12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006 11/01/2010 - 12/01/2010
Syndicate this site
You Should Read Every Word They Write:
Friday, October 29, 2004No, no, no. I said he is a punk. Big difference.
Everything else you said in your Friday post is good.
I'll be manning the phones Sunday and Monday. Have a good weekend.
The fair Jessica is pretty funny (from The Corner):
MY WIFE'S REACTION [Jonah Goldberg]
Thoughts on a Friday
Have a good weekend, and be sure to volunteer down at Bush Headquarters.
Again, Charles Krauthammer offers up a clear-eyed analysis of what is and what has been. This time he focuses on the amazing success of Afghanistan.
Within days of Sept. 11, the clueless airhead president that inhabits Michael Moore's films and Tina Brown's dinner parties had done this: forced Pakistan into alliance with us, isolated the Taliban, secured military cooperation from Afghanistan's northern neighbors, and authorized a radical war plan involving just a handful of Americans on the ground, using high technology and local militias to utterly rout the Taliban.That is an astonishing achievement and it was all due to George W. Bush. Good on ya, Dubya. You are the man! Mr. Krauthammer has a few words for Sen. Kerry as well.
This election comes down to a choice between one man's evolution and the other man's resolution. With his endlessly repeated Tora Bora charges, Kerry has made Afghanistan a major campaign issue. So be it. Whom do you want as president? The man who conceived the Afghan campaign, carried it through without flinching when it was being called a "quagmire" during its second week and has seen it through to Afghanistan's transition to democracy? Or the retroactive genius, who always knows what needs to be done after it has already happened -- who would have done "everything" differently in Iraq, yet in Afghanistan would have replicated Bush's every correct, courageous, radical and risky decision -- except one. Which, of course, he would have done differently. He says. Now.I pray the American people are smart enough to return President Bush to office.
Nick, it was all written with a smile on my face. There's nothing so invigorating as some lively bantering with you - it's like the smell of napalm in the morning.
(I still don't like the Red Sox.)
Wow, Gar, that's fairly aggressive!
I'll just chalk it up to your fickle sports heart that you stood on the corner having a smoke while one of the greatest sports stories in a generation passed you by.
Thursday, October 28, 2004You know what is a quintessentially female comment regarding most championship or playoff-like contests? "I hope such-and-such team wins, they haven't won in a long time." Please, spare me the teary-eyed sympathy for the long-suffering Bosox. I don't like them. It matters not a lick to me that their last championship was in 1918. That kind of futility does not deserve to be rewarded with victory. So I don't buy your 'wrong side of history' blather. Go discuss it with the other girls.
Yes, Gary, rooting for the Cards puts you on the wrong side of history. You didn't know what that was, so I'll explain. Being on the wrong side of history means that in retrospect, people looking back will think "What in the world was/were he/she/they thinking?!?".
For instance, John Kerry is now on the wrong side of history. Jimmy Carter is now and always has been on the wrong side of history. King George, Jefferson Davis, Carrot Top and every French leader since Charlemagne are or have been on the wrong side of history.
When people look back at the invevitability of the Sox victory, they will quickly note those that blogged "Go Cards!" and those that foresaw the momenetousness and inevitability of a Sox victory and reveled in it.
And every self-respecting non-"true blue" (true red?) Cardinals fan was pulling for the Bosox, so it's not entirely clear that you have any self-respect ;-)
Ah, so rooting for the losing team puts me on "the wrong side of history" (whatever that means). Fine, I'll accept that. You stay right there on the bandwagon with all the other 11th hour hangers on. I prefer retaining my self respect.
Now don't be going all George Stephanopolous-y on me and spin this thing to look good. A quick glance down the page reveals a direct quote from you:
Note the bold text. Note the exclamation point. Clearly this was written by someone rooting for the Cardinals. That person was and is you, my good man.
But hey, jump on the bandwagon now, Bear. I won't tease you. Much.
Nick, did you receive instruction at the New York Times School of Journalism? Let me refresh your memory. I said, "I don't anticipate anything but a Red Sox World Series victory, but it would be fun to see the Cards sweep it out from under them." Therefore, the record shows I predicted a Red Sox victory. I only hoped for a different conclusion.
Second, I forgot to mention Curt Schilling as a Boston player I like. Sorry, Curt. It was nothing personal.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004Gary, great comment about "Next Up...".
We totally should move our troops out of the hopelessly ungrateful nation of Germany and station them square in the heart of the Warsaw Pact: yes, in Poland. The Poles are loyal allies, a budding bastion of capitalism, and they know how to fight. They've been a very loyal ally in the GWOT, and we should reward them. The Left, not to mention the Germans, will cry like the babies that they are, but screw 'em. Actions have consequences. If you want to play with the big dogs, you have to join in on the run. Well, the Poles ran with us, and they should reap the reward.
Well, Gary, you were on the wrong side of history, my man. After the Sox win last night, their victory was as certain as Kerry looking foolish playing football on the tarmac. It clearly was a "meant to be" thing, and you got on the wrong bandwagon, my friend.
But that is no matter -- The Curse is broken, and there is joy in Beantown. (Let us hope that their joy doesn't turn into the traditional stupid rioting.) My congratulations to the team, the town, and anyone who spent his whole life rooting for the Sox. They won it for you.
Hindrocket at Powerline asks a question at the end of his post, which I shall answer.
Yes, I think there might be.
Gee, I'm getting all choked up here today.
(Is that Gollum in the picture there.....?)
I don't anticpate anything but a Red Sox World Series victory, but it would be fun to see the Cards sweep it out from under them. I don't like Pedro Martinez - he's a punk. Manny Ramirez can't play defense. Johnny Damon needs to spend some time in a barber's chair. Doug Mientkewicz (sp?) thinks more highly of himself than he ought. I like Ortiz and I like Francona, and that's about it. It sure would be fun to see the Red Sox nation howl and wail after losing the Series when they were up 3-0! (I envision weeping and gnashing of teeth.) That would be delicious ...
Bill Simmons is one of my favorite sports writers, despite the fact that he always seems to dis' Minnesota and writes 96.876% of his stuff about Boston teams.
This is one of his best. An article about all the long-suffering Bosox fans whom the team should "Win It For". Great, touching stuff. (Seriously, this time. ;-)
I was sort of pulling for the Cards -- my NL team -- but now I want to Red Sox to take it all. Tonight. In a sweep. Let there be no doubt.
Nick, I love the Puerto Rico story. And it's why I love this administration so much. Words mean things, and Rummy took them at their word. Now they're crying in their beer. My heart breaks. Next up: Germany and South Korea.
And now, from the "Stories you Won't be Seeing on the Nightly News" Department....
So far, it's a great day for those little stories that warm your heart, give you a chuckle, and help you remember that things do sort of all work together for the good.
Want to whine and complain about the Navy allegedly ruining your island? Well, fine, the Navy will just up and leave. I guess the Puerto Ricans are going to pay $300 million a year to learn to be more careful what they wish for.
Man, bringing a tear to my eye.....
Some people get all warm and cuddly when they see pictures of their kids or baby animals. Some get goosebumps when hearing stories of great athletic achievement or heroism in battle. I'm among them, I suppose. But me, I also get all juiced up when I hear great tactical political speechs that drop on Leftist, liberal democrats like huge Daisy Cutters:
Bush was on the stump in Pennsylvania today, and I grabbed this quote right off of Drudge's front page. Man, what a thing of beauty: perfectly timed, perfectly said, point perfectly made. That is a "Walleye at the waterline" as we used to say in the Navy. I mean he got all the points it: Iraq is dangerous, Kerry is denigrating the military, Kerry doesn't have a clue what Iraq is all about, and he'll say anything to get elected. Whoever wrote that line deserves a serious promotion.
Could this "October Surprise" have been bungled any worse? I love the "Kerry recently discoverd that Iraq is a dangerous place" line. Great stuff. Warms the heart to hear it.
It gets even redder when you look at it district by district. Heck, even Minnesota has a bunch of red.
Tuesday, October 26, 2004Hugh Hewitt makes two additional excellent points about the HMX story:
1. The Left is currently touting a story that the bad guys in Iraq had some dangerous munitions but managed to spirit them away for use later and that Bush is somehow responsible. Hmmm. Sound familiar? Yes, it does, to me. If these munitions, measured in tons could be spirited away and hidden, couldn't WMD's that are must lower in quantity and weight, yet even more deadly have been so spirited? Well, yes.
2. And hey, didn't they say this stuff is really, really dangerous and could be used to kill Americans and commit terrorist acts? Yes, I think they did. But I thought he wasn't a threat and didn't have anything that we need to be worry about. Hmm.
And let's not forget the months and months of time that Saddam had with a totally open border to Syria while Bush "rushed unilaterally to war" while at the same time putzing around with the UN while they were taking Saddam's Oil for Food bribes. Months and months and months of rushing to war. So fast that Saddam baaaaarely had time to squeeze tons and tons of HMX out of our grasp. Juuuuuust squeaked it in during the "rush to war".
The whole story simply confirms everything that Bush was saying, and Kerry/Edwards want to turn the totally discredited story into a campaign commercial? Aren't they even keeping up with the news cycle? Doesn't this whole thing simply point to the idea that we should have gone in sooner?
Hugh's right -- this is desparate and pathetic.
The really scary thing is that even after all this, Bush might actually lose to the bozo.
ADDED: KLo at The Corner adds a good point (via Hugh, KerrySpot): In sticking with the silly HMX/Bomb story and running commercials on it, Kerry believe a UN memo over the reports of our own troops.
MORE ADDED: Powerline makes another good point: This has really become a second-guessing of the behavior of our troops in a heated, wartime environment, and there is no reason whatsoever to question their actions.
You may have seen this already, but I wish to enter it into the Banterings record before it disappears. It's an editorial (the link is live until oct. 27) written by Mathew Manweller, a Central Washington University political science professor. It's long, but it's good.
Election determines fate of nation
After the Rathergate scandal, surely CBS had mended its ways. Right? I mean, surely the would be bending over backwards not to appear nakedly partisan, right? Right?!?
Kerry is, in my view, a pretty yucky guy. He's done a lot of yucky things: weaseled out of Vietnam as quickly as he could by making up wounds to get Purple Hearts, lied to Congress when denouncing those who served in Vietnam as war criminals, met with the enemy while a member of the Naval Reserve, voted against any attempt by Ronald Reagan to win the cold war, lied about running the Boston Marathon, lied about being at the crucial Game 6 of the 1986 World Series, tried to throw a pitch all the way from the pitchers mound to the plate only to blame the catcher when it bounces ten feet short, approved of the way Bush conducted the war in Afghanistan and then denounced him for doing exactly what he approved of, married a rich woman twice, grossly mispronounced "Ghengis Khan", blamed Bush for remaining cool under the pressure of the Twin Towers being knocked down while he sat unable to think for 45 minutes, but now we can, apparently, add plagiarism to the list.
Hugh gives a nice wrap up of the missing weapons story broken by The New York Times yesterday. He quotes extensively from The Belmont Club which makes a great and obvious point:
... most of the damage had already been inflicted by the dilatory tactics of America's allies which allowed Saddam the time and space -- nearly half a year and undisturbed access to Syria -- necessary to prepare his resistance, transfer money abroad and disperse explosives. The price of passing the "Global Test" was very high; and having been gypped once, there are some who are still eager to be taken to the cleaners again.Hugh adds:
Throughout the run-up to the war, Frank Gaffney would again and again warn on my radio show that the most telegraphed punch in history was having consequences we could not calculate.Exactly! It's no surprise that Saddam would hide whatever he wanted with that much time to do it. Thank you France, Russia, Germany, and Democratic Party for preserving these dangers for the rest of the world.
"Ten-nine, the Sox did fabulous," Mr Kerry said with a big smile as he ducked into church on Sunday morning in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. That's from Nedra Pickler (great name!) in The Scotsman. Of course, the score was 11-9. If he'd watched the game Kerry would know that a 9-9 tie was broken by a late 2-run homer. Not only that, what percentage of real Red Sox fans would be saying the next day, "the Sox did fabulous" - about .0001%?
However, the "Sox fan" redeemed himself during game 2 when,
Landing in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, the Democratic candidate bounded off the plane wearing his Red Sox cap to exclaim:Give it up, Forbesy, yachting is more your style.
Gary, just took a look at the letter to the President signed by a rather impressive list of athletes. You left off some other interesting folks of note:
Mary Lou Retton
Dot Richardson (The softballer -- she rocks!)
Kerri Strug (She of the top five gutsiest Olympic moments ever)
An impressive list indeed.
This is fun. Turns out the alleged "Missing Explosives" were gone when we arrived there during the initial invasion. Since Kerry and Edwards said today that we should have gotten there sooner, Bush officials now wonder if the Kerry/Edwards team are now openly advocating that the invasion shouldn't have begun sooner!
And of course, since the arms were reported to be there, and it turns out that they aren't there, we know that the never were there and that who ever said they were there must be lying, right? Isn't that how it works with weapons that you can't find? Someone must have lied about them being there at all? Who?
Monday, October 25, 2004I am a firm believer that one should always obey the orders of the police.
Friday, October 22, 2004This auction has, I note, over one million page views!
Saw Two Weeks Notice last night. I enjoyed it quite a bit. Fairly clean (most of the sex was at the discussion/implication level. One scene was a bit randy. No one in bed together). It was witty and cute. Sandra Bullock plays a lefty lawyer whom Hugh Grant hires to be lead counsel for his hugh Donald Trump-like real estate conglomeration. Hilarity ensues. Hugh and Sandra are polar opposites, but both soften until of course there is no more denying that they are in love. The real laugher is Sandra's mother, a died in the wool liberal who actually speaks these words during the film "It's immoral for anyone to have that much money." A real keeper.
I like Hugh Grant. I can easily say I've never seen him in a movie when he wasn't good. I've never seen him in a comedy when he wasn't funny and witty and pleasant to watch. I really like Sandra Bullock (I was surprised to discover that she recently turned 40!) She has never, as far as I can tell, ever played a bimbo or done a sex scene, and her characters always seem to be pretty wholesome. Not many Hollywood starlets can say that nowadays.
This is the kind of thing that makes politics such a gas. Here we have a left-wing, Democratic hypocrite (is there any other kind?) who doesn't even legally live in the state he represents! The Constitution requires that a Senator have primary residence in the state he represents, but Daschle, apparently in a bid to save $288, declared his primary residence as his $2 million dollar home in Washington, DC. Now nevermind that the guy is avoiding taxes -- all good Americans do what they can to avoid (not evade) paying taxes -- the real humor here is that he cares so little about South Dakota that he doesn't even want think twice about abandoning it for $288.
Daschle has alway struck me as a phony, and I've always been surprised that the generally conservative state of South Dakota continues to elect him. I hope John Thune beats that phony carpet-bagger. Seems like he has a fighting chance. I saw a charming ad with two of Thune's lovely daughters, and I liked his message. Of course, I'd probably like the message of almost anyone running against Daschle.
I like what Curt Schilling said about A-Rod's cheating (from A Large Regular):
In case you missed it - Schilling was asked if Alex Rodriguez trying to knock the ball out of Arroyo's glove was a "bush-league" move and Schilling responded "No - it's Kerry league."Yes!
The Bush web site has a letter in support of the President signed by 24 professional and Olympic athletes (hat tip again to A Large Regular). Some of the signers: Ernie Banks, Carlos Beltran, Craig Biggio, John Elway, Bob Feller, Jack Nicklaus, Roger Staubach, and Lynn Swann. Go Bush!
Thursday, October 21, 2004Nick, you might want to rethink your admiration for Ben Domenech's blog. I've enjoyed some things I've read there, too, and he's got some cool pictures. But reading this quote was like diving into a Boundary Waters lake in early May.
And they'll be back again. This is a team that's used to hard luck and unfair calls, taking their lumps from crowds and umpires. They're a team of castoffs and has-beens, players no one wanted who were taken in by a loving and compassionate owner with a heart of gold. They've lived tough and hard-scrabble lives with blue collar backgrounds. There's not a roid user among them. Proud and defiant in defeat, the Yankees will put the pinstripes away for a few months, but oh yes, they'll be back to fight again, to fight for their honor, their city and their country.Now, I suppose we should cut him some slack. He's probably a little down about his team's historic collapse. But, sheesh, "hard luck and unfair calls" and "a team of castoffs and has-beens, players no one wanted"? Is this satire? Ben! (slap, slap) BEN!! Wake up!
Did you know there's a Corruption Perceptions Index? Yes indeed. Claudia Rossett keeps Kofi Annan's feet to the fire in yesterday's OpinionJournal. In the column, she scoffs at Kofi's contention that France, China, and Russia are incorruptible because "these are very serious and important governments." Well, according to a group called Transparency International, there's a whole lotta corruptin' goin' on. Their Corruption Perceptions Index says, of the 146 countries examined, France is more corrupt than 21 countries. China is 71st, and Russia is 90th. (The US ranks a little better than France, at 17th.)
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world.
Some musings on the events of the past few days:
Wednesday, October 20, 2004Hey! George Dubya and I share a passion for Freecell (you know, the Solitaire variation found on most computers). He's a great guy. I wonder what his record for consecutive wins is? I won't tell you mine because I don't like to brag.
Wow, this one is powerful. From the makers of a Reagan documentary in theaters now.
The Zogby folks called me last night to participate in their Presidential poll. I was happy to add my voice to the national discourse. They wanted to know how likely I was to vote (very), did I vote in 2000 (yes), for whom (Bush), my party affiliation (Republican), and for whom I will vote this election (Bush). Quick and painless. The results are out today - Bush and Kerry are tied at 46%. But as I read the article, there are results for questions I wasn't asked. They didn't ask my age, or whether I was newly registered, or whether the President deserved reelection. Hmm.
According to RealClearPolitics, Bush has the lead or is tied in all the national polls. Some show a healthy advantage (Gallup,+8 - Fox,+7 - Newsweek,+6 - WashPost,+5) others, like I said, no lead. There's nothing to feel smug or confident about here, but I guess I'd rather be Bush than Kerry right now.
I don't think this story will have any bearing on the presidential race. But it reminds me there are more important things in life than who wins or loses in politics. Win or lose, I think the the President has his priorities straight.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004I've been conducting a bumper sticker poll here on the streets of Minnesota for about three weeks now. Actually, it is a bumper sticker/yard sign/jacket button poll. I don't keep absolute numbers, but only relative ones, and right now, Bush is +4. Kerry has been up by as many as seven, and Bush up as many as five. I note that for much of the time of my poll, Bush was way down, but in the last week or so, Bush has charged ahead. I look for bumper stickers and yard signs every where I go, and have been scrupulous fair in my counting.
What this means, I have no idea. But it's a topic on The Corner right now, so I thought I'd weigh in with my personal poll.
Kate O'Beirne doesn't like the Ashley's Story advertisment. Or at least she thinks the money could be better spent on other things. She says, in part, "Seems to me it plays to the caricature of Bush as an unfeeling warmonger so beloved by Michael Moore Democrats".
I don't get that -- how does showing Bush's good heart, compassion and humanness play into the caricature of warmonger put out by Michael "I think I'll have another milkshake" Moore?
Call me confused by Mrs. O'Biernes skepticism.
Thank you, Hugh, for linking to us and welcome new visitors.
Why vote for Bush and what's wrong with Kerry?
When Spaniards reacted to their pre-election terrorist attack by rejecting the pro-war incumbent candidate, many Americans responded with contempt. "That will never happen in America," we thought, "we will not terrorized into submission."
But the current escalation of violence in Iraq is our Madrid. The terrorists' plan is to weaken our resolve, to convince the American public that "it just isn't worth it." They know they can't win the war, every encounter with coalition forces is a resounding defeat. Instead, the target in each attack is public support here.
John Kerry won the first debate with President Bush because he talked tough. He was aggressive, firm, and resolute in his manner and message. The problem is, it's a brand new John Kerry, not the John Kerry of the last 30 years. His new toughness is all talk, the President has the record that John Kerry is trying to contrive. What are you going to believe, 30 years of record or 30 days of talk? John Kerry will retreat the first chance he gets - and we will be a nation terrorized into submission.
As we noted this morning, Gar-Bear, Whoopi was quoted in the local paper this morning:
"The fact that I am no longer the spokesman for Slim-Fast makes me sad, but not as sad as someone trying to punish me for exercising my right as an American to speak my mind."
I read this and I confess being utterly flummoxed by what it takes to actually think up such a completely stupid thing to say. I do believe I would have to exert a serious amount of brainpower to come up with something so catastrophically mis-guided, yet Ms. Goldberg appear to have such banality rolling off her tongue like rotton milk down the kitchen sink.
Where to start? Does Ms. Goldberg actually believe that she can both represent a company and make gross, filthy, corrupt statements? Does she think that there shouldn't be consequences for one's actions? Does she think she has some God-given right to be the spokesman [sic] for Slim-Fast, and that nothing can take that away from her?
She can speak her mind freely here in this country. No one is going to put Ms. Goldberg in jail for spewing filth, nonsense and garbage from her pie-hole. But if she is such an elitist that she thinks that she isn't responsible for doing so, then she's even dumber than her quote above leads me to believe.
And let me add that I've never found the woman funny, either.
What a Pansy.
Monday, October 18, 2004Some oxygen-deprived peaceniks have begun a campaign to apologize for the liberation of Iraq. Of course, there are some who couldn't leave this alone. See Tim Blair and Sean Gleeson. Look around - they're hilarious.
Jonah points out this campaign from The Guardian in the UK. The paper invited Guardian readers to write to Ohio voters to advise them on how to vote. Most didn't appreciate the help.
Ah, we Americans are so nuanced, aren't we?
Friday, October 15, 2004Our big chance to get a link from the man himself, Hugh Hewitt!
Weekend Symposium 3: How deep a hole have John Kerry, Mary Beth Cahill and the Edwards dug for themselves? How lasting the damage?
Good question. My personal take? I think that the hole is very real and somewhat damaging, but I think it will be hard to measure. How do you poll for such a thing?
I think the damage is done amongst the "Security Mom" crowd, or even Mom's in general, and among gays.
First the moms: My mom has a beautiful painting on the wall of her office. It's of a Bald Eagle standing in a nest with a couple of hatchlings around her feet. She has a look of utter, deadly seriousness. It's been there for years, and when I was in high school I asked her about it. She told me she liked the picture because it portrayed how she felt about us kids. At the time, I thought that was silly, but now that I have three of my own, I understand completely what she meant. (The gentlemen at Powerline made a similar analogy yesterday at the bottom of this post). Anyway, I think Moms all across America are reacting this way to the flap in question. They don't like there kids being messed with, and they will be very sympathetic to the way that the Kerry/Edwards campaign is going after Ms. Cheney. (And I don't kid myself, they clearly are going after her.) Kerry having brought it up like he did was bad, tasteless, and very much out of line, but Elizabeth Edwards' comments about the Cheneys being "ashamed" of their daughter are truly reprehensible. It is that statement that will, I think, actually have the most impact on the election for the Moms.
Second: Gays -- I presume that there are at least some "undecided" gay people out there. (Though how one -- whatever your "orientation" can be, at this point, "undecided" is a bit beyond me....but whatever...) And my guess is that they won't look to kindly at a guy who is so presumptuous as to put words into the mouth of Ms. Cheney regarding her homosexuality, nor will they like the fact that he brought her up at all. It's almost like he took the gay vote for granted.
How lasting will the damage be? Oh, about eighteen more days, and then it will just be a footnote in a sad story of a pathetic politician's career.
One further thought: I don't believe for a second that this was an "accident". And I dont' think for one second that the Left doesn't view Ms. Cheney as "fair game".
"....that's why I gots a sticker for the US Marines on the bumper of my SUV..".
I'm sorry, but these soldiers ought to be executed. Quickly.
Kerry's comment in the debate was terrible. He doesn't care about anyone but himself. Lynne Cheney's response (3 times) "this is not a good man" was right on.
Kerry's "explanation" yesterday was an out-and-out lie: "I was trying to say something positive about the way strong families deal with the issue." There was nothing in his comment about strong families dealing with the issue.
Finally, Elizabeth Edwards comments were worse than Kerry's. "I think that it indicates a certain amount of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences." Who do these people think they are?
Mr. Krauthammer is a man of many talents (he's also on The President's Council on Bioethics) and we're lucky to be able to read him weekly. I read his article, too, and it roiled me. This surprised me:
Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem cell researcher at NIH, has admitted publicly that stem cells as an Alzheimer's cure are a fiction, but that "people need a fairy tale."Ron Reagan, call your office! Why has no one heard this before? Further proof that the MSM is working for Kerry.
Not that it matters, but I had no idea that Charles Krauthammer was a quadraplegic. And I've seen him on TV a number of times.
Anyway, he tells of Edwards for his sick remarks about Christopher Reeve. Good for him.
Thursday, October 14, 2004I went here and fired off this to WCCO:
"Just a quick note to let you know that I won't be watching one second of WCCO TV's coverage of Election Night. I see that CBS has allowed Dan Rather to host the coverage, and so I won't be watching. I'll even probably do everything I can to make sure that I don't even quickly pass by Channel 4 that night.
After the Bush Guard Memo debacle, it is my view that Rather is a liar and a man utterly devoid of objectivity and honesty. I will no longer be watching WCCO TV news, election coverage, nothing. Heck, I just decided never even to tune my TV in to Channel 4.
You guys there need to put the heat on the corporate headquarters. Rather needs to go."
Holy Cow. These new commercials are really powerful.
The Democrats dismiss these ads with the classic "Their lies have been disproven", but I've watched all of these ads, and I say "What lies? Name statement that these guys make that is a 'lie'." Most of what they say are simply their informed opinions.
I guess, though, if I were Kerry I'd be doing everything I could to dismiss and deflect what they say. Because what they say is powerful and condemnig. They are honorable men. The Left attacks them because the Left doesn't have any idea what honor is.
As they point out, they have nothing to gain from exposing themselves to the ridicule of the Left and the MSM. Why else would they be doing what they are doing other than they are expressing heartfelt conviction?
God Bless these brave Americans. God Bless them for serving us so faithfully then, and for serving us faithfully now.
Hindrocket over at Powerline has a nice little story about Mary Cheney.
Kerry's comment about Ms. Cheney in the debate last night was out of line. But Mrs. Edwards's comments this morning telling the Cheney's how ashamed they are of their daughter is just pathetic, mean, and ugly. Shame on her.
Have you seen that Burger King ad on TV where the guy wakes up and the "Burger King" dude is in bed with him, stares at him, and then gives him something to eat while some weird music plays, and a guy with a weird voice talks?
Am I the only that thinks this ad is just plain creepy?
A great column today from the eminent Thomas Sowell. I must include a quote (but read the whole thing):
The political left has long favored putting more and more decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong -- not only judges but zoning boards, environmental commissions and, internationally, the United Nations and the World Court. This is a vision of the wise and the virtuous imposing their wisdom and virtue on the lesser people who make up the rest of humanity.Refulgent.
I wondered (as I know many people did) why in the first debate President Bush seemed unwilling to say some things that would have buttressed his case for decisions he made. This American Spectator article posits exactly the point that's been rattling around in my head.
But consider President Bush's situation -- the situation of any President in wartime, faced with an ad-lib partisan debate. There are far more things he can't say than those he can, because the President actually is in the game of world politics. What he says could fracture alliances, end relationships, start wars. And some of his best ripostes are barred to him because of that.I'll give just one example (there are other excellent ones in the piece). When Kerry charged that under Bush America "turned its back on its traditional alliances" and "failed to bring aboard our traditional allies" in the war on terror. It would have nice to hear the President say,
"What countries are you talking about there, Senator? France, maybe? Did you know that France was bribed by Saddam Hussein through the Oil for Food program, to the tune of X billion dollars? And that France sold weapons to Saddam right through our war in 2003?"But a president shouldn't say those kinds of things. Bush makes that point well when he chides Kerry for speaking ill of our current allies. (Proof that Kerry is not ready for the office.) The President was willing to restrain himself for the good of the country, Kerry will hold back nothing to win - the country's good be damned!
Here's the answer to the flu question from last night's debate. (From Michelle Malkin's comments last week and again this morning.) The problem is a perfect example of incentives (see Thomas Sowell's book, Basic Economics). The CDC buys the vaccine in bulk. They're a huge buyer and can therefore bargain for a low price. The price is so low it's not worth the drug companies' trouble. Many companies quit producing it. The supply goes down.
My solution: Introduce market forces. Take the purchasing away from the government and move it closer to the consumer - insurance companies, hospitals, or health clinics. They would begin competing for supply and the price would go up. Vaccine producers would reenter the market and supply would increase. The problem for the consumer, of course, would be increased prices - but who said the vaccines have to be free anyway? And isn't a more expensive vaccine better than no vaccine at all? The government could subsidize the cost for the poor and the rest would pay their share.
This kind of stuff infuriates me. If Bush wins this election, one of the top 3 priorities of his next term should be cleaning up the process and educating the public on voter responsibility.
This is just sick. Words fail me.
Hugh Hewitt asked his readers to come up with analogies for the choice we face on election day. It's a fun list
My favorite? Captain Kirk v. Colonel Klink
I didn't watch the debate last night -- for some reason I find them very hard to watch. I think I feel the same way that a Red Sox fan felt last night -- you'd just rather not watch. I prefer reading the play by play in The Corner and following along on Hugh Hewitt's excellent summary.
Two things stick out to me:
First, when asked about his wife, Kerry started talking about his mother. Yikes. But, I guess you can't blame him. I can't even imagine being the concubine to Theresa. But then when he starts talking about his mother, he tells us that on her death bed she tells him "Integrity! Integrity! Integrity!". That, of course, immediately makes me wonder why Kerry's mom needed to stress such a thing at that particular moment. Maybe she realized something about him.
Second, Kerry's line about Cheney's daughter was really out of line. Totally tasteless and out of line. Stick to the issues and don't get personal, Kerry. Really, really bad.
Other than that, it appears that the third debate was pretty superfluous, although I gather that President Bush finally pointed out that Kerry voted not to kick Hussein out of Kuwait back in 1990.
Gary, I am in utter agreement. Fabrizio Quattrocchi is a great hero and a true man. I applaud him and mourn his loss. He was a true hero. Derb hit the nail on the head. I hope that when my time comes, I can die 1/10th as well as Mr. Quattrocchi did.
And a word about that Stein article. I don't exaggerate when I say that his article, the one that the Telegraph was too cowardly to publish, may very well be one of the greatest opinion colums ever written. Seriously. It is a moving, powerful indictment of our sissified, girlie-man drenched society. We are soft, we are ignoble, and we are weak. There are pockets of honor and bravery -- most of these folks go down to their local Armed Forces Recruiting Office and sign up, but there is a sad, weak, wussy streak that runs strong in our Western Culture. One only need look at the fact that millions of people will vote for John Kerry to see that.
Does anyone better represent the pansy-ified, soft, wimpy, simpering, whimpering portion of our culture than John Kerry?
I was supposed to post this yesterday, as promised, but I'm glad I didn't, because when I popped open Drudge this morning, I saw this
DNC ELECTION MANUAL: CHARGE VOTER INTIMIDATION, EVEN IF NONE EXISTS
Now isn't that just typical? Claim voter intimidation no matter what, truth be damned. Sadly, this doesn't surprise me. It's a typical lefty tactic. Charge racism no matter what. Charge sexism no matter what. Charge voter fraud, even when the Left is the one committing voter fraud.
A lot of things going on in this country bug the heck out of me, but the one thing that I think stands out is the utter lack of respect for the integrity of the ballot box. I'm going to be an Election Judge this year, and I suspect after I do my two hours of training, I'm going to be rather disgusted with how things work. I suspect I'll find out that even Election Judges aren't allowed to ask voters for proof of citizenship in order to vote. How in the world can we maintain the integrity of the ballot box if we can't even verify the legality of a voter? The bizarre thing is that the Left resists any and all efforts to enforce election law. The reason? Well, it's pretty obvious to me.
I have to believe that hundreds of thousands of non-citizens will be voting in this election, and I don't think it outrageous to say that 99% of them will be voting for Kerry. Let's call it a million extra vote for Kerry and other Democrats. That's the difference between a victory and a landslide loss. Of course the Left doesn't want these voters stopped. Since the ends always justify the means, of course it's perfectly okay to commit voter fraud to elect your candidate.
So I typed "Voter Fraud" into Google News, and look what I found:
Allegations of voter registration fraud rankle nonprofit voter groups
Oregon Opens Probe of Voter Fraud Charges
Colorado to tackle voter-fraud fears
And of course, right here in Minnesota: Stash of voter cards probed
...and the hits just keep on rolling. Type "voter fraud ACORN" into Google News and the list is almost as long. ACORN, it seems, is paying a bounty for each registered voter gathered up by its workers. Apparently, you can get paid for registering the same person
Another aspect here is that the Democrats don't want to play by the rules. Here's a great example: The election office in Palm Beach closes at 5pm. Show up late, and you don't get to register. But noooo, this is "disenfranchising" people. Actually, Florida in the 2000 election is the best example. Following the election law in Florida meant Gore lost. What do the Democrats do? Try to change the rules after the election. Sorry, but that is wrong. We are a nation of laws, and we follow the law. We don't change the law to suit our own needs. In St. Louis, a judge ordered polls to stay open when it was looking like Republicans were goint to win key races. Things aren't going your way? Change the rules! Jeez, even a five year old playing a card game knows that you don't do that.
If you want to vote, follow the rules, register on time, show up to vote on time, an be a legal, eligible voter. If you don't, you can't vote. Now if we can just get the left to understand that.
UPDATE: The Kerry Spot has a good post on some really unbelievable law-breaking.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004I don't always agree with John McCain, but when he does something like this, he has my full support and heartfelt gratitude.
Could there be anything more crass than the NFL fining a guy for putting a small, respectful sticker on his helmet in honor of a friend and hero that died defending our country? I guess I can understand a rule that prevents players from becoming walking billboards, but honoring a fallen soldier with a small sticker hardly seems like a step towards neon advertising signs on the side of players helmets.
Shame on the NFL and shame on Tagliabue for sticking with the fine.
"Fabrizio Quattrocchi was, in my opinion, a hero of Western civilization. His name ought to be a household word. That it isn't, say a great deal about us." John Derbyshire
Quattrochi is the Italian hostage Mark Steyn talks about in his spiked Telegraph column. In the column, Steyn decries the "the feeble and unserious Britain" in the weeks between Kenneth Bigley's capture and execution. Allow me to point out two gems from the column. First, regarding Bigley's last words,
None of us can know for certain how we would behave in his circumstances, and very few of us will ever face them. But, if I had to choose in advance the very last words I'd utter in this life, "Tony Blair has not done enough for me" would not be high up on the list.And second, Mr. Steyn reminds us of the noble Quattrochi, hero of Italy -
By contrast with the Fleet Street-Scouser-Whitehall fiasco of the last three weeks, consider Fabrizio Quattrocchi, murdered in Iraq on April 14th. In the moment before his death, he yanked off his hood and cried defiantly, "I will show you how an Italian dies!" He ruined the movie for his killers. As a snuff video and recruitment tool, it was all but useless, so much so that the Arabic TV stations declined to show it.
Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn) is obviously a big weenie - a baby, a wimp. He's the only senator who, after hearing about security concerns and potential threats to all senators, closed his office in Washington. But there's more to this stunt than fear. He wants to needle the administration, to use national security issues as a political tool. He does it in such a ham-handed way, though, I doubt that it will have its desired effect - it may have the opposite effect. He's such an embarrassment.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004The other night in the debate, Kerry claimed to be a Catholic, but then spent the rest of his answer explaining why he doesn't really believe Catholic doctrine.
But all along he was hiding a secret: He can heal the sick!
According to Edwards: "When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk. Get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."
A stunning, "October Surprise" level revelation!
Sunday, October 10, 2004I can't read continuing story of Jessica Clements without getting a lump in my throat. The continuing sacrifice of the men and women of the US Armed Forces is a debt we can never repay them. The courage exhibited by this remarkable, lovely, young woman is inspiring and humbling.
Head nod to the guys at Powerline for continuing to track the story for us.
Friday, October 08, 2004The Deacon of Powerline makes a great point about where we would be now if the Kerry doctrine had played out instead of the Bush doctrine.
Under the Kerry-Edwards approach, then, inspectors would have reached the conclusion that Saddam had no WMD. At that point, the inspectors would have left and the sanctions against Saddam likely would have been lifted. The U.S. would have been humiliated, and any chance of leading a coalition against Saddam would have evaporated. Saddam, of course, would have remained in power and in a stronger position than before. Thus, Kerry's claim that we would have achieved his preference for removing Saddam is obviously false.The logic is unassailable. Duelsfer reported that "UN sanctions were eroding and increasingly ineffective." So Saddam, with his billions from the oil-for-food scam, was already gaining strength. With a Good Housekeeping award from the UN inspectors he would be free to pursue weapons and homeless terrorists from Afghanistan would have found safe haven and aid.
The logical results of Kerry's criticisms and proposals are there to be found but, because he says so many different things and is so confusing, you have to dig to get there. Journalists, partly because of their political leanings and partly because of the difficulty of the task, are unwilling to dig through Kerry's conflicting and confusing statements to reach their logical conclusions. Not only is that sad and disappointing, it fills me with fear. If no one pins him down he may get away with sounding tough enough to fool the electorate. Lord help us!
Thursday, October 07, 2004From the Washington Times: "Weapons inspector Charles Duelfer released his 918-page report to Congress Wednesday, saying under pressure from the United Nations, Iraq had "essentially destroyed" its illicit weapons ability by the end of 1991, with its last secret factory, a biological weapons plant, eliminated in 1996."
Clifford May of the Corner gives his interpretation of the report's findings on the website of The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Here are some points to remember:
John Hillen comments in the same article:
Now, the good strategist always acts against adversaries based on intent and capabilities (and informed by their track record). A lawyer waits for a smoking gun. In this world, a smoking gun means dead Americans. Bush understands this.It's obvious who the lawyers are in this election. The Democrats argue for proof but the world is not a courtroom. It is enough to understand your enemy's intent and to have reasonable suspicions about his capability. We are at war, and one party doesn't know it.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004Did John Kerry ever run the Boston Marathon as he claims?
Sunday, October 03, 2004But of course, we aren't surprised, are we?
A quote of a quote from Power Line:
"It's sad that a Senator with twenty years of experience does not appreciate Polish sacrifice...I don't think it's a question of ignorance. One thing has to be said very clearly: this Coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain and Australia, but there's also contribution of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who died in Iraq. It's immoral to not see this involvement we undertook because we believe that we have to fight terrorism together, that we need to show international solidarity, that Saddam Hussein is a danger to the world.
Those are the words of the Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski. Brought a tear to my eye. Kerry constantly harangues about needing to have more allies in the war on terror, but he constantly disrespected the allies we do have -- like he totally dissed Poland in the debate the other night. Boy, that burns me. The Poles are a great, freedom-loving people whom I admire mightily. For Kerry to dismiss them so cavalierly makes my blood boil. I admire the Polish President for his forthright comments.
Friday, October 01, 2004Check out the headline on this story. Momentum? What the heck is that? I couldn't find any poll numbers in the article showing that the debate helped Kerry, and I didn't see much in the article other than Bush rightly bashing Kerry for kissing France's butt.
It was the lead story on Yahoo News at the time of the blog entry, by the way.
Rod Dreher has a great post in The Corner. I'd like to meet CDR Flynn. Flynn pointed out to the head of the ACLU that fighting tooth and nail against pragmatic, small steps in fighting terrorism could lead to us being unable to stop another 9/11, and if another 9/11 comes along, the ACLU will be summarily ignored in our outrage. If the terrorists succeed in attacking us as spectacularly as they did on 9/11, the President of the ACLU not only won't be heard, he might be fearing for his life if he continues then to fight against those wanting to capture terrorists.
Something for those on the Left to consider.
Add Us To Your Blogroll