September 30, 2004
and read James Lileks. You have no choice.
UPDATE Don't miss Hugh Hewitt's debate scorecard. It is a nice graphical illustration of each question/answer with a few comments as the debate went on.
In the comments in my analysis/reaction post, reader binacontenda aka Scott chides me because Kerry "dominated." Certainly, on style but that will fade some as the transcript (also linked below) is poured over. How will Kerry's moral equivalency vis a vis The United States should immediately stop researching bunker-buster bombs because it makes us hypocrits when we are denying the same to terrorists play with real people? Certainly, the Left has made moral equivalency one of their most cherished rhetorical sticks to beat up the rest of us (ie all violence is the same; Israel is worse than Hamas; etc) but is that what we want...good lord, is that what we can afford in a President? Kerry should run for Kofi's spot if that's they way he thinks.
The debate -- analysis and reactions
Allah, peace be upon him, is rounding up the reactions and spot analysis.
My immediate, personal reaction: GW did not knock it out of the park. Kerry ahead on style points (very smooth) very Senatorial vs off-the cuff business/CEO in the trenches non-politician. No obvious mistakes by either.
However, while GW's pauses, his slow starts (and when he relaxes, he's very personable and articulate) will elicit the usual "stupid chimp" slams, Kerry didn't get the upper hand on substance like he needed to do to make inroads against GW. Infact, what with the FL hurricanes and other aspects of the job of President that GW has been carrying on, even up to the time of the debate, I'd say GW was cautious this round to feel his way in what Kerry would toss his way. There are two more debates. Rope-a-dope? GW is known for his poker playing.
Kerry also let slip some policy things that can come back to haunt him... the "tax the rich," the blaming GW for North Korea and wanting to pursue talks with NK that would push China aside, the continued sneering at the coalition, even to giving nuclear fuel to Iran.
And the "global test" was something GW immediately picked up on, because the American citizenry has been witness to the huge corruption and moral cowardice of the UN since 9/11. Kerry says he won't ask for a permission slip then goes right ahead and says he won't do anything that "the world" disapproves of.
Now THAT's something no President of the USA should ever even hint at!
UPDATE Debate transcript
Welcome to the Debate
Whew. Just got home, still getting settled. I've got the shoes off, TV on, and am going to trot downstairs for a beverage. But first, I want to let you know what to expect from me.
Of course I'm partisan. That goes without saying. And I will be watching these debates as a partisan for GW. However, if I think Jo_Ke makes a good, sincere point, I will say so. If you feel like commenting, I'll try and keep up with that, too. I'm going to be also watching a few other blogs. Command-Post has a chatroom up.
"Pluck and perseverance?"
"a summit that the President hasn't done yet." So, Kerry, what besides talk talk while Islamofascists kill kill have you got plans for?
GW's great strength is his ability to sound like a human being, a regular guy sitting across the kitchen table from you and explaining some not so great things. GW says "stay on the offensive"
Kerry's first cheap shot: (where is the Pres "errors of judgement") "where do you want me to begin..ha ha"
First Kerry Vietnam reference "when I was in combat"
GW gets in some nice pokes at the UN
Kerry slipping into speechifying with prepared statements rather than being conversational... and being totally negative
earth to Kerry ... cops/firemen are local issues, not feds
GW doesn't set a timetable for withdrawal, but a standard for bringing the troops home.
Kerry flip flops...says "going into Iraq was a mistake"..then when Leher asks "was it a mistake?" he says "no"
Take a DRINK... Kerry waives the boogeyman "Halliburton"
Kerry says Kofi offered to send the UN in after the fall of Baghdad and GW said "no"...what Kerry doesn't say is that Kofi wanted CONTROL of US troops for bringing in the blue helmets.
Kerry "we did not go to was as a last resort" WTF, Kerry? Just exactly what would have gotten Saddam to "cooperate?"
Oh heck...is anyone keeping count of Kerry's Vietnam references?
Kerry..you keep hammering on GW having "no plan" but you only have a "secret one."
Yeh, that makes me all warm and fuzzy
EARTH TO KERRY... Iraq is PART of the War on Terror. A FREE IRAQ is the Islamofascists worst nightmare
What Kerry doesn't say about the no-fly zone, is that we were being shot at on a consistent basis AND Saddam was wearing down the UN sanctions (with whole sale bribery)
GW "what 'global test'?" and reminds everyone that we did not join the "International [anti-America/Israel] Court"... GOOD MOVE
Kerry is smooth...argh the "back door draft" perfidy!
Kerry has always been consistent???
GW wants China in on the NK talks, Kerry wants to sabetoge that
GW criticizes Putin for trying to grab power, also lauds him for focus on terror
KERRY: I served in VIETNAM! Kerry is redoing his DemCon appearance
Nice close by Bush
I need to go have some dinner. Later and thanks for listening.
Eye on the Ball -- voter fraud
Powerline a few days ago covered a group in Wisconsin, "New Voter Project" which is raising concern with turning in bundles of voter registration with fake addresses. Today Power Line points to Michelle Malkin's roundup of massive voter fraud around the country.
Just the other day on another blog I debated with a liberal who crowed about Democrats in Ohio out registering Republicans by huge margins ... and as Michelle reports:
In Cleveland, Ohio, the NAACP and liberal group Americans Coming Together are under investigation for their involvement in 1,000 suspicious registrations. A Lake County prosecutor, Charles Coulson, said: "We've seen voter fraud before, but never on this level," Coulson said Thursday. "I grew up in Chicago and this looks like the politics of Mayor Daley in the '50s and '60s."
Leftists have fought tooth and nail to make voter registration ridiculously easy (now we can add "dangerously" to that description) and they fight every effort for even minimal checks into the validity if the person is eligible to vote, either at registration and certainly at the polls. In California, poll workers are forbidden for asking for any identification from a person who presents him/herself at the polling place to vote.
Of course, that paragon of election "fairness", Jhimmi Carter, is certain that voter fraud is happening in ... Ohio? Wisconsin? Michigan? ... oh no ... Mr. "I've never met a dictator that I didn't like" Carter is slamming Florida.
This election can't be close, because the Democrats along with the Angry Left (who are quite clear that they believe their feelings are more legitmate than facts or fairness ... even to calling for armed revolution if the "sheeple" are stupid enough to re-elect GW) are working feverishly to steal the election. I live in a "blue" state, but I'm voting. I've never missed a vote since 1972 and it is very important for me to vote this time.
September 29, 2004
CBS trying again
You would have thought CBS would be just a tad more careful about their "reporting" after the Killian Memo Affair (trying to peddle fraudulent memos in an effort to influence a national election). They backed off trying to resurrect the Niger story (especially since their "story" had already been earlier discredited by several sources), but again, CBS doesn't let facts stand in the way of doing a "sexy" story with all the earmarks of an urband legend.
Do read the comments by reader SFC Thomas here in the comment section of that post. He is a retention NCO with twelve years now with the Army.
Oh, SFC Thomas? Thank you.
Notwithstanding recent stories in the news media and on the Internet, Selective Service is not getting ready to conduct a draft for the U.S. Armed Forces -- either with a special skills or regular draft. Rather, the Agency remains prepared to manage a draft if and when the President and the Congress so direct. This responsibility has been ongoing since 1980 and is nothing new. Further, both the President and the Secretary of Defense have stated on more than one occasion that there is no need for a draft for the War on Terrorism or any likely contingency, such as Iraq. Additionally, the Congress has not acted on any proposed legislation to reinstate a draft. Therefore, Selective Service continues to refine its plans to be prepared as is required by law, and to register young men who are ages 18 through 25.
Site update -- The debates
I've added at the right a script link from the Bush/Cheney site that will have live updates from the debate on Thursday. In addition, I hope to be home on time to be able to live blog the debate myself. You're quite welcome to watch and comment live here, too.
September 28, 2004
We report, you decide
Noticing the mantan that Kerry has recently sported, many of the blogsphere have commented on the uncanny resemblance to Oompa-Loompas.
Of course, Camp Kerry has immediately claimed a "rightwing smear." That wiley Rove! Taking a cue from Police Academy and doctoring Kerry's clay masque with mantan! What a card, Karl is! You should have seen him when he short-sheeted Colin Powell and hid Dick Cheney's glasses.
However, I noticed the pompadoured hair, the oh-so-chic wrist band, the shirt slightly unbuttoned (did Kerry leave his cravat in the greenroom?) and I realized ... well ....
Is this the way Kerry woed Teresa?
From 'symbology' to 'misleadisments'
A couple of posts back, I got a certain amount of amusement from Bruce Springsteen's Rolling Stone Magazine interview, especially where he uses a legitimate five-dollar word like "oligarchy" and then coins his own words like "symbology." When GW fumbles his words the Angry Left tosses the confetti and almost rolls over in orgasmic joy in adding to their "Bushisms" list and crowing that it is yet another chunk of "evidence" of GW's "stupidity." "Bushisms" are the stuff of domestic L.A.M.E. (Legacy American Media Establishment) columns.
However, in another example of the double-standard that L.A.M.E. engages in during their partisan attempt to drag Jo_Ke into the White House, Jonah Goldberg points out a Kerrysm that only got a mention in the foreign press. And a Kerrysm, not because of a word fumble in the midst of conversation, but a coined word that approaches self-parody.
thought the "W is for Wrong" thing was lame. But this from yesterday was lameness wrapped in dorkiness swaddled in wimpiness. Yesterday, after whining that Bush's negative ads were getting so mean that the American people were getting scared from all the nastiness he declared:
"I'm calling them 'misleadisments,'. It's all scare tactics because (Bush) has no record to run on."
At least when Bush butchers a word he does it by accident. Kerry probably sat down and hammered this out with aides. I wonder why they didn't go with distortials or miscommercials.
I also wonder why I could only find this tidbit in foreign newspapers.
Yeh, I wonder, too.
Countdown to debate
O'Reilly isn't one of my favorite interviewers. Well, he's better than Larry King but that's not saying much. For Larry, it's all about kissing his guest's tuchas, for Bill it's about kissing his own. So I gritted my teeth to watch his mano-a-mano interview with GW last night.
I was impressed. O'Reilly reigned in his ego, asked some to-the-point questions and followed them up. GW was relaxed, focused and answered in a very straight forward unequivocal manner. Indeed, the last question of the segment ended with Bill and GW disagreeing on illegal immigration.
I could have done without the Kerrybot that followed whose "analysis" in totality of GW's performance was chanting "He didn't answer the question! He didn't answer the question!" And Alan Colmes is looking more disheveled and stressed-out as Jo_Ke trips over his own non-message on a daily basis.
If you missed part I, Fox News has the video on its site. I plan on watching all the segments and then the debate on Thursday. Join me for live-blogging of the debate (but I may be a little late as I don't get home from work until 5:45 pm PDT)
Oh! And I'm running this pic of GW because it absolutely drives the revisionist Leftists absolutely nutz. Heh.
September 27, 2004
Earth to The Boss – the wisdom of separating Pop and State
Moving from childhood through adolescence and then adulthood is like moving outward through concentric circles, where as a child you inhabit the center. As you mature your awareness moves outward to encompass immediate family, friends, school, community, country. I was pretty typical as a teen, my focus mainly on family, friends and school. Regardless of the fact of growing up with the Vietnam War and its profound impact on my life, it did not dominate it. Everyday conversations revolved around boyfriends, fashion and music. Music was an integral part of my life as it is any teen’s life. I found it both a communal and individual experience. I can hear a song today and it’s a time machine. I’m suddenly in the place and time that most emotionally resonates with me.
During adolescence, I indulged in hero-worship of my favorite pop/rock stars. I bought magazines with their pictures, memorized their birthdays and astrological signs, knew their “likes” and “dislikes” by heart (yes, I confess, I bought Tiger Beat!) displayed posters in my room and sighed with sadness when gossip had them “seriously dating” someone besides ME (there is not a teenaged girl alive that hasn’t daydreamed of a chance meeting with her teen idol where he is stricken by her shy, but earnest, manner and falls madly in love). As I grew out of adolescence, I knew that musicians, like all people in the entertainment business had lives outside of their “art.” I realized that sometimes one had to separate the artist from the person, to compartmentalize as it were the art one might admire from the person one might not even respect. It can be really nice when one can admire both aspects of the person, their art and their private character, but I certainly don’t expect to. I’m pleased when I hear of a music entertainer who has quietly been involved in community or charity work, even if it doesn’t cause me to suddenly like their work. And I’m not about to through out cherished CDs if I’m confronted with the revealed indecency of the person who made them.
However, it gets harder to keep this compartmentalized when entertainers insist, very publicly and very loudly, on mixing their “art” with their “message.”
A perfect case in point of an entertainer who has internalized his pop-popularity as license to hold forth as a political pundit and prophet is Bruce Springsteen. Rolling Stone Magazine has an interview with The Boss that is a fascinating read of a man with enormous musical talent and little self-reflection.
Do read the whole thing. I’ll wait.
Now, let’s look at a few things.
I always felt that the musician's job, as I experienced it growing up, was to provide an alternative source of information, a spiritual and social rallying place, somewhere you went to have a communal experience.
As I said before, I accept music as a communal experience. Attending a live concert and swooning with your friends over the hunk on the stage is a lot of fun, but “alternative information?” Do you collaborate with Steven Hawking on the side and you’re going to sing about the possibility of warp speed? I’m sorry, Bruce, but looking for “alternative information” from a pop-concert or album went out of fashion when Charlie Manson listened to the White Album backwards and acted on what he saw as “alternative information.”
I don't know if someone is going to run to the front of the stage and shout, "I'm saved" or "I'm switching," but I'm going to try. I will be calling anyone in a bow tie to come to the front of the stage, and I'll see what I can do.
Oooo… The Boss as Billy Graham! Get real, Bruce, conservatives don’t wear bowties as the Mark of the Devil. Didn’t Karl Rove cc you on the memo?
Basically, the concerts are raising money specifically for America Coming Together …
A George Soros’ production, associate with the execrable Moveon.org
... basically, I wanted to remain an independent voice for the audience that came to my shows.
So why are you raising money for “America Coming Together” and billing your concerts “Vote for Change?”
Our band is in pretty much what I think of as the center.
Don’t get out much, do you, Bruce?
I tried to build a reputation for thoughtfulness.
Goodness, and here I just thought of your music as mostly fun, feel good stuff, or even sad emotional stuff. Dancing in the Dark, Glory Days… if I play them backwards, will I find “alternative information” on them?
There are a portion (sic) of your fans who do quite a bit of selective listening. That's the way that people use pop music, and that's part of the way it rolls.
The upside is that there has been an increased definition about the things I've written about and where I stand on certain issues.
Considering what you just said, don’t you find this just a tad contradictory? You don’t mind pushing issues in your music you know many of your fans are not going to want to hear about?
The example I've been giving is that I've been an enormous fan of John Wayne all my life, although not a fan of his politics. I've made a place for all those different parts of who he was. I find deep inspiration and soulfulness in his work.
Why haven’t you followed that example? John Wayne didn’t stick a political subtext in the Quiet Man. Why don’t you respect either your “art” or your audience enough to separate out your music from your politics?
Pop musicians live in the world of symbology.(sic)
Artists are always speaking to people's freedoms.
Bruce, ever hear of Leni Riefenstahl*? Shall I go on to list other “artists” who have not spoken to “people’s freedoms?” Just because someone self-identifies as an “artist,” it does not automatically anoint them into some special place in the cosmos where they can “speak to freedom” and be freed of criticism or ridicule.
I felt we had been misled. I felt they had been fundamentally dishonest and had frightened and manipulated the American people into war. And as the saying goes, "The first casualty of war is truth." I felt that the Bush doctrine of pre-emption was dangerous foreign policy.
The key word in that whole passage is “felt.” Bruce, “feelings” are not the way people are supposed to come to conclusions about the most effective way to combat evil. Eisenhower didn’t sit around with his staff and talk about what he “felt” was the best way to topple Hitler… you know that “sovereign leader” of a foreign nation that had never attacked America?
It was something that gestated over a period of time, and as events unfolded and the election got closer, it became clearer. I don't want to watch the country devolve into an oligarchy,
Wow … “oligarchy” no less. From the guy who used the word “symbology.”
watch the division of wealth increase and see another million people beneath the poverty line this year.
I love it when someone who lives in one of the most tony areas of New Jersey waxes emotionally about poverty and the “division of wealth.” Excuse me while I guffaw.
People are always trying to shut up the people they don't agree with -- through any means necessary, usually. There certainly was an attempt to intimidate the Dixie Chick … But it's one of those sad paradoxes that in theory we're fighting for freedom, and the first thing people are willing to throw out is freedom of speech at home …
Wait, now. Let me get this right. An “artist” has the right to say whatever they want, but if the fan doesn’t like it, if the fan criticizes the artist and refuses to buy the “art” or tickets to view the “art” that constitutes intimidation? An abridgement of freedom of speech? The “artist” has the right of free speech but the fan does not? Oh. No double standard here. Nothing to see. Move along.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this election is that the machinery for taking something that is a lie and making it feel true, or taking something that is true and making it feel like a lie …
Oh, you mean like CBS trying to smear President Bush with fraudulent memos? Or a “reporter” from AP inventing a “report” that Republicans “booed” when President Bush said President Clinton was in the hospital? Is that the machinery you’re talking about?
I am a dedicated [New York] Times reader,
That explains a lot.
I've found enormous sustenance from Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd
And that explains the rest.
And as you can see from the balance of the interview, its just more of the same. Kerry is the white night, the Old Media isn’t sufficiently on Kerry’s side [excuse me, a moment while I fall on the floor laughing], too much of the media is concerned with ratings [no Bruce, can’t have people decide for themselves what they want to watch. Your role is to provide them “alternative information” whether they want to buy your stuff or not], too much “patriotism” in the media …
Sigh. Bruce, don’t take this as “intimidation” or an attempt to curb your “freedom of speech” to act as dumb as you sound in this interview; but, in the words of Laura Ingraham, “Shut up and sing.”
UPDATE: Thanks, Brad. I have made the correction.
September 26, 2004
What happened to the halftime show?
Yesterday I did something I don't usually do, watch a football game on TV -- the USC/Stanford game from Palo Alto, CA. My family has been SC fans for years and I fondly recall attending many of the games at the LA Coliseum during my jr high/high school years. My parents had season tickets and there was a wonderful excitement that hit me as soon as we parked the car and starting walking up to the imposing structure. Go through the gate and first stop to buy hotdogs and sodas. After dressing the dogs in all manner of relish and ketchup and onions, head into the stadium itself. Go into the shadow of the soaring arched entrances, emerging into the light with the sight of thousands of seats spread out in front of you, the field below you.
There is nothing like actually attending a football game. TV can show the action up close, it can run an instant replay with analysts pointing out the fine points of the play. But it cannot capture the palatable emotions that move like waves through the crowd.
And TV does one more thing that diminishes this experience. TV takes away (at least for me) one of the more fun activities at a football game -- the halftime show.
I admit it, I was really annoyed, and it wasn't just because Stanford was whipping SC's ass the first half of the game. I wanted to watch the halftime show, not be shuffled away to sports announcers analyzing the first half or being told breathlessly about all the other games going on across the country. Why does halftime have to be some twenty-something minutes of broadcast station advertising?
Give me the band!
I love bands. I love fieldshows. I remember Stanford band from my youth sprinting onto the field in a moment of exuberant irreverence and capturing the rapt attention of the crowd.
My girls have all been band members. I've been a band mom for years. Considering that the high school football teams of their schools have never been powerhouses, I always looked at the game as the opening act for the band. Does anyone outside of band families know about Fieldshow Season? Whole days dedicated to competing bands?
At my girls' schools, the football team got the money, but the band brought back the trophies (and the parents fundraising to make up for the school's studied indifference).
Heather was drum major of both her middle school and high school band. This year Siobhan is a senior and she, too, is drum major. Fieldshow competition begins in October and I will be there, cheering her and her band on, not really missing the football game bracketing the show. This marks my last year of attending these competitions. Twelve years of high school band field shows.
I'm sorry that TV figures that superlative college bands are not something they should expose their audience to; however, it again demonstrates that regardless of the technical advantages TV can bring to the view of a game, it falls way short of capturing the full experience.
L.A.M.E. still doesn't get it
Or maybe, seeing the competition, they want to dismiss the citizen-journatist of the pajama set by ignoring the bloggers who broke the CBS fraud and portray left-of-center blogs as rather silly ventures.
Today the NYTimes runs with a ten page spread on bloggers written by fiction writer Matthew Klam. Ten pages, with only a couple sentences that even mention "conservative" bloggers and the Rather debacle.
Charles Johnson describes his forty minute interview by Klam that never made it into the article. Michele Catalano offers up an excellent and pithy review of the piece, including pointing out how tired it is that the "face" of female blogging that ends up in print is Wonkette. She also has links to many other blogs commenting on this.
September 25, 2004
Former Prime Minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar, spoke at breakfast Friday morning at AEI and predicted three spectacular terrorist events in the near future. First, a major destructive action in the United States before election day on November 2, possibly during the last 72 hours, for massive effect in causing confusion and commotion. Second, a dramatic escalation of action in Iraq leading up to November 2, and again in late December and early January to head off the Iraqi election at the end of January. Third, a spectacular attack in the United Kingdom next May to disrupt the re-election campaign of PM Tony Blair.
Aznar's main subject was the serious gap between European elites (and even European popular opinion) and the United States. This gap originated before Bush and it will continue for many years to come. But Americans need seriously to reach out to Europeans, assisting and encouraging our friends (not only fair-weather friends, but friends in difficult times), and making clear to others that gratuitous obstructionism toward the United States is not cost-free.
CBS shelves hit-piece, Danny-boy to the debates
From AssPress via Yahoo.
NEW YORK - CBS News has shelved a "60 Minutes" report on the rationale for war in Iraq (news - web sites) because it would be "inappropriate" to air it so close to the presidential election, the network said on Saturday.
The report on weapons of mass destruction was set to air on Sept. 8 but was put off in favor of a story on President Bush (news - web sites)'s National Guard service. The Guard story was discredited because it relied on documents impugning Bush's service that were apparently fake.[ed. note: apparently fake? naw, no bias there. Nothing to see. Move along.]
CBS News spokeswoman Kelli Edwards would not elaborate on why the timing of the Iraq report was considered inappropriate.
Now, the "inappropriateness" couldn't be because their story is as bogus as The Killian Memo Affair now, could it? Or could it...
The new “scoop” purported to show that Bush relied on forged documents to “lead the country to war.”
Bear with me, please. Since the Forces of Idiocy so persistently try to pass off dead ducks as living, we have to reach into the freezer to show you again: this is a dead duck.
In his State of the Union speech, the President said these sixteen words:
The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
The statement was true, and recently a British Commission confirmed that was so. Days afterward, however, the US received forged documents about uranium sales from Africa to Saddam. (Documents, I should add that an Italian inquiry established were forged by a man working for French intelligence - apparently to discredit the good information upon which Bush and Blair had relied, and thereby to embarrass them.)
And was this French farce forgery used for that purpose? Indeed it was. By Joseph A. Wilson (author of Politics of Truth), then an outspoken Kerry supporter and advisor. And where is Wilson today? Well, he has been thoroughly discredited by anyone who actually studied his testimony before the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee. That includes the Committee and the brilliant Christopher Hitchens.
Hmmm... ya think the cluebat has finally had an effect on CBS that their credibility is about nil and easy to discredit hit-pieces are just not going to pass the smell test anymore?
However, CBS still is allowing Rather to wax Nixonian:
Meanwhile, the network announced that Rather would anchor the network's coverage of all three presidential debates, starting Sept. 30.
Nice reward for a male who should be answering questions in front of a Congressional committee.
BTW... democraticunderground.com is going nutz (even more than their usual battiness, which says a lot) over this story.
Reading for a Saturday
First off, I want to say to all my Jewish friends and family members, a blessed Yom Kippur. May your fasting go well and may the light of today shine on you and yours in the coming year.
Now, some interesting things happening:
Germans have a negative view of Islam, which I find encouraging in view of the appeasement most of EU is officially taking towards fundamentalist Islam.
Certainly, the above view is in sharp contrast with the blinded socialist government of Spain --
The Spanish government sparked a furious row yesterday after it emerged that it had drawn up a timetable to halve state funding of the Roman Catholic Church and to ban crucifixes from public buildings.
Further enraging conservatives, the government has drawn up plans to finance the teaching of Islam in state-run schools and to give funds to mosques on the grounds that it will create greater understanding of the country's one million Muslims.
Don't miss Mark Steyn's column today --
Kerry's looking for American failure -- and he's it
Iran is still giving the finger to the Western world. But why not? Kofi is impotent where Islamism is concerned, and that's the best I can say about that venal crook.
Powerline has yet another on-point analysis of how partisan the "press corp" is as evidenced by their "performance" in regards to GW and Allawi in the Rose Garden.
Opinion Journal also looks askance at the "international community" and their "hint[s] it may not live up to its promise to organize the vote."
So, here's a good start to the day! And oh!
UPDATE:Do not miss Best Photoshop of the week, from the Creator of Worlds. [chants: we are not worthy, we are not worthy]
September 24, 2004
While Kerry was relatively restrained in disputing Allawi's upbeat portrayal, some of his aides suggested that the Iraqi leader was simply doing the bidding of the Bush administration, which helped arrange his appointment in June.
"The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips," said Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser.
Of course, if the name Lockhart seems familiar, you may recall he is the purported wannabe bagman in The Killian Memo Affair for Camp Kerry. If some snowball melts in hell and Jo_Ke is elected, how much of a warm welcome is he going to get from the Iraqi government with this kind of highly insulting rhetoric? Or is this just the foreshadowing of Jo_Ke's withdrawing of the troops and setting Allawi up as a dead-man? Is this Jo_Ke's invitation for negotiations with a restored Saddam as dictator or terrorist Islamist government?
How much more anti-Iraqi citizenry will Camp Kerry go?
Chutzpah Watch II
If you haven't heard it, Command Post has the text of Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi's speech before Congress.
John Kerry not only refused to attend, he got on national TV immediately after to piss all over it. He came as close as possible to calling PM Allawi a liar. I suppose that Jo_Ke figures the foreign leaders he meets with in restaurants in NYC know better what is going on in Iraq than its own PM.
This is the way to win friends and influence people? John Kerry consistently bad mouths the members of the Coalition and then waxes vague about how he will "repair" relations with "the world." (um, Jo_Ke? How? You always veer off to other topics when "how" comes up. Or are you counting just on the power of your sparkling personality to have Kofi, France and Germany falling at your feet?)
Charles Krauthammer writes:
The terrorists' objective is to intimidate all countries allied with America. Make them bleed and tell them this is the price they pay for being a U.S. ally. The implication is obvious: Abandon America and buy your safety.
That is what the terrorists are saying. Why is the Kerry campaign saying the same thing?
And let's not forget that venal Kofi is in the terrorists' corner, too.
[Allawi] expressed annoyance with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan for suggesting last week that there could not be "credible elections" if violence doesn't abate by January.
Allawi said he asked U.N. officials in Iraq whether they were privy to inside information about a postponement. Their answer was no, the prime minister said.
Kofi is up to his scrawny neck with the UN oil for food scandal, so one could almost expect him to be nostalgic for the good old days of Saddam. However, Camp Kerry's stance has to give one pause.
WTF is Jo_Ke thinking?
September 23, 2004
Well, for the next few days we'll be able to tell the twins apart. Daughter Erin called me at lunch to tell me that Nick had beaned Sean between the eyes with a block.
Cool. They turn two Monday, and birthday pics will show Sean with a scab on the bridge of his nose and a bruise running down each side of his nose.
From the Washington Post
The House and the Senate overwhelmingly voted last night to extend three tax cuts aimed at the middle class, along with an array of business tax breaks, sending President Bush a $146 billion tax cut that would be his fourth in four years.
The legislation would extend the $1,000-per-child tax credit, rather than letting it slip back to $700 next year. It would extend tax breaks for married couples that otherwise would also have to be trimmed in 2005. And it would prevent the 10 percent income-tax bracket from being applied to smaller amounts of earned income, as was the case in the past.
Kerry said in a statement: "Millions of American families are being squeezed by the weak Bush economy, falling incomes and rising health costs, and we should extend middle-class tax breaks to help them."
The Betraying Voice
As I've already discussed in a previous post, I find John Kerry's slipping back into his 70's persona spooky. Of course, I'm assuming that he actually has ever changed from who he was when he sat in front of the US Senate and spoke of the US Military as "the heirs of 'Jenjus' Khan."
The last several days have moved my suspicion into the realm of confirmation as Kerry is dropping all attempts at pretense in a last ditch effort to resurrect the twitching body of anti-government/anti-American tie-dyed, rarely washed, black-armbanded, clenched-fisted, "hey hey LBJ" chanting Baby Boomers. He started this run at the White House with the constant refrain of his extraordinary qualifications because of his four months in combat in Vietnam. From "saluting" the gathered at the DemCon to dropping mentions of his service into every conversation from riding a ferry in Boston to discussing his favorite gun in Outdoor Life, he wanted to put his time in uniform front and center, to the exclusion of his Senate voting and, most certainly, to obfuscate his time with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
However, it hasn't exactly worked out the way Kerry wanted. Certainly, September 11, 2001, changed a great deal with most Americans. We woke up and realized that a couple of oceans and a tendency towards isolationism are no guarantee of safety. We also saw our all-volunteer forces in action, educated, dedicated and finely trained, and we saw something to be proud of. Kerry thought to capitalize on our heightened sense of respect for men and women in uniform. Regardless of his past with a radical anti-Vietnam group, Kerry must have figured the memory bank was so faded that he could pick and choose which pictures to restore to the national attention.
In the meantime, the Democratic Party has become almost indistinguishable from the Left. It has an easily angered core whose collective knee dances the jig at every international catastrophe in which America is even a peripheral player and pronounces America guilty.
So Kerry sought to straddle the divide between the core Leftists and the moderates of the party by trying to support the liberation of Iraq while saying it had been done "wrong." He says that while he voted to give President Bush the power to topple Saddam, he really didn't mean it. He now says Iraq is the "wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" when he said prior to the DemCon that anyone that would hold such a position was "unfit" to be President. Kerry counted on the core to grumble, but to hold their peace on his listing towards hawkishness because, at least, he wasn't Bush. His "hawkishness" would play upon the moderates rediscovered respect for US military and willingness to confront Islamist terror.
What Kerry didn't count on was that his military service in the past would be the only thing people would remember. Kerry didn't count on the deep well of resentment he engendered by his very public actions in the early 70's. These sentiments may have well remained in the background except Kerry was so earnest in his efforts to revive only that part of his past that he felt would resonate with the new security minded moderates and conservatives of his party he totally discounted those of us that would find that appeal hypocritical at best, cynical and condescending at worst.
Even the Angry Left admits that Kerry doesn't have the "common touch" that GW does. They attribute it to every thing than the reality that Kerry looks at people as things to use to further himself. From the couple of hundred of Swift Boat Veterans who have recalled Kerry's self-aggrandizing both in Vietnam and as recently as the Swiftboat reunion in 2003 Kerry's attitude has always been clear. Even a Doonesbury strip of the time poked fun at his self-importance:
We know from direct testimony of former POW's that Kerry's testimony was part of the torture that they endured at the hands of the North Vietnamese. We know that many of the VVAW were frauds, never having even been members of the military let alone serving in Vietnam.
I was 16 years old at the time of the "Winter Soldier" testimony. My high school allowed for a "Vietnam protest day" at the urging of some students, who arranged for speakers and who passed out black arm bands. And part of their argument was that the US military were "committing genocide" on Vietnamese. They claimed it was "policy" and the terms of "rapist" and "babykiller" was just as prominent from their mouths in my high school as it was on college campuses.
I was shocked. I argued with them that no matter their political disagreement with the Administration, they were just plain wrong to attack the soldiers. I argued they were giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy by portraying our soldiers as war criminals.
I was part of a small group of kids that counter-protested, handing out red/white/blue armbands in support of the troops. I offered a counterview to the speakers when the discussions were opened.
I really didn't want to relive those times. I would love to let it fade into sepia-toned memories. I'd rather wryly recall the disasters of fashion and home decor of the era, from harvest gold appliances to granny-square crocheted ponchos.
Kerry started this. He ripped the scartissue off and all those lingering memories of spitting on returning veterans and riots and burning flags and burning monks are now in the forefront, along with a soundtrack that includes a patrician voice intoning an almost endless list of purported American atrocities as policy; a voice born of the American northeast but a content worthy of Tokyo Rose.
I guess it will be up to me and my peers to stop it Nov. 2.
September 22, 2004
Jo_Ke goes Gore
What can I say? The man is slipping into desperation and swinging at the Bush Campaign with stuff that no longer makes any sense. The unraveling he is doing in public is gawk-worthy if it weren't so worrisome that this man is seriously wanting to be President. It's as if Kerry is morphing into the incoherent, unhinged Al Gore six weeks out from the election. Not learning from The Killian Memo Affair and that people are taking a dim view of Rather's trying to peddle forged documents in Kerry's service, Kerry drops this stink bomb
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, citing the war in Iraq and other trouble spots in the world, raised the possibility Wednesday that a military draft could be reinstated if voters re-elect President Bush.
Kerry said he would not bring back the draft and questioned how fairly it was administered in the past.
See UPDATE end of this post
Isn't that fun? Kerry claims he has all the goods on the "secret plans" of the GW administration and waves the boogeyman of a resurrected draft knowing full well that Republicans all oppose it. Then there's this bon mot about a fearmongering email making the rounds of college students:
Mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages18-26) starting June 15, 2005
There is pending legislation in the House and Senate, S89 and HR 163,to reinstate mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages18-26) starting June 15, 2005. This plan includes women in the draft, eliminates higher education as a shelter, and makes it difficult to cross into Canada.
The Bush administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections. The Bush administration plans to begin mandatory draft in the spring of 2005, just after the 2004 presidential election.
· The Congress has added $28 million to the 2004 selective service system budget to prepare for this military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005.
· Bush has ordered the Selective Service to report to him by March 31, 2005 on their readiness to implement the draft by June 2005
· The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.
Please act on this:
· Tell everyone you know - parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents,
godparents, friends, teachers
· Call and write to your U.S. Senator and your U.S. Representatives and ask them why they aren't telling their constituents about these bills
Collusion with Camp Kerry? Well, who would have ever thought that CBS would run with forged documents while coordinating with Camp Kerry and risk turning the "Tiffany" network into so much junk jewelry?
Indeed, the few rumblings about instituting a draft have come from cynical Congressional Democrats specifically to try and scare the bejeebus out of young adults and their parents. Check out HR 163 and see just who is sponsoring this attempt at punishing Americans dissenting from Liberal wisdom.
Then add to this perfidy by Kerry his claim that GW is going to gut Social Security and Edwards is claiming that the Bush administration will eliminate the mortgage tax credit (when homeownership is now at record highs).
This is downright spooky.
UPDATE If you haven't seen it yet, James Lileks perfectly captures the gut groans most of us felt at Kerry's "the draft is coming back!" pronouncement.
The draft is coming back! The draft is coming back! You know, there’s Zombie Hippie Boomer component of the nation that simple can’t dump the tropes of the 60s, and the only way they can live is to eat the brains – the sweet, sweet braaaains – of the young. The draft is coming back! Tin Soldiers and Nixon coming! Run away! I hear Canada is, well, Canada this time of year.
The ZHBs want it to be 1969 in perpetuity, I fear. Well: I was 20 in 1978, and I was sick of the 60s. And they’d just ended a few years before. (The sixties hung over into the early seventies, until about ’72; the true sucktacity of that decade didn’t manifest itself until ’73, and died in 1981 about the moment the American hostages left Iranian airspace. It was a short decade, but it had the dead horrid gravity of a black hole.) 1969 was 35 years ago. To prop that dead rotten hulk up and wire its jaw so it appears to speak – well, it’s like telling me, in 1978, that I ought to base my worldview on the ideas of 1943. No: the ideas held by the anti-establishment types in 1943, which would be old bitter Wobblies still pissed that WW2 wasn’t about destroying industrial capitalism.
Read the whole thing. James has, too, captured how Kerry and Bush would answer this question in a debate.
As Burns would say: "Egggshalent."
Swift Boat ad
If you haven't seen it yet, do review the new ad that the Swiftees are releasing soon. It is short and to the point with a devasting ending. Interestingly, even though I usually don't listen to "talking heads", especially when I first get home from work (I need some quiet time to unwind and recharge) I flipped on the TV on the way to either TLC or HGTV and ran across John O'Neill being grilled by Alan Colmes on FoxNews. Alan was bound and determined to have a "gotcha" moment with John, asking repeated if the use of the word "betrayed" in the ad meant John Kerry had committed "treason." John, of course, said that was a deflection he refused to engage in, that "treason" was a legal word and at this time he did not believe it was applicable.
I concur. IMHO one can betray -- one's friends, one's peers, one's spouse, even one's country -- without rising to the level of treason. I'm interested in your opinions on this. Watch the ad and comment. I'll post more later on what experience in my own past leads me to my opinion. Yes, I'm coming at this personally since I actually recall the "Winter Soldier" testimony as it took place in early 1971, when I was a high school junior; a very politically aware 16 year old.
September 21, 2004
This is fun. I hadn't quite realized how the cartoonsphere has taken to the Killian Memo Affair and L.A.M.E. Take a gander here. A little uneven but some real gems, too.
I have a question
My favorite gun is the M-16 that saved my life and that of my crew in Vietnam. I don’t own one of those now, but one of my reminders of my service is a Communist Chinese assault rifle.
My question: Can Kerry answer any friggin' question without dropping in Vietnam? We know you served, already!
September 20, 2004
We interrupt our regularly scheduled rant
I know I promised the next post would be more about MOB. They are just such a ripe target. But my heart is just not in it right now and time slipped by today.
Had a dentist appointment. Such joy in that. "Well, Darleen (why does it feel strange to be addressed by my first name by a dentist who looks young enough to be my son?), you have no cavities. Everything looks good. But you must floss more."
Eeech. Do they teach them that line in school? Memorized right after the Pledge of Allegiance? "...with liberty and justice for all. Spit please, and remember to floss more, at least each day until our next visit."
Daughter Siobhan had her appointment at the same time and got almost the same advice. Which I'm happy with, since as a little munchkin her baby teeth were a nightmare of soft enamel. I almost went grey overnight when I took her to the dentist when she was barely three and our dentist at that time looked over his glasses accusingly and said, "she has seven cavities."
I feel this same sort of free floating guilt if I show up to the doctors for an appointment and my weight is up ten pounds (tip: never schedule a checkup right after the Christmas holidays.)
Our checkups were routine, new appointments made with the hygenist for cleaning and a quick shopping trip so Siobhan could get a light jacket for the cooler weather. Home, a cup o'tea and then looked at the 'net and read a transcript (find it at Command Post) of the Dan Rather interview with Bill Burkett.
Sorry. At this point my energy is sapped. CBS doesn't get it. Dannyboy doesn't get it. And they are all scrambling to find a fall guy, a patsy, so they can just clasp their hands and sigh "we were misled."
Too little, too late, and entirely insincere. And there's still no apology to President Bush.
Personally, I won't be satisfied until I watch Danny and co-defendants perp-walked. But I ain't holding my breath.
I'm going to hold onto the better parts of my day, make a last cup of tea, climb into bed and start afresh tomorrow. Now where did I put my blogger jammies?
MOCKing the MOB
Having Mondays off, I get to enjoy and catch up on reading, some housework, listening to the radio and surfing the web. I got to listen to Dennis Prager live this morning (and where Charles Johnson was interviewed) and now on Michael Medved I'm learning about a new group, Mothers Opposed to Bush. Do visit the site and read the "list" of their points on which oppose Bush. It's actually amusing.
We deserve a president who protects us with vision and through intelligent strategies aimed directly at combating terrorism, rather than through a misguided war that has caused America to lose respect and support around the world.Translation: Saddam should have been left in power. Infact, one of the speakers on Medved's show just said that Saddam would probably been dead in ten or fifteen years any way so there was no reason to go there.
We deserve a president who will not gamble away our savings on tax cuts for the wealthy and an unjustified war that is leaving our descendants with an overwhelming deficit.Translation: F**k the "rich." Again, I heard one of these women actually say "the rich should pay a bigger share." Medved asked them several times (upon the claim of one of the women that she was a "fiscal conservative") "Should the government consume more, less or the same percentage of the total economy?" They refused to answer the question.
We deserve a president who manages a budget that leaves no child behind, hungry, uneducated or impoverished.Translation: "To each according to his need, from each according to his ability."
We deserve a president who believes sick people need equal access to quality healthcare, and that benefits for the elderly should not dwindle.Translation: Healthcare is a right.
Oh my. I gotta stop for now. This is just too rich a dessert.
This Mother Opposing Characterless Kerry will return to [leftist]MOB in the next post.
Religion of Beheadings
I want, really want, not to believe this.
CAIRO, Egypt - A Web site posting claimed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's group has beheaded one of the American hostages in Iraq, but the claim could not be verified. The short statement, posted by a Web site contributor who has put up past statements signed in the name of Tawhid and Jihad, said that al-Zarqawi, "God protect him, has beheaded the first American. The group will next behead the others."
Of course, for too many leftists, Islamism is no problem at all. Just their way, don't you know? And if only America was less "imperialistic" and more "sensitive" (read that as code for "stop being Jew-lovers and cut off Israel") the world would be all skittles and beer.
Weasel words from L.A.M.E.
Drudge Reports the following statement from Dan Rather:
EXCLUSIVE // Mon Sep 20 2004 11:58:02 ET
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically.
I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
This may have been sufficient within a day or two of the broadcast when even a one-eyed baboon could spot the forgeries. Now, more than ten days out? And Dan was misled??
Nope. Nada. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Baby, you tried to mislead your audience.
Time for a full FEC and FCC investigation. Minimally Dan and top executives in the CBS "news" division should be fired. In reality, they should be charged and fined. Though, I admit I'd enjoy seeing Dan doing jail time. Obviously this is a hell of a lot more serious than what Martha Stewart engaged in.
However, read the above weaselly statement above and notice what is obvious by its absence:
Where is Dan Rather's apology to President G.W. Bush?
L.A.M.E. and 'The Killian Memos Affair'
John Hawkins at Command Post has a well-written roundup of the memo hoax and points out the sharp contrast between Old Media's eager embrace of these memos, even in the face of repeated warnings from the handful of document examiners they contacted, and this same Old Media's out-of-hand dismissal of the Swift Boat Veterans regardless of the sworn, firsthand testimony and vetted documents they brought to bear.
In the comment section, poster CERDIP has a new (and IMHO more descriptive) acronym for Old Media: Legacy American Media Establishment.
It reminds me of my favorite TV show of my youth, "The Man from U.N.C.L.E." (hence the title to this entry). The blogsphere needs an U.N.C.L.E. type acronym since L.A.M.E. is the contemporary THRUSH.
September 19, 2004
The Senility of Old Media
During the first Gulf war, the ratings of talk radio (lead by Rush Limbaugh) took off. Indeed, "talk" saved radio from oblivion. Old Media was aghast. Even today, articles about talk radio appearing in Old Media take a condescending view even as they grudgingly admit its impact. We even witnessed Billy Jeff blaming "hate radio" for people not going along with his programs. Old Media hasn't the nerve come to grips with why talk radio (and now FoxNews) is popular. They keep running with the meme that it is just one big Vast Rightwing Conspiracy that most citizens ("sheeple") are too stupid to understand. Again, the basic arrogance and elitism of Old Media blinds them to the "why." And now it looks like this same tact will be followed by Old Media and how they characterize the Internet and bloggers. First case-in-point comes from Allah.
He writes of receiving a press release from Time:
Here's a snippet from the article as reprinted in the press release:Bush staff members rely on technorati.com and truthlaidbear.com, which track political blogs and websites to see what items in local papers, on websites or in blogs are getting the most hits. "If a story moves up through the rankings and linking we can know," says one of the Bush staff members assigned to alert the rest of the team about which stories are moving through the blogosphere. "We can get indicators about stories before they break elsewhere. It's like an early warning system."
In other words, the Bush camp reads blogs to get a sense of what people are talking about. Very smart on their part. So what headline does Time uncork to describe this sinister blog-reading phenomenon?
Bush Campaign Keeping Close Eye on Blogs,
Using Them To Mainline Information to the G.O.P. Faithful
Time turns the Bush staffers use of the Internet bloggers on its head.
In another case, Old Media, ten days out since the CBS/Rather/Killian_memo_hoax story first broke, is finally covering the story in depth and ignoring or minimizing the role of bloggers in breaking the story. Charles Johnson was one of the two sites that first got the story out. Charles was the first (the other site, Powerline, also notices the WaPo omission) to do an overlay comparison between one of the hoax memos and memo created in MSWord with default settings and coming up with a match. Today the Washington Post runs a rather thorough article tracking the timeline of the hoax, but the only nod to those who broke the story and did the heavy lifting of forensic investigation is this paragraph on page four of the online version
These software experts say differences in font widths and printing styles make it impossible to replicate the CBS documents using the printing technology available in the early 1970s. By contrast, reasonably competent computer enthusiasts have created nearly exact replicas of the documents in 15 minutes employing default settings for Microsoft Word and the widely used Times New Roman font.
That's it. Ten days out and that's all the Old Media wants to begrudgingly credit "reasonably competent computer enthusiasts" with.
Damn! They didn't mention our pajamas, either!
UPDATE: Bill of INDC journal succinctly describes the role of bloggers:
A blogger is more analogous to a single reporter than he or she is to a news organization. Please do not rely on me for all of your information needs.
Hear, hear! Bloggers are not looking to be the "sole" source of "All the news thats fit to print" [ahem]. They truly are engaged in democratic, cooperative endeavor, where each individual brings their singular talent to the group. Synergy in real-time action.
September 18, 2004
Can the United Nations go any lower?
Kofi Annan is bad enough as a corrupt, meally-mouthed moral coward posing as a UN Secretary General. However, the descent to the eighth ring of hell will come if an Iranian Islamofascist takes his place.
Iran plans to propose President mullah Mohammad Khatami to become the next United Nations Secretary General, IRNA reported.
Chairman of Iran's House of Political Parties Hassan Ghafourifard said he would discuss the issue with Khatami soon, and that a special committee would be formed to follow up due proceedings. He said he had been informed that the next UN secretary general would be elected from Asia at the recent International Conference of Asian Political Parties (ICAPP) in Beijing.
If something like this happens, we must seriously get the United States out of the UN, and the UN out of the United States.
[hattip: Roger L. Simon]
The Euros, in your local polling place Nov 2, 2004
Note: this article was first published at Redstate.org on August 7, 2004. I've written an update at the end of this article.
For a goodly portion of the Democrats in this country, 2000 still rankles. Nine Congressional Democrats wrote to Kofi Annan just prior to July 4, 2004, requesting the United Nations "assign international observers to the U.S. presidential election in November." Needless to say, this challenge to United States sovereignty did not sit well with many Republicans.
Of course, the myth-mongering of these Democrats that the 2000 elections were really one rife with deliberate corruption has not been lost on the Johns. Kerry proudly feeds the sophistry with his own cadre of mobilized lawyers.
On Election Day in your cities, my campaign will provide teams of election observers and lawyers to monitor elections and enforce the law ...
Lawyers for Kerry-Edwards is working with the DNC's Voting Rights Institute (VRI) to organize thousands of attorneys across the country to be in every polling place on Election Day and to educate voters locally about their ballot, their voting machine and the voting process.
It appears that the Democrats are determined to wave the red flag of the "stolen" 2000 election, both attempting to get a less than America-friendly UN involved, or having lawyers ready at the courthouse doors at 12:01a.m. on Nov 3 to challenge the election if it doesn't go Kerry's way.
There doesn't seem much the Bush administration can do with this scenario. The Democrats are poised to scream "thief!" at every turn. So the report that President Bush has invited the OSCE to observe the November elections is a bit breath taking.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe will monitor the U.S. election Nov. 2 at President Bush's invitation. Members include Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Russia, Spain and the United States.
What? French observers poking around US polling places? What about US sovereignty? What do the Russians have to teach us about voting?
Immediate emotional reaction is "No No No! What the hell is Bush thinking?" I confess, I was stunned at this announcement.
Then I started digging a bit and thinking. Sometimes we are not given the luxury of the choice between good and bad, only between bad and worse. Or, as the adage goes, when handed lemons, make lemonade. In this scenario, I believe President Bush is making lemonade.
First, the US has been a member of the OSCE since 1973, and in November of 1990 signed "the Charter of Paris." Relevant section
(8) The participating States consider that the presence of observers, both foreign and domestic, can enhance the electoral process for States in which elections are taking place. They therefore invite observers from any other CSCE participating States and any appropriate private institutions and organizations who may wish to do so to observe the course of their national election proceedings, to the extent permitted by law. They will also endeavour to facilitate similar access for election proceedings held below the national level. Such observers will undertake not to interfere in the electoral proceedings.
Second, this is not the first time OSCE has observed a US election, they were in Florida in 2002. Certainly, I don't remember this being widely reported in the media.
Third, the way the "invitation" was framed by the State Department's Wendy Silverman who spoke before the OSCE in session in Vienna, Austria, July 15, gives one pause:
The United States is dedicated to the OSCE commitments regarding free and fair elections and has resolved to implement these commitments effectively.
Free and fair elections, in which the electorate has confidence, are vital to the development and consolidation of democracy in every country in the OSCE region. The presence of domestic and international observers can enhance the electoral process and public confidence in it. That is why the United States has invited ODIHR to observe our own presidential and congressional elections on November 2. Furthermore, the United States commends other participating States organizing elections this fall that have also already issued invitations to ODIHR. [emphasis added]
ODIHR monitoring teams should not be seen as "interference in [a country's] internal affairs," but rather as an international resource, like the Election Assistance Commission that works domestically in the United States, which is available to countries that seek to improve public confidence in elections and uphold their OSCE commitments.
President Bush's invitation is a pre-emption of Kerry's efforts and the Democrat Magical Thinking Bus. The UN effort is thwarted, the Kerry partisan Cadre with JD's skulking about the country's polling places will not be "observing" in a vacuum, and such a third party outside of the UN AmeriHate parade will dash grounds for any Kerry boilerplate lawsuit. And with the added bonus that Silverman has tossed down the challenge to the Euros that are coming to watch us that we are expecting them to act in the same manner.
I think I can drink this lemonade.
UPDATE You can find out more about the OSCE here. This issue is back in the news again as international observers invited by Global Exchange made the news. Global Exchange is a NGO and though, in perusing their site, they are of the Leftist persuasion, there is little to indicate they are out to make mischief or interference in America's election process.
Indeed, Americans themselves provide observers in their own elections, from Federal observers to local organizations. Election boards have rules for observers (no electioneering, no interference, etc.) but basically are open to any one that wants to hang and watch.
Now $50,000 and still unclaimed
They started with a mere $10,000 and a challenge: be the first person to reasonably recreate the Killian memos on an actual typewriter from 1972.
The award is now up to $50,000.
Reading of Interest for a Saturday morning
C_BS is bound and determined to keep digging that hole to China. In another brilliant example of chutzpah, Powerline notes the strategy of slandering a person, and when they defend themselves, brush off the defense as suspect because they were slandered in the first place:
Yesterday, we noted that General Staudt had given an interview to ABC in which he denied that he had pressured anyone about Lt. Bush, and put to rest the claim that he had somehow come out of retirement to do it. In addition, Staudt drove a stake through the heart of the claim that Bush received preferential treatment in getting into the Guard. Staudt said that he was the person who accepted Bush as a pilot, that he did so solely because he thought Bush would make a fine pilot, and that he received no communications from anyone in relation to Bush's application. (Contrary to what is often reported in the press, there was no "waiting list" at that time to become a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard.)
Staudt's testimony would seem to definitively put the lie to CBS's faked memos, but that's not how CBS sees it. Yesterday CBS spokeswoman Sandy Genelius brushed off Staudt's comments:
In a debate this heated, one can hardly expect Gen. Staudt to endorse the point of view that he exerted undue influence.
Mark Steyn writes, yet again, another great column that cuts to the chase of the issue, then asks, "Why has CBS News decided it would rather debauch its brand and treat its audience like morons than simply admit their hoax? For Dan Rather?"
Well, I know I have a good idea why. It might have to do with growing evidence of connections between CBS, Burkett and Max Cleland as Allah explains.
LittleGreenFootballs is hot this morning. Charles Johnson is posting multiple threads all worth reading.
This is a good start of the day. I note, too, from last night and this morning, much consternation over "Election Observers" arriving in the US from foreign countries. People, this is not the UN. I will repost here an article I wrote on this subject on August 7.
September 17, 2004
UPDATE: France or Spain?
My first impression of the EL PAÍS ad campaign I linked to here was more signaling further capitulation to Islamists than just one of singular tone-deaf idiocy. This morning Command-Post links to an apology by EL PAÍS and offers an English translation. And excerpt from V-man's translation:
EL PAÍS apologizes for the use of the images of the terrorist attack against the Twin Towers in New York, which happend on September 11, 2001, for a campaign to aquire subscribers to ELPAIS.es. This regrettable campaign, carried out through emails, supported by two photos of New York, one with the Twin Towers and another one without, under the heading “You can do a lot in one day, imagine what can happen in three months”. The promotional campaign started last Monday, September 13, and was sent to more than 50,000 recipients before it was cancelled, on Wednesday 15th. EL PAÍS, its publisher and the Grupo Prisa profoundly regret the use of a tragedy, which in this case cost the lives of more than 2,700 persons, for publicity purposes. We would like to apologize for it to the victims and their families, to the citizens of New York who experienced that agression from up close, and to those who saw among their email this ominous message, and to all the readers of the newspaper.
Any explanation about the chain of errors which led to the launch of this campaign is insufficient, which some of our readers rightly qualified as repugnant. We share the disgust they have expressed in numerous messages and letters to the management and we are sorry it happened.
Do read the whole thing.
Doesn't it make you wonder how much credibility CBS could have salvaged from the forged memo debacle if they had offered up a similar apology on day two rather than being here, at day eight, with CBS and Rather still acting belligerent. "Fake but Accurate" indeed. Orwell must be spinning in his grave.
September 16, 2004
This is not only unscientific, but entirely personal. Since Camp Kerry has continued slipping on the proverbial banana peel since Kerry stepped up to the podium at the DemCon and snapped off a salute worthy of Benny Hill, the Angry Left has decided to do a classic case of projection. While GW has never made his Air National Guard service the centerpiece of his campaign, the Dems have decided to act like he has, and have taken to attacking him on it, for the umpteenth time. However, what this has done is fill the media with pics of GW in uniform at that time.
That smile, those eyes. Yes. Very nice. Looks like a guy who wouldn't mind talking with you, not at you, during a date.
Now, compared with
Well, now. Hmmm. Doesn't even compare. No matter how this guy would brag about his fancy car, how many fancy vacations and hobbies he had, he'd still be speaking about himself...over and over again.
So go on, Dems. Have your minions in the Old Media splashing GW's TexANG pic all over the place. Thank you!
September 15, 2004
France or Spain?
Which country will go Islamist first? Well, with sentiments like this the betting pool is leaning more towards those yearning for the good old days of dhimmitude.
[hattip: Roger L. Simon]
Excuse me .. I'm having an "ARGH!" moment
I still cannot believe what I'm reading from what are, purportedly, "reasonable" lefties commenting here. They merely keep repeating over and over
*The documents haven't been proven fake
*Even if they are fake they speak to "bigger truths"
*Secretary Knox confirms that the content is real, the "maybe fake" docs could be just bad copies of the real docs
*That no one has the real docs it proves that a Bush operative shredded them
*Killian's son is not credible because he got in the guard by "pull" too...
Suddenly Knox is the darling of the desperation set, an avowed Bush-hater, they have taken to their collective bosom. She just can't have her own agenda (and now at this late date she knows all the problems with the fakes..so she speaks as if the pressure/physical stuff is really more than a year earlier...just a typo from from those misguided by good-hearted forgers, you know).
Where were these guys when Rosemary Woods was getting a bad rap?
Guess these guys had no problems when the Boston Globe published as "real" fake "GI Rape" pictures picked off a porn site because, after all, as long as the pictures were speaking to someone's "essential truth" that's all that matters.
And I guess they'd have no problem with police planting fake evidence, I mean, as long as the police believed it was speaking to someones "essential truth."
And when a newspaper publishes on the front page tomorrow, during Rosh Hashana, "Protocols of the Elders of Zion Book...fake but content speaks to essential truth" ...
They oughta be a shamed of themselves... if shame were any part of their vocabulary.
September 14, 2004
Norma Rather, your camera shot is ready
So says Jonah Goldberg in National Review:
Remember when Joe Gillis told Norma Desmond: "You're Norma Desmond. You used to be in silent pictures. You used to be big."
She responded, I am big. It's the pictures that got small.
Dan Rather has flipped this around. The news is still big, but Rather has gotten very, very small.
September 13, 2004
Of memos, measles and Mona Lisa
It's been a rough day today. When it's shorter-staff time at work after months of being short-staffed in the first place, all it takes it yet another person out sick to really make you think seriously about pouring shots of whiskey into the 8:00 am coffee. I covered four desks today, and while that means none of them actually gets done, I triaged the work and made sure the critical stuff didn't go nuclear. My own attorneys were sympathetic, the attorneys who I was stepping in to help lost the look of panic in their eyes and while I wasn't happy leaving piles of files for me to face in the morning, they were neatly arranged for tackling tomorrow. Mostly I was giddy at leaving at five and happily arrived home to a warm spouse, a cold drink and an early evening nap. I really did not think I had the energy to write anything tonight. But it looks like the Old Media is still digging in its heels at coming to grips with the CBS memo hoax and the role of the Internet in exposing it. My own fault that I was happily surfing the cable channels and stumbled across Bill O'Reilly. I'm not sure whether it was the smirk (I have nothing against smirks, mind you, I've been known to toss off a few myself) or just the condescending tone of Bill's voice while he was extolling his own virtue (in the imperial third person), but when he went on and on about how we must not draw any conclusion about the CBS memos until experts in the field examine them .... well, at least I didn't break the TV, but the remote is toast.
Mr. O'Reilly, take a clue. I personnally cannot authenticate as real if someone showed me a digital photo of the Mona Lisa and claimed they had stolen it from the Louvre. But I sure as hell could say the picture was a fake if upon cursory examination it looked like this:
Come on, Bill. Do you really need to suspend your judgement until an expert tells you that this is not the real Mona Lisa, but a paint by numbers reproduction?
Despite the sneering of "bloggers in pajamas" or the dismissive condescension by Dan Rather that Internet is nothing but a "professional rumor mill," what the Old Media fails to grasp is that the Internet is filled with millions of ordinary people from a wide range of backgrounds and expertise who, when confronted with a paint-by-numbers Mona Lisa are not so cowed by "appeals to authority" that they won't say "Hey, hold on. What are you trying to pull here?"
Now, I'm not an expert in type fonts nor typsetting. As I participated on numerous blog sites, I did relate my own experience as a professional secretary in the 1970's and how my use of both the typical office equipment and the accepted business protocols of the era had caused me to look at these memos and see them as much a "real" product of the era as the paint-by-numbers Mona Lisa was painted in 1506. One of many true experts is Joseph M. Newcomer who decided he, too, had enough of the self-serving equivocation on the memo issue. His explaination is here. As he explains:
I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word “alleged”, because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At time I a writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of "expert" they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum.
This is not a question of either/or. Everyday, we all make decisions based on our experience and training. While an expert can authenticate, it doesn't always take an expert to spot a fraud. As I started this post, I discussed how I had triaged my work. Experience at my job has taught me what is most important, what to prioritize. Just as my years of being a mom has taught me I don't have to be a doctor to know when my children are sick and when they are sick enough to go to the doctor. There was a time not long ago where doctors exibited similar attitudes toward their patients that Dan Rather and much of Old Media does to its audience. "We are the professionals. You do not question our judgement, our conclusions and particularly our methods."
We don't accept such attitudes from our doctors anymore. The medical profession came to accept that patients are partners in the pursuit of health. We come to the table with our doctors with precise descriptions of symptoms and questions. We look to our doctor to listen to us and to show us how s/he arrives at his/her diagnosis. If my child starts running a fever, coughs and then develops an all over rash of small red spots, be assured that the doctor that tells me it's nothing, I'm seeing things, my child is "ok" and I should shutup and "take my word for it, after all I am the doctor" that would be the last time I would visit that person. Indeed, I'd be looking at filing a complaint with the medical board.
It is time for the Old Media to come to the same decision as the medical profession. To embrace the citizen-journalists of the New Media as partners in the pursuit of fact and truth. We are here, we are not going away and continuing in such snobbishness-by-profession is going to isolate and make irrelevant you, not us.
And of course, you'll now get to wear some really cool pajamas.
CBS memo hoax and citizen-journalists
Well, if you've been any where near the net these past several days, you are aware of the blogsphere's amazing role in exposing CBS's 60 Minutes and Dan Rather's unconscionable attempt to palm off obviously forged memos purported from 1972/73 detailing malfeasance on the part of President GW Bush's service with the Texas Air National Guard.
It's been a fast and furious ride, and it is not over yet. So many sites, so many experts have pooled their experience, professionalism and expertise, it has been breathtaking to behold.
However, it is not over. CBS is stonewalling. Dan Rather, in a fit of aristocratic pique, demands that us lesser beings take his word alone that the memos are "authentic." And now, the DNC is poised to start a campaign of viciously attacking President Bush on his Texas Air National Guard service, partly based on the hoax memos.
Many people have suggested writing CBS or contacting Viacom Institutional Stockholders. I'm sure many have already done that, in addition to writing to the FEC and the FCC and any local affiliate that carries 60 Minutes. I just want to add my own suggestion. I've written to Judicial Watch. I figure at this point, interesting a legal watchdog group to ferret out the collusion between the DNC, Kerry Campaign and CBS in illegal election engineering is critical. If you can, please add your voice.
This really is a war between the Old Media, jealous of its historical role as sole "gatekeepers" of information, and the new citizen-journalists of the Internet, who cooperate with one another in tracking down even the most esoteric of facts. The volume and scope of information that has been produced on these fake memos in such a short period of time is unprecedented.
It is now up to us, each and every one of us, to keep the pressure up and to live up to both the promise and the responsibility that this venue has provided.
September 11, 2004
9/11 Essay: In praise of the Ordinary Life
I’ve spent this past week thinking about what I would write today. For me, as for many, September 11, 2001, is the seminal moment of my adult life. It has shaped me. It has shaped my approach to the macro issues surrounding my country and the world in which it exists. Whether or not I am consciously aware of the profundity of 9/11 as I read world news or debate with others on the Internet or in the flesh, I can look back at the person I was on 9/10/01 and realize the path I’m is not the one I was following then.
Words. Millions of words will be written today. Words that will recount exactly where we were, what we were doing, how we felt as we heard the words. For me, here in California, it was being barely asleep as the clock radio went off, tuned to my usual morning station KFI640 AM and hearing host Bill Handel say, “We’ve just gotten a report that a plane has hit the World Trade Center.”
Time stopped. Time has never been the same.
However, let me move beyond that. Move beyond the remembering of that horrible day. So many people will be writing and speaking today with words more elegant than mine of their own experience. They will speak to history of witnessing it and of their loved ones lost in it. Others will not speak today, choosing to remember quietly, in reverent silence and in an effort not to be consumed in a reliving of the horror still too close.
September 11, 2001, was an ordinary day. It was a day filled by ordinary tasks. Parents frustrated by dawdling youngsters. Commuters musing on where they’d have lunch that day and if they had time to stop for coffee before getting to the office. Turn on the tv, turn on the radio, listen for the weather, listen for the traffic report. Mommy, I can’t find my homework! Mommy, he’s making faces at me again, tell him to stop! Sweetie? Have you seen my blue tie? Hon, that went to the cleaners. Oh, can you pick up the cleaning on the way home today, I have a late meeting and won’t be able….
“Woke up, fell out of bed
Dragged a comb across my head
Found my way downstairs and drank a cup
And looking up I noticed I was late
Found my coat and grabbed my hat
Made the bus in seconds flat
Found my way upstairs and had a smoke
Somebody spoke and I went into a dream.”
I want the ordinariness back. I really enjoy a life of family and work and books and home. I raise my children to be good people. I volunteer in my community to give back when others can’t. I’ve been a Band Booster mom, a Soccer mom and a PTA mom. I’ve organized fundraisers. I’ve organized donations to help my neighbors through tragedy. I was a Girl Scout and always buy their cookies. I’ve taught my daughters how to ride a bike and crochet a scarf. I’ve sewed Halloween costumes and prom dresses. I’ve hosted exchange students and been there for my children’s friends when they needed an adult’s ear. My own life has had its triumphs and tragedies but was never centered upon forcing change on my neighbors to conform to my way of life.
I’m part of those great-unwashed masses that is sneered at for the sheer middle-class ordinariness of my life.
I don’t revel in the changes in this country. I don’t gleefully caper on the bodies of the victims of 9/11 as proof of America’s evilness as too many others do. I don’t dismiss whole segments of the country because the people living there don’t wear the same clothes or listen to the same music as I do.
I want my ordinariness back, not by retreating into 9/10/01 and pretending 9/11/01 didn’t happen. Or by trying to dismiss it by saying it was Yes.it.was.Tragic.BUT. (ah … that magic “but” that lets you know the preceeding words are going to be negated by the following words.)
I want my ordinariness back by going through 9/11. Faced dead on, fully experienced, fully remembered and as the impetus to fight, not only for the ordinariness of my life, but also for the ordinariness of the future lives of my children and grandchildren. How nice when my grandsons start kindergarten that the biggest worry their mom will have is if they will like their teacher, not about if the school is a target for terrorists. How nice will it be if each approaching American holiday my grandsons’ experience will be excitement at the celebration with BBQ’s and fireworks, not threat levels and heightened security.
I realize I want to secure that ordinariness for them, as my parents and grandparents wanted the ordinariness for me when they faced fighting the fascism of their time.
It is an extraordinary responsibility that faces my generation; to both recognize the modern fascist ideology of Islamism, and to be dedicated to defeating it. And the defeat will not only be on battlefields, but will come within our hearts. It will come in defeating the nihilism that permeates our culture and holds us of the ordinary life responsible for the evilness of others. It is not easy and we will be tested again and again; but can we do less than what was asked of our parents and grandparents?
Today, I fly my flag, I offer my prayers to those lost and those that remain behind, I praise and feel pride in the men and women who are giving so much to me by being in United States Armed Forces.
Most of all, I wish for all my fellow citizens is a future of ordinariness.
September 09, 2004
'Mainstream Media' says "we want no competition"
[hattip: Glenn Reynolds]
Poor MSM, they are feeling their exclusive control of the flow of information slipping and they are whining like the cliquish junior high school girl who finds her popularity slipping after she and her friends have pulled one too many mean-spirited practical jokes on the less popular kids.
Editor John Carroll of the LA Times snarled about "pseudo-journalists." Walter Cronkite only likes the internet as a "reseach tool" and adds he is "dumbfounded" that "there hasn't been a crackdown with the libel and slander laws on some of these would-be writers and reporters on the Internet. I expect that to develop in the fairly near future." Now moving into the rarified ivory towers of Priestly Professorship of Journalism, we can now see just why so many of us rubes are having a hard time with Professional Journalists dedicated to Bringing the Truth. Can I hear a Hallelujah, Brothers and Sisters!
News is a messy and elusive form of information. Journalism is crude, tentative and fumbling, always involving compromise, and there's a healthy measure of give-and-take in the process.
But anybody who enters the profession makes a core commitment to do his or her best to determine and tell the truth. And that commitment is now under assault.
I don't want "The Truth", thank you very much. If I want to listen to lectures about "The Truth" I'll go to church and listen to my pastor. What I want is facts presented as completely and as dispassionately as possible. "The Truth" belongs on the Editorial/Opinion page.
I guess I take for granted I grew up in a home with a father that started his business career working for newspapers in Los Angeles. Citizen News in the 50's, the Examiner before it merged with the Herald. Then he moved into corporate advertising. I grew up well-educated on mass communications and the difference between reporters and editorial writers. What I know is that "professional journalists" with a college degree in same are a relatively new phenomenon. Most reporters then came up through the ranks apprentices, men who may have started as paperboys, who eventually honed their instinct in ferreting out the facts of a story. They didn't look down on the great unwashed masses, they knew they were part of the masses and they didn't suppose it was up to them to pre-digest and selectively present a story so their readership would be spared the strain of coming to their own conclusion. Wasserman easily presents the basic contempt Professional Journalists have for their audience.
It's hard now even to write for publication without being aware of just how thoroughly what you say is going to be inspected for any trace of undesirable political tilt and denounced by a free-floating cadre of rightist warriors.
Oooo! Forget "gadfly," forget "fact-checking"... The Priests of Journalistic Truth are under assault by warriors! And just so the rubes know who these scary people are, they are a cadre of rightists!
If that's apparent to me as a mere columnist, I can only imagine the current mind-set of supervising editors: If we give prominence to this story of carnage in Iraq, will we be accused of anti-administration bias? And - here it gets interesting - will we therefore owe our readers an offsetting story, perhaps an inspirational tale of Marines teaching young Iraqis how to play softball?
Now, both stories may well be integral to the news. If so, both should be told. The problem arises when the pressure to tell the softball story comes not from a principled desire to deliver a factual account that is broadly emblematic of significant happenings in Iraq, but from a gutless attempt to buy off a hostile and suspicious fragment of the audience base.
Hey, Ed. Why don't you ask yourself why the audience (and it's just a tad more than a "fragment") is "hostile and suspicious." Couldn't have anything to do with Journalists presenting their own Truth instead of the facts would it?
News then becomes a negotiation - not a negotiation among discordant pictures of reality, as it always is, but an abject negotiation with a loud and bullying sliver of the audience.
Damn, it's that audience thing again. Can't we just get rid of 'em, have the Government (the correctly installed Leftist government of course) fork up our paycheck and we can then completely ignore the audience?
Resisting undue outside influence is part of what news professionals do. But it's hard enough to get the story right, without holding it hostage to an open-ended negotiation with zealots who believe they already know what the story is.
Yes, Ed, it's really messy that some people, who have decided they don't have to fork over tens of thousands of dollars to pay your salary to Ordain them as Professional Journalists committed to The Truth [hallelujah!], may use the information readily available to write and present their own stories and some of those stories will expose your acolytes as being less than truthful or factual. It's really messy that the AP was caught lying, that the stories of US military committing acts of good only comes about through the "bullys" and "rightist warriors" outside the pale of your Church of Journalistic Truth.
Heavens, you might actually need to retrain to teach a real subject, like science, math or business!
(also posted at redstate.org)
September 06, 2004
Kerry 'jokes', crickets heard
Camp Kerry has been spiraling out of control since the end of the Republican Convention. They've screeched there would be no bounce, then they've promised the bounce would evaporate. Former failed-Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich wants the Democrats to attack GW and Cheney as unrecovered alcoholics. Character assassin extraordinare Kitty Kelly is releasing her latest tome of libel in support of Kerry by charging GW snorted cocaine in the White House. Reportedly other charges in the book include GW's dad, GHWBush as a pedophile, grandma Barbara as a witch, and Laura as a slut.
But some would whine, Kerry can't be responsible for anyone not connected to him saying nasty things!
Ok. Let me grant that. Let me say that Michael Moore, who had a place of "honor" sitting next to former President Jimmy Carter during DemCon, is "independent" of Camp Kerry. Let's just say Estrich has little pull with the DNC these days and the timing of the release of Kelly's "book" is mere coincidence. Let me even give that Kerry is only responsible for the words out of his own mouth.
In West Virginia, Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, gave Kerry a rifle as a gift. Kerry, a self-described gun-owner and hunter, quipped: "I thank you for the gift, but I can't take it to the debate with me."
Happy Labor Day
After an especially mild summer, September arrived with the furnace turned up. Today in my little corner of Southern California it has hit the century mark on the back patio for the third day in a row.
We had a nice dinner party for my dad on Saturday. He turned 76, in great health and lovable curmudgeony humor. My twin grandsons will turn two at the end of the month. Four generations having a good time under one roof!
Here are the munchkins. After raising four daughters, I must say, boys are different.
Hope everyone has had a great weekend.
September 05, 2004
Kerry Campaign selects new Manager
In light of the recent polls to be released by both Time Magazine and Newsweek, Campaign Manager Mary Cahill has tendered her resignation, report officials from the Kerry campaign.
"I have always believed in this man and his goals," Ms. Cahill was quoted this afternoon at campaign headquarters. "I'm only sorry I was not able to live up to the expectations of the campaign. I am willing to take a secondary seat to the new manager and help in trying to bring to the American people the true John Kerry."
It is reported that the new manager will shift the campaign's central focus off Kerry's Vietnam experience, where he served with distinction and honor thirty-five years ago, garnering five medals including the Silver Star and will try and connect with the large demographic of first time voters. This new strategy is evident in the Kerry selection of Sean John Combs of New York as his new Campaign manager.
Reached for comment, Mr. Combs was enthusiastic at the chance to join the Kerry Campaign, "Been in the game twelve years it ain't easy, I don't think they ready for this one. Bring it to cats like Bush to Osama. Bodyguards, topguns, two extra lamas."
In anticipation of the new image makeover, Kerry has taped an appearance on MTV, reminiscent of President Clinton's appearance in 1992. In fact, a member of the audience posed the same question to Mr. Kerry about whether he wore boxers or briefs. Seemily reluctant to let his Vietnam experience be forgotten, Kerry answered:
"Neither. I prefer to go commando."
September 03, 2004
This is why we fight
Chechens and Arabs that stormed the school in Beslan are not "separatists" "rebels" "hostage-takers". They are terrorists. The guislings in the so-called "mainstream media" have got to stop avoiding the term. The Islamofascist terrorists deserve no more than being hanged from the nearest lamppost while crows peck out their eyes.
There is no excuse, no "human rights violations," no "oppression," that justifies the wanton torture and murder by the Islamists, either in Israel or in NYC or now over the last several days, Russia.
Some of the places you need to read:
Islamists are evil wrapped in human skin and walking upright. They shot fleeing children in the back. They clubbed children to death with rifle butts.
If you are up to it, look at the photos.
Don't just extend Russia your prayers and spiritual support, lend her your anger. If her schoolchildren can be so cynically used by this deathcult, what makes anyone believe American children are any safer?
Why Bush Matters
West coast time here. I went to bed late last night, wanting to sleep on the images of the last four days and all the speeches I was able to watch at the Republican Convention. The blogsphere was alive with play-by-play coverage. I came home from work, poured a glass of wine and joined with 'net friends at Charles' place while following the action on c-span. This morning, cup of coffee here on the desk, I wanted to review all the commentary out there, but something else intruded. Something that makes me want to get a transcript of GW's speech last night and take out my yellow highlighter pen and stick sections of it under the windshield wipers of all the Kerry/Edwards bumperstickered cars.
What is it about Islamofascist terrorism that the anti-Bushies don't get?
BESLAN, Russia - At least seven people were killed and 310 others wounded Friday, reports said, after commandos stormed a school in southern Russia where hundreds had been held hostage for three days by rebels strapped with explosives.
What are the ABB's thinking while they read these headlines? "Couldn't happen here"?? Really.
If you haven't visited it before, Belmont Club was live-blogging this this morning. Glenn Reynolds succinctly states "That could be happening here, and sooner or later it will if we don't win this war first."
There are domestic policies championed by the Bush administration I am less than thrilled with. However, the last section of GW's speech dealt with the issue that trumps all others: national security.
And how did John Kerry respond last night, mere minutes after GW had left the stage in NYC? Like the petulant, spoiled, self-aggrandizing stereotypical trustfund brat he is underneath the "I served in Vietnam, so shutup" wrap of insufferable conceit. I couldn't watch all of it, it was so petty, rambling unto near incoherence, bizzarrely unconnected to the GW's actual speech. If anyone could watch that self-indulgent twaddle and still seriously consider voting for Kerry, then I question that person's basic rationality.
Posted by Darleen at 06:45 AM
September 02, 2004
When Hate marries Paranoia
What you get is a dKos little gem about the podium at the Republican Convention. Notice how the tiny, slightly blurred pic helps this I see Jaysus in the tortilla moment. Of course, al-Reuters gets in on the act, but gives a clearer picture of the podium.
And just incase anyone doesn't "get it" about how all Republicans are nothing but a bunch of Nazi's, here's a photoshopped gem that is gathering "top ratings" from the Kossacks.
Posted by Darleen at 01:01 PM
New York City Firefighters Endorse Bush
This news just came to my attention. (Good lord, I'm up late. Oh well, who needs sleep, eh?)
President Bush won the endorsement of firefighters on Wednesday as he arrived in the city that redefined his presidency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- a theme that has dominated his renomination convention.
He did not go to Madison Square Garden where he will accept the Republican National Convention's nomination. Instead, he went to the Elmhurst section of Queens and met with firefighters and the widows of several firefighters who died during the attacks.
Bush's eyes welled up as he accepted the endorsement of the Uniformed Firefighters Association of Greater New York, the city's main firefighters union, which broke with its parent union to back the Republican president.
"It really means a lot to me because the truth of the matter is the inspiration I receive from the firefighters is something I'll never forget," he said.
Posted by Darleen at 12:04 AM
September 01, 2004
Oh my, I could use a cigarette
And I don't smoke! Never have.
It is now late. I watched Zell Miller galvinize the Republican convention earlier tonight in a historic speech. A member of one party giving the keynote address at the convention of the opposition party. More than that, Miller orated in the best tradition of a true-believing Sunday preacher. He was angry, he was righteous. He was righteously angry. If you get a chance, do listen to it. It's not just the words, but the sincerity of the delivery. C-span has it on their video clip entitled Republican Convention, Day 3 part 2
Republicans have been on their feet about Miller's sermon. And the Democrats, in and out of the closet, are acting like they were poleaxed.
As I said in another forum
remember Arnold's line last night referring to John Wayne? Remember how the Duke has been a hero to Republicans and that John Kerry sneered about the "John Wayne mentality" in his 1971 seditious turn before the Senate?
John Wayne always portrayed the masculine ideal of duty, honor, steadfastness, heroism, courage regardless of fear, and very slow to anger.
But, if truly angered WATCH OUT
That's where Republicans are...we are very pro-America optimists...but we have had it UP TO HERE with the Leftist nihilism and sneering "America is no big deal" crap. Damn straight we are pissed.
My favorite John Wayne movie is The Quiet Man. Dems ought to view it and be reminded.
The vast majority of this convention has been upbeat, happy, dancing in the aisles and a lot more fun that the doom, gloom Hollywood glitterotti of the DemCon. However, Republicans have taken note, of the ad homenim attacks on the Swiftees that never address the facts, to the whackjobs in the streets of NYC spitting on Republican attendees and worse.
As the lyrics go "You can stand me up at the Gates of Hell, but I won't back down." Republicans and other non-Leftists (and that includes anti-left Liberals like Zell Miller) won't just take it anymore.