo Chamber.

I am beginning to think that Arianna is parroting Kos. I wonder if she perhaps does this on purpose, because deep down she has no real core. After all, her political views seem to be quite fungible and changeable depending upon the particular political winds of the time. She once aped conservative views with all the outward conviction and focus that she now reserves for Leftist views - perhaps, not quite sure herself, she needs Kos' guidance as to what those views actually are. Arianna repeats the view, without the authentic Leftist angst. For example, right after the London bombing, Kos said this terrorist act shows that the flypaper theory is false. Arianna said much the same thing. When Kos says it, it is ignorance masquerading as indignation. When Arianna says it, somehow it is merely gauche.

The authoritativeness the HuffPo has achieved could lie on the spectrum ranging from Washington Post gravitas to tabloid rag fluff--and I hate to say it, because I have something of a time and effort investment into it--that at this point HuffPo is a lot closer to the checkout lines at Walmart than it is to the corridors of power in Washington.

Ken Says: Perhaps all of the original critics of the HuffPo were right, and they could see where it was headed before it even really got started. The place just literally sucks the IQ points out of you. I am not sure that I want to play in Arianna's liberal fantasyland anymore.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway.

Muslims Denounce London Bombing

2005-07-08T15:23:00.000-05:00

Thankfully, there are muslims who deplore the London bombing, such as this unnamed imam from the United Arab Emirates:

What happened in a certain country that was mentioned in the media yesterday is a clear aggression that is totally detached of any logic and is entirely unjustified. Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person. This is the kind of criminal act that only serves those who want to destroy mankind, and to thwart civilization and progress."

While those are admirable thoughts, the imam giving this sermon couldn't help taking a dig at Jews and Christians:

Igniting civil strife and using the tools of war and destruction is the habit of the despicable Jews and Christians of the ancient nations, and the Koran has already deplored them for that...'

Ah well, at least the imam is headed in the right direction.

There are more quotes from muslims such as these here at MEMRI.

Newsflash: Kos Says Bush Was Wrong

2005-07-07T16:43:00.000-05:00

Well I was looking for reactions to the London bombing today around the blogs, and I thought to myself 'I wonder how long before someone says fighting the terrorists in Iraq rather than at home is a false rationale.'

How long did it take? About a nanosecond.

The ever-snotty Kos: "Well, that didn't work out quite as planned, did it?"

Kos never was a class act, and using this tragedy in London as a craven triumphalist blast at Bush is just, well, about the highest level of maturity we ever see from Kos.

If Kos were an honest person (big 'if' here) he would admit that there are no guarantees in life. Bush did not guarantee that fighting in Iraq would keep us safe at home. But the 'flypaper' rationale is in fact valid: obviously the jihadis are concentrating their firepower in Iraq and sending their recruits to Iraq, and if this were not so we may very well have had many more attacks in Paris, Brussels, Rome, New York, Jakarta, etc.

But as usual, the liberals want to make the perfect the enemy of the good. Anything less than immediate apprehension of Osama bin Laden, Zarqawi, Zawahiri, and the immediate destruction of Al-Qaeda and a cessation of terrorist attacks by all groups worldwide means that Bush's War on Terror is a complete and abject failure.

I, for one, am still waiting for the comprehensive report from those brilliant Liberals on how to solve the War on Terror. But then again, Liberals often mistake invective for policy, so perhaps they have shown us the answer, and we just haven't seen it. Maybe a campaign of savage wit, and withering sarcasm will bring Osama to heel?

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway.

Update: Dean Esmay recommends that everyone, liberals and conservatives alike, should just stop posting links to Kos. Heh, well, I don't know if this is the last time I will ever mention Kos, but it is food for thought.

The American Identity

2005-07-01T19:50:00.000-05:00

The United States is not a nation, for it is not defined by race, history, geography, language or culture. What is the proof for this assertion? Anyone can be an American. You can be born into a family with generations of American roots, and you would still be no more an American than a Bangladeshi recently sworn in as a citizen, and certainly not entitled to more rights.

Successive waves of immigration to these shores have altered the landscape and brought new character to the American soul. Not even Native Americans can claim to be from American soil - they too immigrated, over the Bering Strait some ten thousand years ago. Thus no group or faction can claim sole inheritance in ownership of America.

What stays constant among these demographic tides is the Republic, the Constitution, and a commitment to Liberty, and this is the American identity. The identity of America is not race, language or culture--it is the American Dream: a framework of Liberty with the Constitution as its centerpiece, which allows the full play of the human potential in all endeavors.

The rest of the world holds us to our principles because they know such principles are good and worthy. We are often told that the rest of the world hates us--put aside for a moment whether this is true or not and realize that if they do hate us, they do not hate America per se. What they hate is when we Americans fail to abide by our own professed ideals. Everyone knows that an entire world holding true to the American ideals would be the closest approximation of Utopia man could achieve, and we Americans so often fall short. The mere shadow of perceived wrongs committed by America hangs darker upon us than the manifest wrongs hang on tyrants from whom nothing good is expected. The world looks to us for good things.

Only the most ossified reactionaries--the totalitarian Leftists, the islamofascists, the kleptocratic tyrants--reject the principles this nation was founded upon. The rest of humanity is either glad to live under Democracy, or wishes they were so blessed.

If America is a transcendent ideal, one need not even set foot here to become an American. This is why America is not a nation: it is a universal principle, and not reserved merely for those fortunate enough to be American by an accident of birth.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway.

Those 'Brilliant' Liberals

2005-06-30T23:37:00.000-05:00

One of the memes that deserves a stake through the heart is the idea that liberal Democrats are smarter than conservative Republicans.

John Kerry's underperformance in college compared to George W. Bush was amusing.

Howard Dean's destructive lack of self-control makes him the Anti-Rove.

But Nancy Pelosi's ignorance of essential Constitutional concepts is just downright scary.

I weep for a nation that can produce no better quality opposition than this. No wonder the Democratic first resort to dealing with issues is invective, blame, and character assassination. Really, they do not have the brain power in leadership positions to be capable of much more.

Ireland Vindicates Free Markets

2005-06-29T20:47:00.000-05:00

Thomas Friedman informs us that Ireland is the second-wealthiest nation in Europe, and lays out the encouraging way in which this upstart achieved its marvelous success.

Karl Rove, Machiavellian Master

2005-06-26T15:33:00.000-05:00

I can't help but think that Karl Rove's assault on pacifist liberals was some kind of watershed moment in American politics.

This is how it was supposed to play out, I think: Dick Durbin makes an appalling analogy of Gitmo guards to the Khmer Rouge, which raises a negative firestorm against him, and greatly embarasses the Democrats. The Democrats, eager to even the score and not fall too far behind in the 'who sucks now' race, jump on Karl Rove's statements.

The American public was supposed to have risen up en masse to insist upon an apology from Rove, and failing that, his resignation. It was supposed to be the 'gotcha' that erased the stain that Durbin put on the Democrats.

The script did not play out that way however. Far from feeling cowed into insisting upon a Rove apology, the Republicans are feeling their strength. It has given the Republicans an opportunity to highlight the egregious national security weaknesses of the Democrats. It has given the Republicans an excuse they have not really had before to catalog the myriad reasons why Americans do not entrust their security to the Leftists. Not only have the Democrats not erased their Durbin problem, it has grown. And Democrats now look wimpier than ever, still calling for an apology and getting derisive laughter in return. 'Apologize for what?' comes the retort, 'Rove was right!'

And now I think this is some kind of watershed moment because the Democrats, smugly expecting their apology in due course, now have half of the nation pointing at them saying 'these things about you are true.' And notice how few Democrats are defending their pacifism. I thought they were proud of their anti-war and anti-violence stance. They can't have it both ways: they want to be perceived as both tough and soft, and it just cannot be so. From now on, the Democrats will have to meekly accept that they are soft, because their protestations to the contrary fly in the face of far too much contrary evidence.

Can Karl Rove really be this smart? I have said that if Karl Rove is responsible for half of the things he has been credited for, he is a Machiavellian Master of the first order. It took guts to get up there and rail against liberal weaknesses in such a direct way while the Democrats were still smarting after Durbin's smackdown. It could have easily blown up in Rove's face. And yet, there it is. If Rove sought to compound outrage at Durbin into outrage at the entire Democratic party, his gamble succeeded beyond his dreams.

Rove Should Apologize

2005-06-24T06:08:00.000-05:00

It is understandable that many Democrats are upset by what Karl Rove had to say about their response to the 9/11 attacks. It is true that most of them did in fact support Bush's call for war against Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of those savage attacks.

Karl Rove: "Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers." Conservatives, he said, "saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."

I do not think this is an accurate characterization of the view most Democrats had immediately after the attacks. I, for one, am grateful that they did support Bush's actions, and Rove should not take credit away from them. The nation was quite united at the time behind the President's strategies. It was the last time this nation was united, in fact.

On the other hand, if Rove was talking about the entire time frame from the invasion of Afghanistan to the present, his charge is correct. The Democratic party in general does now favor legalisms both for captured and non-captured terrorists over the get-tough approach. And right now at Ground Zero, liberals are lobbying for displays that call for an 'understanding' of the causes of 9/11, which is code for an attempt to blame the victim right at the very scene of the crime.

But, lumping the original Democrat zeal to wipe out the Taliban in with their later deterioration into Vietnam-haunted cowardice is a mistake. Karl Rove should clarify, make a non-waffling apology and move on. Not much damage will come of it I think - what Rove said still pales in comparison to Durbin's hideous remarks last week. And notice how the Republican outrage over Durbin's statements is on behalf of the men and women fighting for our country overseas, while the Democrat's outrage over Rove's statements is on behalf of themselves. Democrats are rather thin-skinned about the weak-on-defense charge (methinks they doth protest too much?)

The Democrats have been a bit disingenuous in their respone to Rove, too.

Chuck Shumer (D-NewYork) said that" Rove "took something that is virtually sacred to New Yorkers" -- the tragedy of the September 11 attacks -- "and politicized it for political, opportunistic purposes."

Rove was not referring to the 9/11 attacks, he was responding to the very lame approach some Democrats advocated to handling terrorism in the wake of that tragedy. And don't forget, there were some Dems and liberal commentators arguing for pacifism even toward the Taliban.

Saying that Rove was 'politicizing' 9/11 is off the mark.

Update: Captain's Quarters has a good selection of wimpy Democrats that actually did call for complete cowardice directly after 9/11. I still think such folk represent a small minority opinion.

Censure Durbin

2005-06-22T10:27:00.000-05:00

Dick Durbin apparently got the apology thing right the second time around, after an embarrassing "sorry you were too stupid to understand me" apology last week.

Lots of folk are saying Durbin gave an adequate, and even heartfelt apology. That may be so . . . but Durbin still needs to be censured.

This is not at all for partisan reasons. Nor is it to 'get' Durbin and humiliate and embarass him. I for one would have far preferred he had never uttered his grotesque remarks than to have him damaged politically, as much as I disliked Durbin even before this debacle.

Durbin's status as a leading U.S. Senator is what enabled Al-Jazeera to capitalize on Durbin's witting or unwitting propaganda coup. The Senate can now use its status to undue a modicum of the damage Durbin has done, reminding the world that the real atrocities are being committed by our enemies, not us.

Israel To Resume Assassinations

2005-06-22T09:10:00.000-05:00

Due to the failure of Mahmoud 'Iron Fist' Abbas to rein in Palestinian terrorists, Israel has resumed its policy of assassinations of terrorist leadership.

Israel announced the resumption of this policy after a failed missile strike Tuesday.

Once again, it is up to Israel to do Abbas' own dirty work for him.

Update: Captain's Quarters has a good rundown of the failed meeting between Sharon and Abbas during which the assassination resumption policy was announced.

Sharon apparently excoriated Abbas for doing nothing to bring the terrorists to heel.

Why 'Am I A Pundit Now?'

2005-06-21T07:23:00.000-05:00

It is a split decision in the blogosphere as to whether I am a pundit now or not.

A commenter at Wizbang has been calling me 'Not Yet A Pundit', so that is one vote nay.

Miller's Time says yea, so I guess it is undecided.

Well actually no. I am not a pundit, and that is why I named my blog what I did - a blogger does not necessarily a pundit make. A pundit is a serious person who does lots of research and cogitates and stirs the pot and comes up with serious reasoned answers.

Me, I just opine.

I don't want the responsibility of a pundit - I would have to be right all the time, or at least have lots of notes and research to paper over my bogus conclusion. Too constricting - not enough fun. And when it comes to blogging, I am all about fun, or venting.

P.S., I forgot to mention that I comment a lot at HuffPo, and there is someone there who calls themself Am I A Nazi Now? in my honor!

Hee!

Kinda makes it all worthwhile. I have my own little pet troll now. I just hope it is housebroken.

Downing Street Memo: Fake?

2005-06-19T16:48:00.000-05:00

Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it, and we may have that here with the supposed 'Downing Street Memo', in what looks like the next Rathergate.

Captain's Quarters is suggesting that they are fakes, or at least highly suspect.

Fake evidence for John Conyer's fake hearings, how appropriate.

The Art Of The Rant

2005-06-17T07:52:00.000-05:00

This guy could even be a plant for all I know, but this is what I call a rant, from commenter 'Rob in LA' over at Wizbang:

Ha , jason and the rest of you losers dream on , why don't you impeach that lying fraud Jon Fraud Kerry . You retards are a disgrace to the human race . You should be admitted, you people must have been hypnotized or something , your from another planet. Democrats are synonymous with lying , cheating , election fraud , corruption etc. what are you stupid or what . I laugh at you , if you stood before me I would laugh even harder.Your all traitors , liars and losers. Sore losers , mad as hell because you lost get over it . Clinton was a fuck up admit it , he did it to himself , don't you asses remember .CLINTON SAID HE DID IT BECAUSE HE COULD. Grow up or drop dead. Your a disgrace to this nation , the world does not revolve around you and besides your just fricken stupid civilian. What the hell did you people lose ??? Not a dam thing . Hell I voted for Clinton both times you shit for brains . Stop putting our troops in danger and stop trying to make shit up just cause someone told you not to like Bush. Guess what they lied to you too about John Kerry being smarter Than Bush , Well your own party lied to you too aren't you mad. Bush is a hell of alot smarter than Kerry , has a higher IQ and he the President of the United States. So there. Kerry got 5 D's HA one in pol. sci. . I always asked why do you say Bush is dumb?? not one person has ever been able to answer. You should feel dumb for being a Democrat. I voted republican nov.2 2004. first time . never again for the traitor liars election stealing democrats."

Heheheh I can almost feel the energy coming of this guy's fingertips while typing, maybe a bit of spittle landing on the keyboard . . .

Iran Admits Nuclear Cheating

2005-06-16T09:00:00.000-05:00

While most of the focus on Iran's nuclear program has focused on gas centrifuges being used to enrich uranium, Iran has recently admitted that it had also enriched plutonium - years after it had claimed it had stopped doing so.

The IAEA did its job and caught the Iranians red-handed by testing plutonium samples for enrichment.

Both plutonium and uranium enrichment can be done for peaceful purposes, as long as these materials are not enriched so much that they can be used as weapons.

But it's gotta make you wonder: why does a nation swimming in oil need nuclear technology?

Durbin Really Is A Dick

2005-06-15T18:29:00.000-05:00

Dick Durbin, Democratic embarassment from Illinois, is now on the Congressional Record as a propagandist for Al-Qaeda:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. ..... On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags , or some mad regime --Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

I would hope the Senator will be censured for these damn-near treasonous remarks.

Dumbing Down Torture

2005-06-15T06:06:00.000-05:00

What are the sources of all this anguish about the detainees in Gitmo? What is the underlying psychology pushing this hysteria about the alleged 'abuse' of these prisoners? The Left has an obvious agenda here: America is Mordor. We torture just for fun, and if the victims are oppressed third-worlders all the better. The Newsweek journalists and Michael Issikoff are not necessarily this type of crypto-socialist, trying to speed up the inevitable collapse of capitalism via the word processor. Issikoff probably thought he was 'correcting' abuses at Gitmo, in the name of aiding national security. After all, we don't want all those enraged muslims to be even angrier at us, do we?

Instead what Issikoff did was feed right into the culture created by the self-loathing American Left that believes we deserved 9/11.

It infuriates the Left that its allies all throughout history have been proven to be real torturers and killers. It is a very damning argument against them - it shows that they will engage in the most heinous means necessary to try and overthrow capitalism, all in service of the Grand Marxist Experiment. Never mind that Marxism was a genocidal failure that produced a modern dark age that makes medieval Europe look enlightened by comparison. Once it has been established that the United States is just as bad, the Left may once again freely support the progressive-murderer-of-the-week without guilt. And once again Marxism will be seen as a relatively palatable choice - after all, capitalism is just as bad, right? So why not take another look at socialism?

This odious mindset has been purchased whole by the once-respectable Amnesty International, which perhaps needs this immoral equivalence between the U.S. and the forces of darkness precisely because Amnesty harbors guilt over its lack of investigating real abuses, such as in North Korea or Zimbabwe. Thus, detaining several hundred terrorists in balmy Guantanamo Bay magically becomes the equivalent of decades of forced labor for innocent millions in the arctic Gulag.

Naturally the Left wants normal America to buy into this, and the tactic they have chosen is to dumb down torture. Now, loud music is 'torture'. Putting ladies underwear on a man's head is now a 'torture'. The mere presence of a woman in front of pious muslim men is 'torture'. Does this notion offend the feminists? No, because truly tolerant Leftists perfectly understand that muslims consider women to be loathsome, and we need to respect that.

This dumbing down torture tactic has largely worked unfortunately, and now millions of otherwise insightful Americans now believe that we are torturing people, because they have only caught the merest whiff of this story, and have not had a chance to look at the entire record. The Europeans too, feeling deep guilt over their own history of genocide and inventing murderous philosophies, naturally ache for the relief brought by being able to point the finger at someone else. Such anti-Americanism gives cover to their neuroses.

Worst of all, this story gives cover to the many third world regimes that can now avoid opprobrium by pointing at the United States. 'Is this your democracy?' the Bashar Assad types will sneer, grateful that they too now have the immoral equivalence weapon in their arsenal.

Linked to Outside The Beltway and Mudville Gazette.

Dean 'Til The Bitter End

2005-06-14T20:54:00.000-05:00

I find Howard Dean to be a fascinating figure. I actually admire the guy in a lot of ways, he says what he thinks, he is a fighter, and he throws himself into his tasks. It would be more fun to sit down and have a beer with this guy than most of the straight-laced controversy-averse politicians on the stage these days.

He has blinded too many of the Democrats to his obvious failings, however. The liberal rah-rah chorus is happy that someone is going to finally tell off the Bush administration (yes we have been woefully short on criticism of Bush) and they probably wouldn't care if he wore his underwear on his head during a press conference as long as he serves up some red meat. In the teeth of ample contrary evidence, the die-hard Democrat base will never admit that Dean is actually bad for them.

Dean apologists include Paul Waldman at TomPaine.com, who thinks that if the Democrats didn't backstab Dean over his intemperate comments, the press would lay off. He proposes that the Democrats invoke the code of omerta, to protect Chairman Dean from fratricidal criticism, in order to make it seem as if the Democrats walk in lockstep support of him.

Waldman forgets two things however - the press started tearing Dean apart before his fellow Democrats started criticizing him, and he also forgets that papering over Dean's faults will not make them go away.

Americans Want Troops To Leave Iraq

2005-06-13T18:39:00.000-05:00

A Gallup poll on American attitudes toward the war in Iraq shows that 6 in 10 Americans want the U.S. to withdraw some or all of its troops from Iraq.

Well that seems quite non-controversial doesn't it? Who doesn't want our troops home?

The poll also stated that Americans are split as to whether the U.S. should keep troops there until the insurgency is contained, or bring them home 'as soon as possible'. Note that the poll does not ask if we should bring all of our troops home now, regardless of the circumstances.

But no doubt the Left will spin this poll to say exactly that: that most Americans want us to cut and run from Iraq now. From this poll, it seems like only a small fraction of Americans are actually saying that.

What The Dems Need To Do

2005-06-11T04:09:00.000-05:00

Well here is another little list, inspired by a very interesting conversation over at Dean's.

1. Stop dissing religious folk.
2. Stop whining and start suggesting solutions.
3. Stop pointing to big business as the enemy.
4. Attack Republican ideas, not Republicans.
5. Support the war in Iraq for as long as we need to fight it. We are going to be there anyway, why bitch and moan?
6. Don't reject tax cuts out of hand. At least pay lip service to the principal that people should get their money back if at all possible.
7. Don't make pro-choice a litmus test for party membership.
8. Come up with something better than open borders on immigration.
9. Be for more efficient government, not bigger government.
10. Grow a spine when it comes to foreign policy.

Honestly I think number two is the most important one here. People are fed up with the Democrats' constant harping on the perceived errors of the Bush administration, sometimes even when they agree with the criticism. Negativity, even when it is correct, is just such a turnoff and it drives people away. So much of it is history that cannot be undone in any event, and so the Democrats often sound like they are just refighting the Civil War.

Right now, it is hard to figure out what the Democrats are actually for.

Kerry Is For Kidz

2005-06-10T06:07:00.000-05:00

Got the latest email from John Kerry!

His new angle is children living without health insurance.

I get the feeling that the consultants working for Kerry just polled the nonsense out of this issue and found it to be a winner.

And . . . he is trying to outmaneuver Hillary on an issue with obvious feminine appeal.

Apparently the words 'arrogance', 'power grabs' and 'radical agenda' are polling well these days also.

Infuriating Democratic Dimthink

2005-06-09T06:10:00.000-05:00

Here is just a quick list of things far too many democrats actually believe:

1. Bush is Hitler.
2. Bush lies about everything.
3. The Patriot Act has taken away all of our rights.
4. Halliburton sets our foreign policy.
5. Michael Moore told the truth.
6. Bush stole the 2000 election.
7. Bush stole the 2004 election.
8. Bush wants to poison our water.
9. Bush wants to eliminate Social Security.
10. Bush invaded Afghanistan to build a pipeline.
11. The recession started when Bush was inaugurated.
12. The Swift Boat Veterans were discredited.
13. Bush really did go AWOL from the Air National Guard.
14. Kerry really did go to Cambodia.
15. Republicans are scared of Howard Dean.
16. Hillary is a moderate.
17. The US sold Saddam Hussein all of his weapons.
18. Clinton was greater than Reagan.
19. The Soviet Union was going to collapse on its own anyway.
20. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was unnecessary.
21. Communism actually accomplished some good things.
22. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer.
23. Tax cuts are bad.
24. Aggression always starts the cycle of violence.
25. The U.S. is too powerful.
26. Bush knew about 9/11 before hand.
27. Bush knew Saddam had no WMDs.
28. Bush wants to outlaw homosexuality.
29. Carter is a foreign policy genius.
30. Marx was on to something.
31. Noam Chomsky is a great intellectual.
32. Republicans trample on the Constitution.
33. We should listen to the europeans.
34. We shouldn't drill in ANWR.

There must be hundreds more of these, I am sure I will be adding others soon.

Linked to Outside the Beltway's Beltway Traffic Jam, and Mudville Gazette's Open Post.

Justice Brown: Liberalism = Slavery

2005-06-08T23:20:00.000-05:00

The New York Times has an article about the 'controversial' statements of Janice Rogers Brown, who was approved today by the Senate. The first, and perhaps most telling, quote from Justice Brown is this:

In the heyday of liberal democracy, all roads lead to slavery."

Perhaps the liberals do not hate Justice Brown because she is 'extreme' - perhaps they hate her because she has their number.

Huffington Post: Thumbs Up

2005-06-07T23:10:00.000-05:00

Kudos to the Huffington Post, which now has comments. Now it feels more like a real blog, instead of the "commands from down high" posture it has without the ability of schmucks like me to heckle back.

I notice that even some of the politicians like John Conyers are now allowing comments.

Good for them, good for us - we need the give and take.

I think HuffPo is a keeper. It has enough substance and serious viewpoints to keep it from being a timewaster, and they are pretty good at headlining interesting and timely news stories (though Drudge still has them beat).

I will be interested to see what the naysayers think a few weeks or months from now. HuffPo is far from perfect, but will people find it useful? I think so.

John Kerry: Lookin' Good!

2005-06-07T17:43:00.000-05:00

Good God, is this really John Kerry? He looks like he joined the casting call for the Adaams Family.

Apparently he wasn't a very brilliant student either, via The Boston Globe.

Consistency Is The Hobgoblin Of Big Minds

2005-06-07T00:59:00.000-05:00

And that Big Mind belongs to Justice Clarence Thomas, who displays an admirable consistency on federalism.

The now-infamous medical marijuana Raich case may have enshrined Thomas as the hero of those who believe the Constitution means what it says.

Heh, in many circles that makes him an 'extremist'. I didn't realize the Constitution, as written, was that 'extreme'.

Even his buddy Antonin Scalia dropped the ball on this one I think.

Dean Esmay and XRLQ are up in arms over this case - and I can't say I really blame them.

Update: The Layperson's Guide To Raich is at the Drug War Rant - despite the blog's title this is an excellent one-stop breakdown of the case and its implications.

Impeachment Hopes Spring Eternal

2005-06-04T00:33:00.000-05:00

In Search Of Utopia gives choir cheers to Recovering Liberal, looking forward with childlike delight to the impeachment of the lame duck George W. Bush.

Lame duck? Outside the Beltway sees it differently.

Ken Says: I would have linked to Recovering Liberal directly, but that blog does not yet seem to have discovered the innovation of permalinks.

Victims of the Factual Revolution

2005-06-04T00:12:00.000-05:00

I found this post at Powerline called 'Blumenthal Responds, Kind Of' to be both fascinating and instructive.

'Sid Vicious' Blumenthal, writing for Britain's Guardian Newspaper makes the charge that Bill Frist is a hypocrite, alleging

Frist, like most Republicans in favour of the nuclear option, had enthusiastically filibustered against Clinton's court nominees, 65 of which were blocked from 1995-2000."

We can handily apply the 'ol chess fork to Blumenthal here: either Blumenthal is lying through his teeth, or he does not know what a filibuster is.

I ask you: what are the chances that a former Assistant to the President does not know what a filibuster is? Not bloody likely, is it. That only leaves the alternative.

In his defense, Blumenthal cited Dianne Feinstein, who makes completely disingenuous arguments that Clinton's judicial nominees were 'filibustered'. Apparently the Democrats, now desperate to show that judicial filibusters were started by the Republicans, are now labelling any and all procedural hurdles a 'filibuster'. If the language does not help the Democrats, it is the language that must change, not the Democrats.

The lesson I drew from the Powerline post is that demagogues like Blumenthal are having a much tougher go of things now than they have in the past. As Powerline points out, Blumenthal probably thought he could write for a british audience without fear of being contradicted on his 'facts'. Blumenthal has been quite thoroughly chewed up and spit out over his lack of integrity, the Powerline post pretty much tears him limb from limb, and a few years ago he would not have needed to defend himself. There was no forum to challenge him, but now there is.

Perhaps we are witnessing the emergence of a 'factual revolution' in which slippery operators like Blumenthal will not be able to gain a toehold. Whereas once they were rewarded with money and percs for peddling half-truths and insinuations, they will now become fodder for the corrective machinery of bloggers and other alternative media. This does not bode well for the Democratic party, which gleefully places someone like Howard Dean, who speaks first and thinks later, in a position to become a laughingstock.

It does bode well for the Republicans however. Republicans thrive on facts, new ideas and reasoned defense of theory. That is what earned the Republicans control of both houses and the White House. Compare the leftists blogs like Kos or Eschaton, etc., with blogs like Powerline or Captain's Quarters. The leftists are just hopelessly outclassed and outgunned. Why? Because people like Kos think that demagoguery, character assassination and invective is political discourse. Granted, those can be effective ways to convince or convert undecideds, but in the end they do not suffice, there is a limit to their appeal. And those pesky facts just don't seem to want to go away.

Instead of fighting the Factual Revolution, perhaps the Democrats need to join it.

Syria Fires Scud Over Turkey

2005-06-02T23:05:00.000-05:00

And it breaks up and showers bewildered farmers with bits of missile.

Tough guy Bashar Assad had better stop playing games. He is on the excrement list as it is, and this imprudent move will do nothing except maybe raise his status in the eyes of his father's hardliners that remain in Damascus.

And having your missile break up in parts in the atmosphere is more likely to inspire ire rather than fear in your enemies.

Dean Inserts Foot In Mouth Again

2005-06-02T17:30:00.000-05:00

DNC chair Howard Dean is out on the stump with his unique brand of democrat warmheartedness, telling the Campaign for America's Future that the GOP has a "dark, difficult and dishonest" vision for America, and that "a lot of Republicans don't make an honest living." Via USA Today.

Terry McAuliffe used to say ignorant things like this also, but it was not newsworthy when he uttered a slew of untruths. Now, the press seems to be eager to pick up on the latest Howard Dean gaffe, to add to the ever-growing file.

This is unfortunate, because I was hoping Dean would get a lifetime appointment as DNC chair, particularly because Dean is a horrible fund raiser.

Josh Marshall: Bush = Nixon

2005-06-02T15:47:00.000-05:00

I haven't blogged on the revelation of Mark Felt as Deepthroat because everyone else is, so why should I jump in?

Well, I am interested in things like this: people like Josh Marshall trying to paint Bush as Nixon redux. In this vein, Marshall takes on Peggy Noonan for criticising Felt:

I guess, though, we owe Peggy et al. thanks for stipulating for the record that they don't think anything of any consequence was done wrong in Watergate because that provides a helpful context for understanding why they keep carrying the water of this administration, knowing as they do that many of the same things are happening."

What are these many 'same things' that are happening? Waging an unauthorized and illegal war, such as Bill Clinton did against Serbia? Using F.B.I. files to establish an enemies list, such as the Clintons did? Using unauthorized wiretaps, such as Kennedy and Johnson did?

Please Josh, be a little more specific in your allegations. Just throwing out the Bush = Nixon meme might get you far among the Leftists, but more skeptical folks are going to need a bit more information to buy into that one.

Linked to Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway.

Conyers Wants To Impeach Bush?

2005-06-01T18:30:00.000-05:00

We learn via this opinion in The Nation that Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) is considering filing Articles of Impeachment against George Bush based on revelations in the Downing Street Memo.

Conyers has called the memo the "the smoking bullet in the smoking gun." One thing that strikes me as odd, then, is this quote from the Downing Street Memo:

On the first, CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions.
For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary."

Why would the U.S. and Britain be warplanning WMD exigencies here, if they knew these weapons of mass destruction didn't exist?

It will be very tough for Conyers to get around that one. So much for the smoking bullet.

Baaaaad Books

2005-05-31T16:04:00.000-05:00

The Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries, according to a panel of 15 conservative scholars (is Phyllis Schlafly a 'scholar'?) chosen by Human Events.

The Communist Manifesto - Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
Mein Kampf - Adoph Hitler
Quotations from Chairman Mao
The Kinsey Report - Alfred Kinsey
Democracy and Education - John Dewey
Das Kapital - Karl Marx
The Feminine Mystique - Betty Friedan
The Course of Positive Philosophy - August Comte
Beyond Good and Evil - Friedrich Nietzsche
General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money - John Maynard Keynes

Via Hit & Run.

Loose Lips Sink Ships

2005-05-31T15:13:00.000-05:00

The New York Times today printed an article exposing Aero Contractors Ltd. as a C.I.A.-connected provider of charter flights.

Will the New York Times next print schedules of when American troop ships are leaving?

The Nation's Shameful Treatment Of Tillman

2005-05-31T14:37:00.000-05:00

The Nation takes the Bush administration to task for 'exploiting' Army Ranger Pat Tillman's death. The Nation seems to forget that it was actually big news when Pat Tillman decided to forego a 3 million dollar contract to play with the Arizona Cardinals to instead join the elite Army Rangers. Tillman himself hoisted himself into the spotlight by doing this - even though he declined all interviews and other publicity regarding his amazing decision, it still became news. When Tillman was killed in Afghanistan, of course that became even bigger news. The Bush administration naturally had to address this situation - was this 'exploiting' Tillman? Hardly. It would have been oddly remiss for the Bush not to speak about the loss of a remarkable young man and his sacrifices. To read the Nation article, you would almost think the Bush administration held a Nuremburg rally in his honor.

The Nation then charges that there was a 'coverup' over the fratricidal killing of Tillman, that the Bush administration 'lied' about it, and that no one has been held accountable. First, it is impossible for there to be a 'coverup' when the White House comes out and states that Tillman was killed by friendly fire. This was not 'uncovered' by some intrepid Nation reporter - this information was released by the Pentagon. And what, exactly, did the Bush White House 'lie' about? It seems the Nation's style manual insists upon labelling Bush as a 'liar' in every article that mentions him, regardless of context. The opinion piece is loaded with plenty of accusations of lies, but little explanation of exactly what those lies are. Tillman was killed by friendly fire. There was simply no way to put a good face on that, but the Nation accuses the White House of trying. And for that someone needs to lose their job?

Of course, the Nation also gratuitously mentions Abu Ghraib in the editorial. The fact that this prison in Iraq has nothing whatsoever to do with a friendly fire death in Afghanistan is unimportant to the Nation, because this article is not about Tillman's death, government integrity or the dire events in Afghanistan. It is all about building yet another case against George Bush. Lies, torture, Gulag, coverup, let's just regurgitate our litany of grievances against Bush. The Leftists at the Nation could well be rooting for more soldiers to die, knowing that the Left defeated public opinion over Vietnam by harping on casualties, and no doubt consider this the way to win again. Remember how the Leftist press waited with baited breath for the 1000th soldier to die in Iraq prior to last November's election?

That is what American soldiers are to the Left: contemptible dupes that are only useful when they offer a chance to smear Bush.

France Joins The Second World With A 'Non'

2005-05-30T13:28:00.000-05:00

Oh how Jacques Chirac must be regretting his gratuitous decision to place the EU Constitution on a referendum for approval. There was no requirement that France accept the Constitution by plebiscite, but Chirac, at the time basking in anti-American fervor, arrogantly thought his force of personality would win the day.

Bye bye Jacques, you are finished now.

And bye bye France, you are finished also. Clinging to an ossified program of strict labor rules, short workweeks, overly generous vacations, and cradle-to-grave socialism, history will now pass France by, as France settles into its new role as a once-great nation.

France: now more irrelevant than ever!

More Democrat Ethical Lapses

2005-05-30T13:08:00.000-05:00

According to Howard Dean, the mere implication that Tom Delay might have committed some ethical lapses means Delay should go to jail.

If true, a lot of democrats would be joining Delay in a cellblock. A review of travel records by the Associated Press reveals nearly 200 unreported trips by congressmen and aides, and some trips go back as far as eight years ago.

Nancy Pelosi, Luis Gutierrez, and Maxine Waters are among these Democrat paragons of ethical purity.

Luis Gutierrez even relies on the lamest excuse concocted yet - he didn't know he was obligated to file travel disclosures.

Rosie O'Donnell Coddles Saddam Hussein

2005-05-29T21:40:00.000-05:00

Ace blogger Rosie O'Donnell called Bush a 'war criminal' for daring to attack Iraq without explicit approval from the U.N. (Via Drudge's radio show, Sunday 9-12 p.m. on WLS-AM 890 Chicago.)

Let me get this straight. Bush takes out and jails a man who started the third bloodiest war of the 20th century, used nerve gas on the minority Kurds, liquidated a Shia rebellion, executed 300,000 of his own people and who routinely used torture.

But no, Bush is the war criminal.

Unbelievable.

Israeli Air Strike, Prisoner Deal

2005-05-29T21:22:00.000-05:00

Mahmoud 'Iron Fist' Abbas has failed to disarm Palestinian militants, so the Israelis do it for him.

The IDF destroyed two palestinian rocket launchers used in an attack on an Israeli village in northern Gaza today, just hours after Israel's Cabinet approved the release of 400 Palestinian prisoners.

Cheney Chews Up Kim

2005-05-29T21:10:00.000-05:00

Vice-President Dick Cheney launched into a verbal attack on Kim Jong-Il, in remarks taped for a 'Larry King Live' show to air tomorrow night.

Cheney called Kim Jong-Il "one of the world's more irresponsible leaders", accused Kim of running a 'police state' and charged that Kim's people are living in "abject poverty and stages of malnutrition."

Easy prediction: the White House will be accused of having a 'failed' policy against North Korea due to bellicose language that causes Kim to lose face.

Save the criticisms. North Korea has been absolutely intransigent about each and every issue surrounding its nuclear arms, and has refused to even talk. Even now they are preparing for a nuclear test. And North Korea is, in fact, a brutal police state that is starving its own people. Is that irresponsible? No, it is in fact psychotic. Cheney merely calling Kim "one of the world's more irresponsible leaders" is a marvellously ironic understatement, almost a compliment compared to the truth.

Kim Jong-Il needs to be smacked on the nose with a rolled up newspaper once in a while - he is not entitled to diplomatic niceties. He will be rewarded with pleasant talk and adulation if and when he does something to actually deserve it. Until that time, he is nothing less than the Hitler of our age. He deserves a cyanide capsule, not airy kisses.

Trivialized Tribute To The Dead

2005-05-29T15:29:00.000-05:00

Nightline and Doonesbury have both once again issued lists of the war dead for Memorial Day. I have seen the Nightline presentation of war dead names before, and it is a well-produced tribute. I have not seen what Gary Trudeau's Doonesbury tribute looks like, but using the cartoon as a medium for such a weighty subject will automatically trivialize it no matter how well drawn it is. And Trudeau is not known for his drafting skills.

Though the Nightline treatment of the war dead is invariably tasteful, thoughtful and properly reserved, in the end it really is a tasteless gesture. Double for Trudeau.

It is as if the dead were all that mattered in this affair, and that the goals of the administration are of no consequence. This is not about the dead, it is about a future that the dead sacrificed themselves to build. During World War II the public and the media kept their eyes focused on the goals, shed a tear for the dead and moved along. They knew the dead would castigate them for dwelling too long on their loss at the expense of the goal they died for. To do anything else is to waste the sacrifice.

The subtext of such memorials, as if it were scrolling like subtitles below the image, is "were it not for a misguided/greedy/manipulative White House, this person would be alive now." One can almost imagine Ted Koppel closing the show with an admonishment - "how many more of these shows do I have to do before america comes to its senses?"

Trudeau says "there is power in seeing actual names instead of numbers. Honor rolls always help deepen our understanding of what has been lost."

I have never counted myself among those who needed a reminder, or a deeper understanding, of our nation's loss. Reading about the loss of the anonymous '2 marines killed' or '1 national guardsman injured' always did send a twinge of anguish through me. These are my neighbors - or they could be. They were guys I went to high school with. I always wonder about what they lost when they died - their families, their plans, their aspirations.

Who are these people that Koppel and Trudeau think need reminding? Do they think that it will suddenly dawn upon a great swath of the american public that americans are really dying over there! Wow, I had no idea! Or do they think that americans consider the Iraq casualties as just some new form of regrettable DUI statistic that is unavoidable in this modern world? Perhaps in the circles they travel in, no one expresses regret or admiration for the war dead. Indeed some of them probably express elitist disdain for 'suckers' like Pat Tillman. But among red-state americans there is no need to 'remind' oneself of the fallen - they are taken to heart. A lack of outward bereavement does not mean the bereavement does not exist.

Speaking of bereavement, I have a question for Koppel and Doonesbury: come September 11, can we count on a recitation of the names of the World Trade Center victims?

Memorial Day 2005

2005-05-28T14:43:00.000-05:00

I am humbled on this day to give thanks to our selfless fallen warriors, and all the soldiers fallen from generations before.

It is a testament to the strength of the human spirit that young men living in the world's wealthiest nation would sacrifice their comforts, everything they cherish, and everything they love to preserve our republic.

And the republic in turn, on this hallowed day, is grateful, and pledges to keep a republic worthy of them.

Pantano Cleared

2005-05-26T13:45:00.000-05:00

Great news - murder charges against Marine 2nd. Lt. Ilario Pantano have been dropped. Pantano has beaten the rap put on him by a disgruntled subordinate, and by a media that presumes all soldiers in Iraq to be guilty of something.

The Gang Of Fourteen

2005-05-26T03:26:00.000-05:00

From Tony Blankley:

So begins the Regency Period of the Senate. As long as these fourteen stick together, nothing can pass the Senate. Certainly they now possess, jointly and severally, veto power over the president's judicial appointments. Hereafter it would be imprudent of the president to send up any nominations without first requesting permission from Democratic Sens. Robert C. Byrd, Daniel K. Inouye, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman and Ken Salazar.
The president need not check with the seven Republican senators because their only job is to keep the Republican leadership powerless. It is exclusively the Democratic senators who are empowered to give their imperial thumbs up or down signals.
What shall we call these 14 senators? Trustees, Regents, Governing Board Members, Blessed Ones, Lord Protectors, Proconsuls, Oligarchs, Cabalists, Conspirators, Usurpers? For the moment it doesn't matter. History will give them their final designation. Certainly they see themselves as saviors of the Senate traditions. (God save us from self-appointed saviors. It always ends in tears.)"

Yes, now we have not one, but three steps to the appointment of all officials, or four even if you want to include the committee vote.

Update: Heh, I guess this makes me a member of the Coalition of the Unhinged.