Still Hate Polls

This post from the Washington Post's blog The Fix reminds me of why I don't like polls. It suggest, citing polls, the Democrat base is fired up: It reads in part:

The most striking finding in the Pew poll was the comparisons between Democratic and Republican energy levels in the last midterm election year and today. In 2002, 40 percent of Democrats said they were enthusiastic about voting in the fall while 44 percent of Republicans said the same thing. Four years later, 51 percent of Democrats said they were enthused while just 33 percent of Republicans said the same.

This is one of the reasons I hate polls. If I were polled and asked whether I was "enthusiastic" to vote or not, I'd say "not." Does that mean I'm not going to vote? No. I'm not happy about a lot of things the Republicans have and haven't accomplished, but that certainly doesn't mean I'm doing to sit it out and suffer the consequences. I suspect that most of the Republican base feels the same.

Anger Managment Might Help

I received an email for John Kerry yesterday titled: Stay In Their Face! That's basically what they've got to work with, anger. Has anger ever won an election? I've always thought the best way to win people over was with optimism, hope, and inspiration. Who the hell wants to be angry all the time? But alas, that appears to be what the base of the Democrat Party is all about today. Will it work? Who knows, but if it does I don't see how turning all of that anger into action can be good for the country. I guess I forgot that it's President Bush supposedly dividing the country, how silly of me.

Polls, Polls, And More Polls

Most political junkies love polls -- I hate them. So much polling is done any more that the polls seem to drive the news rather than the other way around. You have a policy you want to find support for? You can have a poll done to do just that.

Having said that, I notice that the liberal flagship blog Daily Kos is flush with polls. Of course there are plenty of conservative blogs that track polls closely such as my favorite, RealClearPolitics, but at Daily Kos it seems they are constantly sighting this poll of that poll to reflect what they believe to be true. Granted, Kos himself usually adds a preface to his posts indicating he is still pessimistic about the election despite what the polls say. He’s been wrong so many election cycles I don’t blame him for being gun shy.

Jim Geraghty at TKS has an interesting discussion about the accuracy of modern day polling (keep scrolling, there are several posts.) With the rapid increase of cell phones and many homes going without a land-line altogether, just how accurate are polls anymore? Who are the people that answer the polls? Are they answering honestly? What are the demographics? It’s a fascinating discussion and as the electronic revolution continues the dynamics of polling will have to adapt in order to provide accurate information.

For my part I’ve been polled one time, and will never do it again. It takes entirely too long and as it drug on I became less interested and therefore was paying less attention to what they were asking. I tend to believe that most people who vote regularly such as myself would probably have the same reaction. This years election will be interesting to watch and see to what degree the polling is accurate. If the polls are not even close and the Democrat Tidal Wave doesn’t happen, the KosKidz are going to have to be put on suicide watch.

Lessons Not Learned

I've always been perplexed by the Democrats insistence on repeating our defeat in Vietnam. I know they hate George W. Bush and have never gotten over their defeat in 2000, maybe even their lose of Congress in 1994. However, even taking their bitterness into consideration, what kind of pathology drives you to advocate a policy of defeat when history so vividly reminds you of the consequences? Here's an example of that history from Michael Rubin at The Corner:

The Ghosts of Defeat [Michael Rubin]

Realists exist in a freeze-frame reality—blind to the long-term consequence of cold, calculating, short-term decisions. Several argue for a pull-out from Iraq. Discussions of time tables and phases are mere spin for withdrawal. It’s too easy to forget or ignore the human costs of such a decision, or the sense of betrayal which we telegraph around the world. In his history of the 1970s, my colleague David Frum relates the story of Sirik Matak, whom the US embassy in Phnom Penh offered to evacuate as the Khmer Rouge closed in on the city. Matak refused, writing this letter to the US ambassador. It should be a must read for the “abandon Iraq” crowd:

Dear Excellency and Friend,

I thank you very sincerely for your letter and for your offer to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion. As for you, and in particular for your great country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You have refused us your protection, and we can do nothing about it. You leave, and my wish is that you and your country will find happiness under this sky. But, mark it well, that if I shall die here on this spot and in my country that I love, it is no matter, because we all are born and must die. I have only committed the mistake of believing you.

The Khmer Rouge shot Matak in the stomach. He took three days to die.

History also teaches us that our abandonment of the South Vietnamese led to the death of hundreds of thousands innocent Vietnamese and Cambodians. It was also a complete and utter humiliation for our military and led ultimately to the feckless presidency of Jimmy Carter, which in turn emboldened our enemies around the world and more humiliation at the hands of the Iranians during the hostage crisis until finally Ronald Reagan (RIP) rode into office and restored a sense of pride and courage in our great nation once again.

Today's Democrats can't see beyond their hatred of George W. Bush and their thirst for power, leading them to openly root for our defeat in Iraq while leaving the fate of millions of innocents, once again, to be brutalized at the hands of a ruthless enemy. This is the face of the Democrat policy on Iraq, and I strongly suggest to anybody who believes the Republicans deserve to lose and is going to sit out this election, please think again.

As Opposed To Behind The Bush?

What Not to Wear in Front of Bush

Things Are Gonna Change, I Can Feel It

This is an classic example of why liberals are disappointed again and again the day after elections:

As I mentioned before, I'm in Connecticut again. Kos, sitting in nice sunny Berkeley, has it right - this campaign just feels better, it feels like there's momentum behind it. That doesn't always mean that this impression is correct, but politics is more about feel than one might think.

This is a classic combination of the echo chamber and liberals natural inclination to judge everything by ones "feelings." At least he throws in the token CYA of he may not be right, but dammit it just feels right. I have no doubt that Joe Leiberman will win reelection easily, and once again left in it's wake will be the KosKidz wondering how they could lose when everybody they know voted for Lamont. Simply being the loudest does not make you right, nor the majority.

What's That Word? Chutzpah?

Now this is rich:

WASHINGTON -- Democrats seized on North Korea's brazen act to criticize President Bush's record in confronting the communist regime, contending the administration's focus on Iraq ignored legitimate threats.

Democratic Sen. John Kerry, the president's rival in 2004 and a potential 2008 candidate, assailed Bush's policy as a "shocking failure," and said, "While we've been bogged down in Iraq where there were no weapons of mass destruction, a madman has apparently tested the ultimate weapon of mass destruction."

So let me see if I've got this straight: because we're in Iraq, that allowed North Korea to develop The Bomb? That makes absolutely no sense. I guess if we weren't in Iraq, we could maybe follow a policy of signing an agreement and building nuclear power plants for them? Oh wait, we already did that and it's the exact reason "Me So Ronery" Kim Jong Il now has the bomb (possibly.)

Democrats have simply gotten so used to blaming Bush for everything that they say stupid things like this and nobody bats an eye. I sure hope Kerry runs again in 2008, he's non-stop material.

On another note, read the entire article linked above so you can gather such nuggets of liberal wisdom such as this from the unbiased, straight-down-the-middle Seattle-Intelligencer:

In the nearly five years since Bush labeled North Korea part of an "axis of evil" with Iran and Iraq, Kim Jong Il's government has withdrawn from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, announced it has nuclear weapons, refused to return to six-nation talks and launched seven missiles into the Sea of Japan, including a long-range Taepodong-2.

You see, it's all Bush's fault!

Foleygate, Revisisted

I've been waiting for the whole Foleygate thing to settle down before commenting on what I thought the fallout wil be. Things were moving so fast with one new revelation after another, frankly even I couldn't keep up. If you want the details I would suggestion visiting Gateway Pundit for the low down (he's got all the inside stuff.)

Enough time has passed and the results are coming in, and they don't look good. That being said, I still think there is more at play here than simply reading the polls. I've picked up a vibe from conservatives that the whole episode has generated some motivation among the base. I wouldn't expect that to show up in the polls, so I'm still taking them with a grain of salt. The polls, I think, reflect the general attitude of people such as those that work in my office. They seem to get their news from The Daily Show and of course are clueless about the details of the story. For instance, they think that Denny Hastert knew of the lurid IMs, when in reality it was the emails Hastert knew about. That's probably neither here nor there, because I don't think any of them vote Republican anyway. But I do believe they probably reflect the general population represented in the polls.

So, the bottom line is that it certainly has caused some problems, but I believe there is still time to motivate the base that so desperately wants to be motivated. The story seems to have dropped a little too early and events such as North Korea's nuclear test pushed the Foley story off the front pages and reminded people of the dangerous world we live in (damn that Karl Rove is good.) Remember Gary Condit? He was front page news on September 10, 2001. Enough said. Also, another reality not reflected in the polls is the superiority of the GOPs Get Out The Vote (GOTV) effort. It is time to see how effective Ken Mehlman's machine can be.

Time and events will tell, but there is no doubt that it'll be tough going for the next few weeks.

Tolerance, The Liberal Way

Ah yes, Babs, a model of tolerence, love, and peace. During a concert in which she was performing a skit portraying President Bush as a "bumbling idiot" (gee, that's original), some in the audience, after shelling out big bucks, were none to please. Babs response?

"Shut the **** up! Shut up if you can't take a joke!"

Nice. They love to dish it out, but they just can't take it. Actually, I was surprised that people in the audience weren't just lapping it up. Considering how well her radical views are known, it's surprising that anybody who doesn't agree with her in lock-step would give her money. Oh well, I guess they got just what they deserve.

Hastert Not Hasert

Ooops.

Should Hasert Resign?

I'm perplexed by the Washington Times' call for Denny Hasert to resign as Speaker of the House. The meat of their argument:

Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, the Republican chairman of the House Page Board, said he learned about the Foley e-mail messages "in late 2005." Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the leader of the Republican majority, said he was informed of the e-mail messages earlier this year. On Friday, Mr. Hastert dissembled, to put it charitably, before conceding that he, too, learned about the e-mail messages sometime earlier this year. Late yesterday afternoon, Mr. Hastert insisted that he learned of the most flagrant instant-message exchange from 2003 only last Friday, when it was reported by ABC News. This is irrelevant. The original e-mail messages were warning enough that a predator -- and, incredibly, the co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children -- could be prowling the halls of Congress. [emphasis mine]

If the initial emails weren't enough to raise even the hackles of liberal newspapers such as the St. Petersburg Times or the Miami Herald, they were supposed to be "warning enough" for Denny Hasert to launch an investigation? The Washington Times dismisses the differences between the emails and the IMs as "irrelevant"? If Rep. Hasert launched an investigation into every such matter concerning questionable behavior of a fellow Representative, the House would be one big non-stop investigation of itself.

So far, I've seen nothing that indicates the House Leadership knew anything more than the contents of the original email. Could you imagine the uproar from liberals if they had launched such an investigation of Rep. Foley, long known inside the beltway as a homosexual, based soley on such ambiguous emails. Liberal would have been screaming "homophobia" at the top of their lungs. They would have accused Hasert of painting all homosexuals as pedophiles.

With everything we now know, I not only hope that Denny Hasert doesn't resign, but I hope he digs his heels in and fights back. There have been some pretty ugly accusations tossed in his direction, including covering for a known pedophile. That is not something you should take lying down Mr. Speaker.

UPDATE: Mark Levin at The Corner makes some good points along the same lines that I believe I'm following here. Of course he's much clearer and better spoken on the matter than I, but then again I'm only about half as smart as he is. Also notice the mature discourse displayed by conservatives on this matter in contrast to the... ah, you know.

UPDATE II: Investor's Business Daily appears to be the first to call into question the timing of Foleygate and questions about what did "Democrats know, and when did they know it?" As the story continues to unfold, it should begin to become clear that the Democrats will have quite a bit to answer for as well. This is politics at it's dirtiest and the only way for the Republicans to fight back is, sadly enough, to get down and dirty with 'em.

Foley, Foley, And More Foley

The left side of the blogosphere is going absolutely nutso about the Foley resignation. As of this writing, seven of the last twelve post in KosLand has been about Foley. It's pretty clear that Foley is a sick perv who got exactly what he deserved. The real question surrounds what the House leadership knew and when they knew it. Of course the left has already decided that it's a clear cut case and Denny Hasert and the entire House leadership should be run out of town on a rail. The facts, or lack thereof, of course tell a more ambiguous story.

I'll let those facts shake out before passing judgement. I've always been apathetic towards Denny Hasert as Speaker of the House. He seems like a nice guy, and as a former teacher if he really knew the perversity of Foley's exploits I have a hard time believing he would simply look the other way.

As far as the possible fallout and impact this story has on the elections, I don't see a lot to it. Of course that could change if it turns out that the House leadership was complacent in the matter, but as of now I don't see it. The story involves sex, so of course the press will cover it in the most sensationalist fashion possible. And right now the dems are taking full advantage of the situation, which of course I don't blame them for doing. In the end, however, I suspect once again they'll over-play their hand on this, because they have nothing else to offer, and within a week or so barring any further incriminating developments it'll be back to business as usual as we head down the home stretch leading to the November elections.

To be continued...

UPDATE: I found this headline from ABC News blog, the Blotter, very interesting:

E-mails Show Foley Sought Rendezvous with Page

My understanding is that there are two completely different issues between emails and Instant Messages. The emails, while creepy, are not explicit and didn't warrant any disciplinary action against Foley. The IMs, on the other hand, are perverse and may land Foley in jail. It's a very sloppy piece written as if they want to blur the line and confuse the story. Big surprise? NOT!

Bush Blast With Both Barrels

President Bush is a master at lower expectations and sandbagging his opponents. Many times persons like me find ourselves criticizing him for not fighting back, only to find out later he was letting his opponents climb further out on the limb before he starts the cutting. Well, he's at it again with this blistering speech at a funder raiser in Alabama yesterday. A little taste:

Some Democrats in Congress say that we should not be fighting the terrorists in Iraq; it was a mistake to go into Iraq in the first place. I believe these Democrats need to answer a simple question: Do they really believe that we would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power? In a recent interview, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee was asked this very question. And his answer was, yes, yes, and, yes.

If this is what the Democrats think, they need to make this case to the American people: They need to make the case that the world would be better off it Saddam Hussein were still in power.

[snip]

After the attacks of September the 11th, it became clear that the United States of America must confront threats before they come and hurt us. Saddam Hussein's regime was a serious threat, a risk the world could not afford to take. America, Iraqis, and the world are safer because Saddam Hussein is not in power. (Applause.)

In a recent series of speeches, I made it clear that we're in the early hours of a long struggle for civilization. I have made it clear that we're in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. I've also made it clear that the safety of the American people depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad.

I strongly believe that Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. The Democrats may not think so, but Osama bin Laden does. Here are the words of bin Laden, "I now address... the whole... Islamic nation: Listen and understand... The most... serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War... [that] is raging in [Iraq]." He calls it "a war of destiny between infidelity and Islam." He says, "The whole world is watching this war," and that it will end in "victory and glory or misery and humiliation."

For al Qaeda, Iraq is not a distraction from their war on America, it is a central battlefield where there's -- outcome of the struggle will be decided.

The NIE I quoted earlier says this about Iraq. It said, "Perceived jihadist success there," in Iraq, "would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere. It also says that "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

Democrats in Washington have been quoting the NIE a lot in recent days, but you don't hear them quoting that part of the document. The Democrats can't have it both ways. Either they believe that Iraq is a distraction from the war on terror or they agree with the intelligence community and the terrorists themselves that the outcome of Iraq is important in the war on terror. Truth is, the Democrats are using the NIE to mislead the American people and justify their policy of withdrawal from Iraq.

[snip]

The stakes in this war are high, and so are the stakes this November. Americans face the choice between two parties with two different attitudes on this war on terror. Five years after 9/11, the worst attack on American homeland in our history, the Democrats offer nothing but criticism and obstruction, and endless second-guessing. The party of FDR and the party of Harry Truman has become the party of cut-and-run. (Applause.)

That last part will have Democrats in full purple-face rage. More Mr. President, please.

Dems, Follow These Men

Senators Leahy, Kerry, Feingold, and Dodd, that is. They're up in arms over the terrorist detainee legislation which passed the House yesterday and is now before the Senate. Nothing would be better for the Republicans than for the Democrats to get behind these Senators in their quest for bestowing the right of habeus corpus upon terrorist being held at Club Gitmo. Liberals cheered when the Supreme Court ruled the military tribunals proposed by the Bush Administration unconstitutional. Now, though, they have to deal with the reality of coming up with a solution themselves. Gee, things get a little harder when you actually have to come up with ideas as opposed to just heaping non-stop criticism.

That's My Niece!

This is an article about my niece, Laura. She helped pass a law in New Jersey that allows students to opt out of dissecting animals, without penalty, as required in some classes. Apparently there are other methods that can be substituted. Good for her. Towards the end of the article you learn she's working to start a Young Republicans Club. Brains, looks, personality, Republican! Oh, sorry, a button just bounced off my screen. And by the way, big brother is a Marine. A big thumbs-up to my sister, Karen.

Ahhh, Is That It?

Now that portions of the NIE have been declassified and we get to see the key conclusions, we can make a few conclusions for ourselves.

First, if this is representative of what the intelligence community is generating, we're in big trouble. There is absolutely nothing of substance in the document. A lot of "if's" and "maybe's" and nothing more. Second, it is clear that the information leaked to the New York Times was cherry picked to put the Administration in the worst possible light and the New Yorks Times ate it up without a single critical thought. The New York Times has abandoned any pretence of objectivity and is nothing more than an extension of the Democrat Party and should be viewed as such. And lastly, the Democrats have once again demonstrated they can not to be taken seriously when it comes to fighting the War on Terror (a phrase which I despise by the way.)

In the end, this is a big todo about nothing. The report is from April, tells us nothing new (other than our intelligence agencies remain inept,) and within a week will be forgotten. Next.

UPDATE: I forgot to add that with the Democrats demanding the President Bush release the NIE in it's entirety, it proves they don't like the results of Bush calling their bluff. They know perfectly well that the President won't declassify the document, so now they can run around blabbing about how the President isn't being honest with the American people. They're not serious about this, they simply want cover for the fecklessness.

Stepping In It

The Democrats are going to regret jumping on the leaked information from the NEI. Now that President Bush has order it's declassification we will get the complete picture. This was nothing more than a political hit job by President Bush's enemies within the intelligence community.

Nancy Pelosi's request for a rare closed-door secret session to discuss the analysis is a sure sign of panic. In their zeal to denounce Bush and the Iraq War they once again put their complete unseriousness and pure partisanship regarding the War on Terrorism on display for everyone to see. They simply are not serious and cannot be trusted with the defense of the this country.

Now, let's get to bottom of who continues to leak classified information to the The New York Times and start prosecuting theses people to the fullest extent of the law.

Fighting Enemies Makes Them Mad

This just in, fighting your enemies makes them mad. Much is being made of the latest National Intelligence Estimate in which it states that our invasion of Iraq has help create more terrorists. Let's put aside the fact that, once again, classified information is being leaked in an effort to undermine the Bush Administration, and look at the logic of the Democrats criticism. I think Neal Bortz has the perfect analogy. He ask us to think about the Civil Rights movement and about how that helped recruitment for the Klan. Does that mean that it was wrong? Of course not, and it doesn't make any more sense in the case of Iraq.

Islamists had been gaining momentum from the time of the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Iran through the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole and ultimately 9/11. The latest National Intelligence Estimate appears to view terrorism as a threat that began with the invasion of Iraq in 2003, ignoring the history of the Islamist movement. Judging by the reactions of the Democrats, they want to go back to what we were doing on September 10th, 2001 -- nothing.

The Wagging Finger

When was the last time I saw Bill Clinton wagging his finger in indignation? Hmmm... Oh, yeah, when he was lying through his teeth to the American people about the whole sordid Lewenski affair. Now he's wagging it again complaing about the "right wingers" criticism of his less than agressive approach to capturing or killing Osama.

Look, nobody took terrorism seriously enough from Jimmy Carter through George W. Bush's first eight months in office. Mistakes were made and the threat was underestimated. Frankly, I don't really care much about pointing the finger of blame as much as I care about making sure we don't make those same mistakes again. Clintons outrage, much the same as his protest concerning the ABC miniseries Path to 9/11, does nothing more than draw attention to his abysmal record on fighting terrorism during his eight years in office. By attempting to rewrite history in an effort to salvage his "legacy," he's only undermining himself.

Mr. President, my advice to you concerning this matter is to follow the words of the immortable Sergeant Hulka, "Lighten up Francis."

Osama Dead... Again

Here we go with another report that Osama bin Laden is dead. Of course nobody believes these reports anymore when they come out. I almost convinced myself that he was dead up to the 2004 election, but when he reappeared just before the election I learned my lesson.

It's curious that this news comes out a few weeks before a new rumored video message from Osama is to appear. This has to do with the chatter that another, spectacular, attack is to occur sometime during Ramadan of this year. We shall see within the next few weeks.

Personally I'd like nothing better for this rat bastard to die of typhoid in some dark, damp, cave, in the hills of Pakistan. Nothing would be better than to deny him the supposed glory of having died as a martyr.

Kos Speaks on Chavez

Well, Kos has finally commented on the Chavez kerfuffle (TM James Taranto) and has this to say: Move along, nothing to see here. The Anchoress is not amused and takes the Democrats and their Kos minions to task for enabling such nonsense:

There are some on the left who are suggesting that Hugo Chavez’s remarks are simply an indicator that the world “disrespects” President Bush…well…I wonder who gave them the idea that they could? Was it John Kerry calling him a “fucking liar,” and not having to answer for that rudeness to anyone while the press shrugged it off? Good heavens, Bush calls terrorism “evil” and he was mocked and criticized for using that word, but the press never had a problem with “fucking liar, fucking crooks and thieves” or with adolescent musings about the president’s name and female genitalia. It was alllllll soooooo funnnnneeeeeee, newsreaders could hardly deliver the spite without grinning, themselves.

Please read the whole thing, she's on fire.

Saying Goodbye to the F-14

The F-14 Tomcat is now officially retired. Growing up, I always loved the F-14. It was just a cool looking aircraft: twin engines, swept wings, huge ordnance capability. It was one bad mother. Of course it became immortalized in the movie Topgun, where everybody learned about fighter pilot culture and became familiar with cool call names such as Maverick, Iceman, and Goose.

It was one great plane that served it's country well. Thanks to the F-14 and all of the pilots it's served throughout the years.

(via The Corner)

Cartoon of the Day

I got a kick out of this cartoon (via RealClearPolitics). While I do give credit to Reps Rangel and Pelosi for calling out Chavez, I get the feeling they're doing it more out of political expediency than authentic outrage. It certainly isn't helping them with their Netroots though. They made their bed by cozying up to the fringe, now they have to sleep in it.

Chavez for Prez!

After listening to Hugo Chavez at the UN yesterday, I thought perhaps he was running for the Presidential nomination on the Democrat ticket. I mean, he was feeding them the red meat they so desire. He doesn't mince words, speaks truth to power, hates George W. Bush, and is a socialist - their perfect candidate!

But, now I see the responses coming in and it looks like even the Dems are not that dense. Even Charlie Rangle is defending the Prez for crying out loud! The only bulb dim enough to defend Chavez appears to be Sen. Harkin of Iowa (link down) which really isn't much of a surprise. There aren't many Senators more partisan than Harkin and he doesn't disappoint here.

Hugo Chavez did President Bush and John Bolton a great service yesterday, he exposed the UN as the worthless anti-American organization it is. Thanks Hugo! I'd also like to note that there is nary a word over and DailyKos about this embarassing episode for their beloved UN, there too busy continuing to try and paint Senator George Allen as a racist.

Oh, and by the way, Citgo is owned by Hugo Chavez. You may want to take that into consideration next time you fillup.

P.S. Chavez is the gift that just keeps giving. Here is Chavez this morning while touring Harlem:

Speaking while walking in a Harlem street, Chavez told a group of passers-by: "Bush is an alcoholic, a sick man with a lot of hang-ups."

"He walks like John Wayne," declared the left-wing Venezuelan leader. "He doesn't know anything about politics, he got there because of Daddy."

This is straight out of the Dem talking points. By all means Mr. Chavez, please continue on...

Blogging Continues

OK, it's been way too long since my last entry. With the election rapidly approaching I'm going to make another effort with this thing. Having said that, now that football season has started, isn't it about time you starting blogging as well, Jim?

Olbermann Puff

This puff piece by the New York Times on Keith Olbermann is what DailyKos characterized as Fox "feeling the heat from Olbermann". Here's a snippet of the "heat":

...Mr. Olbermann has managed to climb past CNN into second place in the news channel competition at 8 p.m. among that 25-to-54 group. That qualifies as a feat for MSNBC, though Mr. Olbermann’s show remains little more than a dot in the rearview mirror of Fox News.

A little more than a dot and the KosKids are dancing in the streets. Oh well, I guess you take what you can get. I admit to watching a bit more of Olbermann these days than I ever did before. Not for anything substantive, but for the mere entertainment of the nutiness. I don't find him funny in the slightest, but the material he covers on his show is a rabid Bush haters dream. It's not for everybody, but if you want to crawl inside the head of a nutty left winger, this is a good start.

News AP & Al Reuters Style

AP and Reuters both report the same way on the video released of two soldiers tortured and murdered in Iraq. Here's the AP:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - An al-Qaida-linked group posted a Web video Tuesday purporting to show the mutilated bodies of two U.S. soldiers, claiming it killed them in revenge for the rape-slaying of a young Iraqi woman by American troops from the same unit.

And here's al-Reuters:

DUBAI (Reuters) - A group led by al Qaeda in Iraq released gruesome footage of two corpses it said were of U.S. soldiers killed in June, and dedicated the video to an Iraqi girl raped and shot dead by U.S. forces.

Obviously from this reporting the soldiers accused of rape and murder have already been found guilty by the AP and Reuters. To bad they don't give as much benifit of the doubt to our soldiers as they do to the terrorists. Oh yeah, to them one man's terrorist is another man freedom fighter.

NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

You have got to be kidding me. According to this review from Libertas the new Superman stands for "truth, justice, and all that is good"!!!!!!! What the...? The rest of the review doesn't get any better. Bummer.

"New Direction" Is It?

Nancy Pelosi, in an interview with USA Today outlines the Democrats strategy to win back Congress this fall:

WASHINGTON — Democratic House and Senate leaders are planning to reduce the cost of student loans and prescription drugs, raise the minimum wage and launch an effort to develop alternative fuels if they win back control of Congress.

Hmmmm... Nothing about the war? Nothing about immigration? They do mention this as part of their platform:

The agenda also calls for enacting recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, formed after the 2001 terror attacks, to boost national security and funding for it, and for eliminating about $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies. Pelosi said savings would go to develop alternative fuels.

That's what we call playing defense -- it's a complete loser. It took then this long to come up with this brillant plan (they've been promising to unviel their strategy since last year)? It's looking more and more like the Republicans are going to have an easier time retaining their majorities than was believed just a short time ago.

Roved Cleared, Moonbats Mourn

A quick note about the reaction of the Moonbats to the news that Karl Rove will not be indicted. Here's a post from DailyKos today (via The Corner):

I don't think I've ever seen such a look of misery and dejection on the face of my daughter as I just did a moment ago. She just couldn't understand why the President would be going to Iraq when so many things are wrong in this country. "Doesn’t Mr. Bush care about us anymore?" she asked pitifully.

I sat down with her on the sofa and (as calmly as I could) tried to explain to her why the President seems to be abandoning his country. "Honey, I think his boss, Mr. Rove, sent Mr. Bush out of the country in order to keep himself out of the newspapers. You see, he wasn’t sure if he was going to be arrested today or not, and so he planned Mr. Bush’s trip ahead of time just in case...”

I tried to keep my voice steady, but it became increasingly difficult - the rage and feelings of helplessness were just too much. I think my daughter could tell something was wrong. I found myself at such a loss for words - nothing made any sense; nothing makes sense anymore. I finally had to admit, "Honey, I just don't know - I don't know what's going on in this country anymore..."

When I finished her lower lip started to tremble and her eyes began to fill with tears, "Daddy" she said, "why are the Republicans doing this to the country?" Well, that was it for me: I finally fell apart. She just fell into my arms and we both began sobbing for several minutes.

For once she had to comfort me and get me back on my feet. Sometimes I just think it's too much, but seeing the strength in my young daughter's voice helped me to get through.

Truly pathetic and hilarious at the same time.

After Long Hiatus

To my loyal readers (hi Jim and Jim), sorry about the long period without any post. I was in the Keys for a week and work has been hell since returning. My boss suffered a minor heart attack while I was gone and needless to say things were a bit hectic for a while.

He's back to work now and things are returning to normal, so hopefully I can begin to post regularly again. There has been a lot going on in the world of politics and I've got plenty to say, so stay tuned.

In the mean time, I'm going to live blog Tropical Storm Alberto. Here it goes:

It rained some yesterday, and today. The end.

BDS At Its Worst

Rep. John Murtha has become so infected with BDS that he is now accusing our Marines of killing innocent Iraqi women and children in cold blood. While the investigation into the incident is still ongoing, Murtha has already declared our Marines guilty and he blames Bush. What a disgrace. This man, a former Marine, is willing to believe the worst about our men and women in uniform and use it for political gain because of his hatred of Bush and his policies.

John Murtha: National Disgrace

UPDATE: Flopping Aces has a good run down of the details. This one is catching fire, expect to hear more about this.

Tony Snow Is The Man

I meant to link to this video from Hotair.com of Tony Snow dealing with Helen Thomas yesterday, but have been busy. This is what we've been waiting for, somebody who actually puts the old moonbat in her place. Why she is still in the front row of these press conferences is beyond me. She's officially retired as a journalist and is now a sydicated columnist, so she neither deserves nor belongs there. Anywho, this is exactly what I expected from Tony Snow; it's a beautiful sight to behold. If you get a chance to catch the entire press conference on C-SPAN, it's well worth watching.

God Bless, Tony.

Good For A Laugh

I missed this Screedblog from James Lileks earlier, and it's pretty funny. It's his version of what the letter from Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. It begins:

Dear Infidel Crusader Zionist sock-puppet Saudi-lackey depoiler of Mesopotamia woman-touching pigdog fiendish (293 words excised) Shah-licking son of a toad’s offal: I trust this finds you well. I have much on my mind, and have taken the pen to unburden my breast. I have enclosed a self-addressed stamped envelope should you wish to reply.

Lileks is always good for some levity when it's needed.

BDS At Work

Some goofball adjuct professor from Boston College is resigning because Condoleezza Rice has been invited to give the commencement speech this year. He starts off by letting us know that he's not resigning in protest because he's against the Iraq War, it's something much deeper:

Many members of the faculty and student body already have voiced their objection to the invitation, arguing that Rice's actions as secretary of state are inconsistent with the broader humanistic values of the university and the Catholic and Jesuit traditions from which those values derive.

But I am not writing this letter simply because of an objection to the war against Iraq. My concern is more fundamental. Simply put, Rice is a liar.

He then he goes on to talk about... the Iraq War:

She has lied to the American people knowingly, repeatedly, often extravagantly over the past five years, in an effort to justify a pathologically misguided foreign policy.

The public record of her deceits is extensive. During the ramp-up to the Iraq war, she made 29 false or misleading public statements concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and links to Al Qaeda, according to a congressional investigation by the House Committee on Government Reform.

He then rambles on about all of the supposed lying by the Secretary and finishes up with this:

Honestly, Father Leahy, what lessons do you expect her to impart to impressionable seniors?

That hard work in the corporate sector might gain them a spot on the board of Chevron? That they, too, might someday have an oil tanker named after them? That it is acceptable to lie to the American people for political gain? [...]

I would like to apologize to my students and prospective students. I would also urge them to investigate the words and actions of Rice, and to exercise their own First Amendment rights at her speech.

To have an oil tanker named after them? And they let this guy teach college students? If I went to BC, I'd want my money back. Also note how he exhorts his students to exercise their First Amendment rights at her speech, obviously inciting them to protest.

Hey professor, I have an idea. How about letting the mass majority of students and their families that are there to enjoy their graduation enjoy their graduation? A graduation ceremony is neither the time nor place to make it all about you and your politics. Grow up!

UPDATE: No sooner then I finished posting this I see that Michele Malkin has already posted about it as well (you'll have to scroll down.) I guess great minds DO think alike.

Just What The Doctor Ordered

I've said all along that Tony Snow would be a great White House Press Secretary, and if this is any indication of what's to come, he won't disappoint.

Go Tony Go!

Well, Duh

Howard Fineman writes today that Karl Rove (cue Darth Vader music) has a new strategy to help Republicans win election this fall, and it shocking, SHOCKING I TELL YOU: Fight Back.

The way I read the recent moves of Karl Rove & Co., they are preparing to wage war the only way open to them: not by touting George Bush, Lord knows, but by waging a national campaign to paint a nightmarish picture of what a Democratic Congress would look like, and to portray that possibility, in turn, as prelude to the even more nightmarish scenario: the return of a Democrat (Hillary) to the White House.

Rather than defend Bush, Rove will seek to rally the Republicans’ conservative grassroots by painting Democrats as the party of tax increases, gay marriage, secularism and military weakness. That’s where the national message money is going to be spent. [...]

Then there is the attention being paid — and it’s just starting — to obscure Democratic characters such as Rep. John Conyers of Michigan. As of now, only political junkies know that Conyers, an African-American and old-school liberal from Detroit, would become chairman of the Judiciary Committee if the Democrats regain control of the House. Few know that Conyers has expressed interest in holding hearings on the impeachment of the president.

But before this election season is over, Republican and conservative voters are going to know a lot about Conyers. To hear the GOP tell it, the impeachment of the president will be the number one priority if Conyers gets his say, which of course Rep. Nancy Pelosi will be only too happy to give him. The aim will be to rally The GOP Base with talk of a political Apocalypse.

I've written here in the past that despite Republicans short comings, a Democrat controlled Congress would be disasterous. They've made their agenda pretty clear that if they do win back control of Congress it will be nothing but two years of going after Bush with a vengence. They've also made it pretty clear that, well yes, they do want to raise taxes, push gay marriage, secularism, and bow at the mantel of the U.N. That Rove and Co. look to exploit this weakness is seen by Fineman as unseemly, apparently unlike the constant bashing the Dems pile upon Bush and the Republicans.

I don't believe you can win an election simply by not being the other guy, you have to have an agenda and some fresh ideas. There is still plenty of time for the Republicans to get their act together and show they've learned their lesson. Along with getting their act together and going forward with a positive agenda, there is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing out the inherent weakness of the oppositions "ideas." This is something Fineman fails to grasp.

Rummy Speaks

A fascinating interview by Hugh Hewitt with Donald Rumsfield (via Radioblogger.) First:

HH: Is the American media doing a good job of covering the war in all of its facets?

DR: Oh, goodness gracious. You know, I'm not a judge and a jury. That's up for the American people to decide, and you know where they rank the media.

HH: Well, transformation has been a watch word of your tenure. But has the Pentagon's focus on the information war that's aimed at the American public undergone a similar transformation?

DR: Well, it has to. I can't say that it has, but there's no question. This is the first war that's ever been conducted, in the 21st Century, in an era of these new media realities, where you have the internet and 24 hour talk radio and news and bloggers and video cameras and digital cameras and instant communications worldwide. And the enemy understands that they can't win a battle out on the battlefield in Iraq or Afghanistan. The only place they can win a battle is in Washington, D.C. So they have media committees, and they get up in the morning and figure out how they're going to manipulate the American media, and they do a very skillful job.

HH: Against that backdrop, that's really what I wanted to focus on. Are the pressers like the sort you just concluded, ten minute interviews and an occasional Sunday show, sufficient for you and the military to get across not only the good news, but the bad news, the challenges, the strategy? Are you using last war techniques in the new war?

DR: To a certain extent, we are still using the old 20th century techniques. And we're trying to figure them out and adjust them, and adapt them to the 21st Century. But it's painfully slow. People get set in their ways, and it's a difficult thing to do. We do provide, the Pentagon does, an enormous amount of information. There's someone briefing at the Pentagon, somewhere in the world, every day. And there are people providing information to people in a variety of different ways: through our website, through the Pentagon channel, through radio and television and print media. But it is still basically, I would guess, 80% 20th Century, and maybe 20% 21st Century.

HH: You've got people like Col. Austin Bay down in Austin, Texas, you've got Mudville Gazette, a bunch of bloggers, you've got Specialist Claude Flowers down at Centcom. They're all fighting the new media battle. Are any of those inside the E-ring, close to the control of actually the message machine?

DR: I don't know how to answer that. First of all, the truth is, and it's embarrassing to confess this, that I suppose I work about 13 hours a day. And I'll bet you that 12 1/2, or 12 3/4 of those 13 hours a day, I spend doing things instead of thinking about how I communicate, and what the message ought to be, and fighting the enemy on their level, against their media committees, and their active efforts at disinformation. And I probably ought to spend, and we here in the Department, ought to spend more time thinking about those messages, and how we can counteract the lies, because they are enormously successful. They can put out a lie, and then we're asked the question is that true. And we can know we think it's not true, but we have to be honest, and we have to be accurate. So we then have to spend two or three days trying to find out what the truth is, before we can rebut the lie. Well, the lie's been around the world 15 times by the time we even get our boots on.

And then this:

HH: Mr. Secretary, do you think that American can lose this war?

DR: Oh, sure. There's no way we can lose it on the battlefield. The only place we can lose it is if we lose our nerve, and if we decide that it's just too tough, and we're going to toss in the towel, that the dire consequences for the world, for the region, for the Iraqi people, for the Afghan people, and for the American people, are so serious, that the thought of it is just unacceptable.

In the first quote Rumsfield admits that we're not doing a good job of combating the terrorists in the media. Then, in the second quote he says the only way we can lose this war is here at home. That doesn't sound good to me.

If the only way we can lose this war is here at home, why isn't the Pentagon doing more on that front? Institutionalization? I like Rumsfield and think he has a very tough battle on his hands in trying to modernize the military to confront Islamofascism. However, this simply will not do. If the only battlefront on which we can lose is here at home I would suggest that the Secretary get busy fighting it.

Dick Morris Is All Wet

Dick Morris writes in The Hill that in order for Republicans to have any chance of remaining the Majority party this fall they must start to act like Democrats. This is complete nonsense. Here is a taste of the strategy Dick Morris suggests:

The only way for a Republican to survive in 2006 is to run like a Democrat. The GOP line on oil companies totally misses the fact that voters see a vast conspiracy by big oil companies to manipulate the price to feather their own nests. All talk of supply increase or demand decrease is quite beside the point for the average voter. The issue is whether or not you are part of the conspiracy to fix and raise prices.

The Republican position on climate change — that it isn’t happening or, if it is, it’s inevitable — also completely misses the views of the average voter who sees hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes and such as the consequence of years of air pollution.

The GOP wisdom on Iraq also fails to address the underlying isolationism that is catalyzing opposition to the war. Instead of searching for a decent way out, most voters are just disgusted with the party that landed us in this no-win situation.

Taken together, the only way for a Republican to survive 2006 is to shed himself of his party ideology and run like a Democrat, using the entire playing field — left, center and right — to address voter concerns.

This is absurd. The reason Republicans are supposedly (I'm not convinced yet) in danger of losing their Majority status is exactly because they have been acting like Democrats lately.

While Dick Morris may be a brilliant pollster, he's absolutely clueless about conservative Republicans. If the Republicans do the exact opposite of what Morris suggest, they should be okay come November.

UPDATE: John McIntyre of Real Clear Politics seems to be on the same wavelength as me.

Well, it looks like things are getting back to normal in New Orleans:

Man Shot Dead On Bourbon Street

(Via Drudge)

Welcome To The Party Pal

Richard Cohen of the Washington Post seems to have been caught off guard by the reaction to his recent column in which he criticized Steven Colbert's performance at the White House Correspondents' dinner. Cohen had the audacity to point out what many people believed to be obvious, that Colbert wasn't funny. I like Stephen Colbert and find him to be mildly humorous, but having watched his performance at the event live on C-SPAN and also found it wanting.

Cohen's criticism brought down the wrath of the left wing kooks upon his head and this seems to have taken him by surprise. I find it interesting that somebody such a Cohen could have been so insulated from the fact that the left-wing in the country has simply lost it's mind; infected, perhaps terminally, with BDS.

Well, to Richard Cohen I quote Bruce Willis from the movie Die Hard, "Welcome to the party pal."

Has Been For At Least 30 Years

Keith Richards near death that is.

Look Up

Attention all nerds! Tomorrow is Astronomy Day 2006. Take a few minutes tomorrow night to go outside and look up (even if you're not a nerd.) By 9pm EST Jupiter will be well into the southeast sky while Mars and Saturn will be setting in the west. Just have a look around, it's awfully pretty.

If you're more ambitious, here is a link to an article from Sky & Telescope which includes a search engine to locate an Astonomy Club or Planetarium in your area.

The Kennedy Saga Continues

A few thoughts about this have gone through my mind.

First and foremost is the police cover-up. I fear that in the story surrounding Patrick Kennedy's accident, Patrick Kennedy will become the story, and not the special treatment he recieved.

Second, why did he first give details about the night and then turn around and say he doesn’t remember anything? Doesn't make sense.

And third, I actually feel sympothic for the guy - he’s Ted Kenney’s son for crying out loud! If that didn’t drive you to booze, drugs, or depression, what would?

I Blame Bush

"New Storm on Jupiter Hints at Climate Change"

(Via Drudge)

PsyOps For Zarqawi

It appears that the military is pulling out one of the biggest weapons it can use against an Islamist: humiliation. Video discovered in recent raids show that Zarqawi may not be the most proficient weapons specialist. And as if that weren't bad enough, the video also shows him wearing sneakers!

Now if we can get al Jazeera to air it.

(Via Fox News)

UPDATE: Lots of stuff over at Hot Air on this one. Zarqawi has been in the news a lot lately and there's been noise about us being close to getting him. I never get too excited about those reports, instead preferring to wait for the actual capture or killing, but boy there is a lot of smoke lately. Let's all hope this scum bag is in custody soon, it'd be much better than killing him -- not that I'd shed a tear about that though.

John Bolton For President

I have to admit that I've always kind of liked Dennis Kucinich, the man. He seems like an affable, honest man, and I have nothing against him personally. Now, Dennis Kucinich the politician is a nut! He is way out there.

Here is a brief exchange between himself and John Bolton, via Expose the Left, where he is asking Bolton if he has read an article by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. Bolton correctly, in my opinion, describes Sy's work as "fiction."

John Bolton is a plain spoken man, we need more men like him in today's world.

Dems In Control? Lord Help Us!

For those of us that are frustrated with the direction of the GOP right now and are contemplating sitting at home this November to "send a message," I'd like to remind you of what you would have to look forward to. This is from todays Philadelphia Inquirer:

In recent months, though, impeachment calls have gained a new seriousness - and wider public support - and for good reason: This November, a shift of only 15 House seats would give Democrats control of the House and of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.), who would become Judiciary Committee chair, has already submitted a bill calling for an investigation into impeachable crimes, and would certainly welcome an impeachment bill.

More important, over the last five years, Bush has become the Willie Sutton of constitutional violators. While the impeachment of President Bill Clinton for lying about sex was a case of frivolous political harassment, this president's many "high crimes and misdemeanors" pose such a threat to basic freedoms, and to the system of checks and balances, that not to impeach would be irresponsible.

While Republicans may be rudderless right now, the thought of John Conyers heading the Judiciary Committe is down right scary. These people are so completely infected the BDS they would run this country into the ground in pursuit of their Great White Whale, George W. Bush.

Read the article to get a feel for what their arguments for impeachment are, it's right out of the Daily Kos diaries: lying us into war, trampling upon the Bill of Rights, abuse of power, war crimes, etc. You name it, and it's there.

Patronize Anheuser-Busch

The wife and I visited Sea World (Orlando) this past weekend. Before the Shamu show started, Augusta Busch addressed the crowd via a huge video screen. He paid tribute to the men and women of the Armed Forces who fight to keep this country free and encouraged everybody to support them. This invoked as very spirited and sustained applause from the audience, but the best was still to come. As the applause died, a Sea World trainer appeared live on stage and ask all service members of the United States, United Kingdom, and any of our allies from around the world to please stand and be recognized for their service. The audience roared with approval as members throughout the crowd stood. It was a thing of beauty. My wife had to wipe a few tears from her eyes.

This was clearly something that Anhesuer-Busch did not have to do and considering the large international audience that visits their parks, I believe it was above and beyond what most corporations would ever consider doing in such an environment.

Anheuser-Busch not only has the King of Beers, but they're a king in the industry when it comes to marketing as well, and few can top some of the their post-9/11 commercials such as the Clydesdales paying tribute to the fallen towers or the troops being greeted by spontaneous applause while walking through an airport terminal. This display at Sea World showed me that Anheuser not only talks-the-talk, but they walk-the-walk as well.

I shall continue to patronize them at every opportunity and hope you will as well.

I Know What's Best!

There are many reasons that I don't particularly care for Sen. McCain, but his Campaign Finance Reform Bill is at the top of my list. I also hold President Bush responsible for signing the bill into law as he expected the Supreme Court to do his dirty work for him by striking it down. Didn't happen, and now we're stuck with a horrible piece of legislation that infringes on one of our most precious and fundamental rights: Freedom of Speech.

Today, the Examiner takes Sen. McCain to task for some comments he made recently. It begins in part:

James Madison, the prime mover behind the U.S. Constitution, and his colleagues among the Founders rightly feared arrogant men like Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., so they limited the central government to a few, well-defined powers. As further protection, Madison and the first Congress approved the First Amendment to the Constitution to protect forever the right of every American to freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition.

Why do we think of the Arizona senator when arrogance is mentioned? Dictionary.com defines arrogance as “overbearing pride evidenced by a superior attitude toward inferiors.” McCain incited a blogstorm Friday with this comment, which epitomizes political arrogance:

“I know that money corrupts … I would rather have a clean government than one where, quote, First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government.”

Sen. McCain is indeed a very arrogant man, and must be kept as far away from the Oval Office as possible.

Conservatives Making Ground?

I've never really cared much for Robert Novak, but there's no denying he's an insider with lots of connections. This column (via Real Clear Politics) is some good insider baseball stuff and it seems to show conservatives within Congress may be getting the upper hand. Lead by Sen. Tom Coburn (whom I love) in the Senate and Rep. Dennis Hasert and Majority Lead John Boehner in the House, establishment types such as Sen. Thad Cochran and Rep. Jerry Lewis are being called to the carpet for their spending and are losing the battle:

Terrified by possible loss of their majorities in November, Republicans in Congress may have turned a corner in casting off the tyranny of the appropriators over the spending process. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert exerted his will, and newly installed Majority Leader John Boehner registered his first triumph. In scoring his first floor victory over an earmark, Coburn showed he is more than a nuisance freshman senator and, allied with Sen. John McCain, a force to be reckoned with.[...]

On Thursday, Coburn proposed to eliminate $15 million for "seafood promotion strategy." McCain told the Senate: "Let me save the American taxpayers $125 million right now by telling all Americans now to eat seafood. Eat seafood. It is good for you." When Coburn rejected Cochran's call for a voice vote, the normally calm Appropriations chairman in a fury made a non-debatable tabling motion to kill Coburn's proposal. The astounding outcome was a 51 to 44 bipartisan victory for Coburn and McCain, following years of failure in such initiatives.

More please.

World's Smallest Violin

Poor, poor, Susan Sarandon. In this short article she whines about how "horrible" she and her family has been treated by the media (huh?) and public. Well friggin' boo-hoo-hoo. Welcome to real, grown-up world, where if you're going to express your opinions in the public square you'd better be able to give as good as you get. And, does this make any sense?:

And I don't think that I thought that I'd really never work again. But when there is nobody else, when you look out on the field and everybody is quiet and they're all looking away and nobody's saying anything, it's a really scary place to be.

What in the hell is she talking about? What a dunce.

Defending A Southerner

This from John Derbyshire is interesting. It's not often that you'll here somebody defend George Wallace, who's been so vilified through the years. Here's some of what Wikipedia has to say:

George Corley Wallace (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998) was an American politician who was elected Governor of Alabama as a Democrat four times (1962, 1970, 1974 and 1982) and ran for U.S. President four times as well (in 1964, 1968, 1972 and 1976). He is best known for his racist attitudes, for which he later repented, during American desegregation.

While I don't pretend to know a lot about George Wallace and am far to young to remember anything about the times (I was born six years after his famous standing in the doorway), was George Wallace really a racist or was he simply a populist politician reflecting the wishes of his constituents at the time?

Mark Steyn: Genius

In a discussion with Hugh Hewitt, Mark Steyn nails it as usual:

I think it [the Administration] does seem to me exhausted. And in a strange way, a lot of the things that he's [President Bush] getting into trouble with over the moment, like the $3 a gas pump, is, I think, a reflection of...it doesn't even have the sort of strength of will to drag its own party with him. I mean, I thought the Senate bill, that the Senate Republicans proposed on energy, is completely preposterous. If the Republicans cave in on energy, which is a national security issue, and which is something where the Democrats are even more witless than usual, because they're not in favor of any kind of energy. If you were to say we should all go back to wood-fired steam trains on the Atchison, Topeka and the Sante Fe, they'd say oh, no, sorry. We're opposed to logging. We can't even have that. They're opposed to all kinds of energy. And if you've got a Democrat Party that's not serious, you've got a Republican Party that is frivolous in Congress more than half the time, then it's no wonder the administration is just exhausted.

All, of course, is still not lost. I think the solutions to a lot of the problems the Republicans are facing now are fairly simple (secure the borders, open domestic drilling, repeal the boutique blends requirments, etc..) they just need to return to their conservative roots. They're not going to win any converts by acting like Democrats, but could win back a lot of support if they started to govern like conservatives. If the House can pull the Senate back into line, there's still plenty of time to right the ship (pun intended.)

Are These Republicans?

What in the hell is happening with the Republicans in Washington? In response to high gas prices they want $100 checks for everybody, anti-price gouging protection, repealing tax incentives for oil companies, higher fuel economy standards, investigations into oil company profits? This is absurd. With behavior like this, I can't tell any difference between the two party's.

They'd better get their act together or they're heading for a train wreck in November.

UPDATE: Powerline has the details with thoughts on the matter as well.

Watch For Heads to Explode!

If this is true, the White House press corp will go nuts!

I've always liked Tony Snow. He's very smart, well versed in all things political, and has a calming demeanor. But if he is named the White House press secretary, the press will go nuts for one reason and one reason only: Fox News. They absolutely loathe Fox News and everything they believe it stands for. They hate the fact that Fox News continues to enjoy unrivaled success in cable news as what they perceive to be a conservative news outlet. I don't believe there is any doubt that Fox's news commentary is dominated by center-right hosts, but their news reporting is honest and fair, something that cannot be said of their nearest rivals CNN and MSNBC.

Strategically, I'm not sure if it is the best move because even though the press corp is hostile towards this White House, a little outreach wouldn't hurt. This is practically a thumb in the eye to the MSM. I used to be of the mind that you could basically write off trying to work with them because of their inherent hostility, but that strategy obviously hasn't worked on Scott McClennon who basically stonewalled them at every corner and provided as little information as possible -- somtimes even muddling the issues even more.

If Tony Snow is appointed, there is not doubt it will be fun. We shall see.

Update: Hotline has some of the details behind the possibility of Tony becoming press secretary. In part, they say:

Fox Newser Tony Snow is said by Republicans familiar with the negotiations to have asked for guaranteed access to the president's ear and to an unusually large degree of latitude to reconfigure the WH press operation. That pleases the new chief of staff, who wants to relegitimize the press podium in the Brady briefing room. But Snow, not content to be a herald, also wants near-complete control over what he says from the podium, be it bromides, platitudes or substance.

This would be good. Tony needs to be able to freelance a bit from the podium. I trust him, cut him loose.

Rewriting History, Again

I found this article by Arthur Schlesinger in today's Washington Post interesting. Most of it is pretty boring and not very noteworthy. The point, as best I can make it, is that the President is a bad man and basically we should do nothing in the War of Terror. What I found most interesting is that Mr. Schlesinger simply breezes past the Cold War as if it was won through "containment plus deterrence."

It was lucky that JFK was determined to get the missiles out peacefully, because only decades later did we discover that the Soviet forces in Cuba had tactical nuclear weapons and orders to use them to repel a U.S. invasion. This would have meant a nuclear exchange. Instead, JFK used his own thousand days to give the American University speech, a powerful plea to Americans as well as to Russians to reexamine "our own attitude -- as individuals and as a nation -- for our attitude is as essential as theirs." This was followed by the limited test ban treaty. It was compatible with the George Kennan formula -- containment plus deterrence -- that worked effectively to avoid a nuclear clash. [...]

But our Cold War presidents kept to the Kennan formula of containment plus deterrence, and we won the Cold War without escalating it into a nuclear war.

Notice how easy is was to face down the Soviets during the Cuban Missile Crisis and ultimately win the Cold War? A simple speech and a policy of "containment plus deterrence." Gee, if only it was that easy.

Of course Mr.Schlesinger fails to mention that the policy of "containment plus deterrence" got us nowhere with the Soviets under Kennedy (Cuban Missle Crisis, Bay of Pigs, Vietnam-Beginning), Johnson (Vietnam-Middle), Nixon (Vietnam-Defeat), Ford, and Carter (Afghanistan). Only when Ronald Reagan aggressively confronted to Soviet Empire were they defeated.

Of course lofty speeches and wishful thinking may make liberal intellectuals feel superior, but the reality says otherwise. Just as President Reagan won the Cold War by confronting what truly was an Evil Empire, President Bush and future president's can only win the War on Terror by aggressively confronting the evil ideology of the Islamists.

Culture of Corruption

Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-West Virginia), the top Democrat on the House Ethics Committee is stepping down while his own questionable financial behavior is investigated:

The top Democrat on the House ethics committee, Alan Mollohan, will leave the panel _ at least temporarily _ while he defends his own financial conduct, Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said Friday.[...]

The Wall Street Journal reported two weeks ago that Mollohan steered millions of dollars to nonprofit groups in his district _ with much of the money going to organizations run by people who contribute to the lawmaker's campaigns.

I look forward to seeing this on the front page of the New York Times tomorrow and as well as the lead story on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC... NOT!

I said from the very beginning that it was a bad idea for the Democrats to pursue this "Culture of Corruption" strategy. When it comes to corruption in the House, it's a bipartisan issue. There's plenty to go around and it most certainly cuts across party lines.

This Is Lame

This from CNN:

Immigration arrests 9 IFCO bosses along with 1,000 workers

The Bush administration unveiled Thursday what it said is a new strategy aimed at companies employing illegal immigrants, illustrating it with a crackdown on the German-based firm IFCO Systems.

So NOW they're going to get tough on illegal immigration. What a blatent, ham-handed political stunt. Very sloppy.

Just seems to prove that nobody in Washington is going to do anything about this and the White House still has a tin ear.

Sad or Sick?

I never really paid much attention to Cindy Sheehan. I've always felt sorry for her as it's pretty clear that the lose of her son drove her to insanity. Kind of a freakish sideshow. Anyway, this story from Gateway Pundit illustrates that not only has she gone mad, she's willing to lie about anything to make her country and our military look bad.

Thanks A Lot Harry

So let me see if I've got this straight. Harry Reid says that the President is a multilateralist concerning Iran, and this is a bad thing. And he, and the democrats, say that Bush is a unilateralist concerning Iraq, and this is a bad thing. Wow, those democrats sure know how to stick to their principles. Oh, and as if that weren't enough, he tells Iran that we're too weak to do anything about their nuclear ambitions. Thanks Harry, it's great to see your confidence in our military capabilities are so high while simultaneously instilling confidence to our enemies. Please continue to speak more, the Republicans can use all the help they can get right now.

Speaking Of Which He Knows

John Kerry that is. I received one of his fundraiser emails supporting Iraq War veteran Tammy Duckworth. Here's a snippet:

You and I both know how Rove-style Republicans treat veterans who speak the truth. They think that men and women who dare to speak up somehow forfeit their right to be honored for their brave service to America. And they've proven time and time again that they won't hesitate to distort a veteran's record, to challenge a veteran's courage, or even to question a veteran's patriotism.

Kerry is right about one thing, he knows something about bad mouthing the troops. Here he is speaking about our troops in Vietnam:

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

It's obviously a subject he well versed in.

Portgate Continues

The Mudville Gazette has an interesting post on Portgate with quotes from the Financial Times and Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times. Also, here is some anecdotal support from Lt. Smash at Indepundit.

I am now in support of the deal and believe that the 45 days agreed to with Congress by the Administration to review the deal is a good idea. That will give the Administration time to bring many Republicans back into the fold and make the case to the American people (mostly his base though) that this is not bad policy.

It seems to me that caution, when first learning about this, was prudent. Instead we saw a lot of hysteria and demagoguery from both sides. For the Republicans is was out of the idea of an Arab country "buying American ports." For the Democrats is was of a political opportunity to appear stronger on security than the President. And for good measure the subject was port security which, to their credit, they've been bitching about for years. Now, however, people are beginning to learn that Dubai is not "buy American ports," nor are they exactly Saudi Arabia.

The Democrats won't budge an inch because they've staked out they're ground and they believe this issue is a winner. Look for Republicans to move back into line as the debate ensues and other than the fact that Dubai is an Arab (Muslim) county, there's no reason to block the deal. In the end I say the President wins this one.

If nothing else, perhaps it's an opportunity for all of us learn a little more about the Middle East and places like Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and the U.A.E.

Update: Jim Geraghty says don't believe everything you here from the Democrats (not surprising) and even some Republicans (sadly.) He doesn't mince words:

The UAE is, in its actions right now, an ally. The Democratic party as a whole appears hell-bent on scuttling this deal, and ruining relations with this ally. For all that party’s relentless talk about the U.S. needing allies and strong partnerships, they will urinate all over one of our comrades in order to score points against the president.

However, this is the same party urging us to continue sending aid to the Palestinians, where it can be used by the new government of Hamas.

The Democratic Party would humiliate, alienate, and punish our allies while sending financial aid to terrorists and sucking up to our enemies. Do not buy into the line that they are pushing.

Ouch! Read the whole thing.

Remembering Hereos

Let us not forget the heroes who have given all. Remembering Chad Gonsalves and Cpl. Rusty Washam (via Gateway Pundit.) Thank God for men like them and their families.

Kennedy Is Reminded He's A Murderer

This is great. A student yells "Remember Chappaquiddick!" at a Ted Kennedy speech. I've always realished the idea of being able to do that if ever given the opportunity. I love the part where he is confronted by a teacher and is asked, "Can't you forgive him after all these years?", and he replies, "No, he killed somebody." Bless him.

RIP Mary Jo Kopechne.

U.S. Ports and the U.A.E.

When I first heard about the deal with the U.A.E. to manage major ports within the United States, I caught a whiff of hysteria that turned me off. I was listening to our local morning radio guy in Orlando, Pat Campbell, and he was livid about the deal. He was going on about Saudi Arabia and comparing it to turning over air traffic control to them on September 12, 2001, and on, and on, and on. I couldn't help but think about everything I'd heard about what a good ally the U.A.E. had been since 9/11, so I figured there was a lot more to this. It turns out I was right.

I still don't know what to make of the deal because, quite frankly, we don't know exactly what we're talking about. There are great discussions going on with the likes of Michelle Malkin and Jim Geraghty talking about the issue. We also have excellent editorials from the Wall Street Journal and Washington Times, for and against, respectively.

That aside, in the end I have the feeling this may well turn out a bit like the NSA flap. Democrats, in their zeal to nail the President and prove their national security credentials will once again over reach. When the details become clear, it may very well be completely overblown and they'll be forced once again to move on to the next "scandal" to try and bring the President down. BDS makes them do crazy things.

Speaking of the President I've heard some rumbling from conservatives that perhaps this president really is arrogant and can't admit a mistake. If they're criticizing the Administrations handling of the deal, then they have a legitimate beef. But, if they're criticizing the President for sticking to his guns and threatening a veto, then they're wrong. I find his steadfastness admirable and reassuring.

Everybody was stunned yesterday when the President came out and strongly defended the deal. People were surprised because it was the incorrect thing to do politically. But we're talking about national security, and when it comes to that I'll give the President great deference on the matter, he's earned it.

Who? Us?

The MSM's spiral into irrelevancy continues. According to Drudge, Newsweek and Time will continue to beat the dead horse that is Quailgate in their upcoming issues.

Here's Newsweek's explanation:

"The reason we ultimately decided to stick with a cover is not because of the hunting incident itself-although we did turn up some new details that you might not have read elsewhere-but because of what it says about the mysterious world of the most powerful vice president of recent times."

And Dana Milbank:

"Of course they succeed," Milbank said of Bush aides. "The press always looks awful. They will once again make us look awful."

And CBS White House correspondent Bill Plante:

"The vice president and the White House have both used the constant press coverage of this story as a wedge [...] It plays to the prejudices of the people who are predisposed not to like us, and it's one way to distract attention from what happened."

No, it's not their fault that they come across as arrogant, narcissistic, self-absorbed pinheads. It's Bush's spin machine at fault! And they say President Bush lives in a bubble.

Priorities In Life

A year ago today I lost one of my best friends, Glenn Loadholtz, to an automobile accident. I've never really considered myself the type to have a best friend, just lots of good friends. Glenn was truly one of my best friends. I can't remember when I met him or exactly how we became friends, it just seems like it always was.

Right out of high school we went to a Miami Dolphins game at his insistence. He was a guy that loved to take off and do something fun. He knew how to live life. So I borrowed by sisters' car, and off we went. We had no idea exactly where to go or how long it would take to get there, we just knew we had two tickets and we were going. Glenn taught me how to go with the flow and enjoy myself. After that first trip it turned into a yearly tradition and we threw in a weekend in the Keys each trip for good measure.

I have a lot of fond memories from throughout my life, and Glenn was responsible for a lot of them. Of course I never really realized this until he was gone, but his death reminded me of what a lucky man I was to have him as a friend.

Tonight I'm going to enjoy a good cigar, a beer, remember how good I've got it, and appreciate everything the good Lord has blessed me with. I have a wife whom I love very much, a family that is always there for me, and friends I feel blessed to call my friends. And to top it all off I live in the greatest country man has ever known.

Glenn was taken from us far to early at the age of 35 and just five weeks shy of his wedding date with his true love that he had searched so long for. I don't understand why he had to go so soon, but it's something I have to accept and am grateful for the time we did have together as friends.

Thanks for everything, Glenn. I miss you a lot, but know someday we'll see each other again.

David Gregory Is A First Class Jerk

All you have to do is read this:

Why was the White House relying on a Texas rancher to get the word of Cheney's hunting accident out over the weekend, asked Gregory, accusing McClellan of "ducking and weaving.''

"“David, hold on... the cameras aren't on right now,'' McClellan replied. "You can do this later.''

"Don't accuse me of trying to pose to the cameras,'' the newsman said, his voice rising somewhat. "Don’t be a jerk to me personally when I’m asking you a serious question.''

"You don't have to yell,'' McClellan said.

"I will yell,'' said Gregory, pointing a finger at McCellan at his dais. "If you want to use that podium to try to take shots at me personally, which I don’t appreciate, then I will raise my voice, because that’s wrong.’’

‘’Calm down, Dave, calm down,'' said McClellan, remaining calm throughout the exchange.

"I'll calm down when I feel like calming down,'' Greogry said. "You answer the question.'

"I have answered the question,'' said McClellan, who had maintained that the vice president's office was in charge of getting the information out and worked with the ranch owner to do that. "I'm sorry you're getting all riled up about.''

"I am riled up,'' Gregory said, "because you’re not answering the question,''

McClellan insisted he understood that reporters deserve an answer.

"I think you have legitimate questions to ask,'' the press secretary said. "The vice president’s office was the one that took the lead to get this information out… I don’t know what else to tell you... That's my answer.''

This is the type of "reporting" that is praised by many on the left as tough, probing, hard hitting reporting, calling the Administration out for it's LIES! LIES I tell you!

Jeezz Louise, all of this over a hunting accident.

Let Us Not Forget

I have a confession to make: I'm a big sap.

As I was surfing around, reading the latest, dissecting the news, I remembered why we're having these discussions of cartoons, NSA surveillance, the Iraq War, and everything in between: 9/11

Time heals all wounds, but it also dulls memories. Sometimes I think we all need a little reminding.

As The (Muslim) World Turns

The Danish Cartoon drama continues (who ever thought you could have drama over cartoons?). It's now becoming obvious that the controversy has been mostly contrived and fanned by radicals with State backing. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said as much today. None of this is really surprising, but the debate I find interesting is between those who are arguing for freedom of the press and western values and those who believe that it was an irresponsible action and has only handed the radicals more propaganda.

I rarely find myself in disagreement with Hugh Hewitt, but this is one of those instances. He has argued from the beginning that it was a mistake. He had a discussion with Joe Carter, Michael Medved, and Dennis Prager on the issue and it's very interesting -- check it out at Radio Blogger.

By the way, I heard an interview with Pat Buchanan on Sean Hannity this afternoon and Pat has taken Hugh's side in this argument. I think that's all the proof I need that I'm on the right side of this issue.