Monday, November 01, 2004

The Tinfoil Apocalypse Prelude: And Who Do You Think You Are? Einstein?

Remember "The Greatest Intelligence Failure In History"?

The core is as follows:

First let's look at a description of one of the universally acclaimed great Presidents. We'll call him X:
X was also an outstanding example of a leader who, although not in any full sense an intellectual (he was a book collector rather than a book reader, and his Harvard grades were of a mediocrity that suggest that today he might have had difficulty in gaining entry to that august institution), ...

Sounds a lot like W's story at Yale, no? So he was easily duped by someone of clearly superior intelligence -- call him Y -- into spending massively to counter a threat that turned out to be nearly non-existant. X was duped so badly that he spent somewhere north of $25 billion on the fiasco.Folks, this is easy for anyone who has even basic Google skills and understands the rudiments of inflation adjustment.

Can you tell me who X and Y were?

Can you tell me what he (and his successor) did that was the direct result of what was actually the greatest intelligence failure of all time?

And for another hint as well as extra bonus points: Was there a genzai bakudan? Or not? Was that an intelligence failure too? Do you think we'll ever know for sure?
As you've certainly figured out by now, X was Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Y was Albert Einstein.But Einstein "mislead" FDR:
With the 1938 discovery of nuclear fission, Germany had a two-year head start on developing nuclear energy; the Americans' fear was that the Nazis would shape it into a weapon of mass destruction. Germany also had in its grasp two materials critical to its development -- heavy water and uranium. They were available in abundance only in Norway and Czechoslovakia, both under Nazi control.

In August 1939, Leo Szilard and fellow Hungarian physicists Eugene Wigner and Edward Teller urged Albert Einstein to sign a letter they had drafted for President Roosevelt. Einstein's letter noted that the work of Fermi and Szilard "leads me to expect that the element uranium may be turned into a new and important source of energy in the near future." President Roosevelt responded by appointing an Advisory Committee on Uranium. The Office of Scientific Research and Development was established on June 28, 1941, under the direction of Vannevar Bush, to develop atomic energy.
But in the end, the Alsos project determined that they might have spent more looking for German nukes than Hitler had spent on developing them:
In the end, ALSOS concluded that the Allies had surpassed the German atomic bomb effort monumentally by 1942. Compared to the Manhattan Project, one of the largest scientific endeavors of all time, the German project was considerably underfunded and understaffed, and it is questionable whether Germany would have had the resources or isolation which were required for the Allies to produce such a weapon. Goudsmit, in a monograph published two years after the end of the war, further concluded that a principal reason for the failure of the German project was that science could not flourish under totalitarianism -- an argument seemingly rebutted by the Soviet Union's development of a nuclear weapon by 1949. The Soviets, however, benefited from Stalin's extensive spy network, which included many top scientists in Los Alamos working to prevent the United States from holding a nuclear monopoly over the world.
And this provides our initial insight into intelligence failure.

And the genzai bakudan? It's possible that the Japanese may have been closer to nuclear weapons than the Germans were! In fact there's a report of unclear reliability that they actually exploded a bomb -- just a little too late...

So was Roosevelt a dimwit like W who screwed up royally and should have focused the war effort on Japan? Or one of the great Presidents?

Everything you know may well be wrong.

The Stakes Are High

VERY, VERY HIGH.

W For President -- Of The Miners

Yes of course! I voted for W last Friday! Surely you don't think I'd take my chances with tomorrow's blockade of Democratic lawyers do you?

If you haven't voted Bush yet, please get out there and do so as if your life depended on it -- because it does.

And please forget the ludicrous arguments about how Bush is a recruiting tool for terrorists. By that argument Hiroshima was a really bad idea because it made the Japanese really, really, really mad.

Yes it did. But they were too shocked with too many dead to do anything about it. Ruthless barbarians will only surrender when they are confronted with the only language they understand. And that language by definition -- and sadly -- is utter devastation.

The other argument that I have been warming up to put to rest is the loony left myth that if only we will surrender Israel to them then the Islamists will leave us alone.

This is utter and complete garbage. As I recently posted, there is a single word reply to this: Bamiyan. Not to mention Beslan and a host of others...

The Jews are the canaries in the coal mine.

And the miners ignore the canaries at their own peril...


(Yes, the suspense is nearly unbearable on the $25 billion failure -- and I dropped another hint too...)
Will Lincoln be repudiated tomorrow?

Kerry's Legal Memory Hole Leaks Some More...

As Beldar notes that we may have found the real reason that Kerry could only get into Boston College Law School. And it may not be stupidity after all. Though that may still be determined to be the root cause that got him into this pickle of course...
Glenn on the REAL threat to Al Qaeda.And Afghanistan a disaster? Brother...

Memory Hole Redux 2: In Case You're Tempted By Hudna

Just in case you're tempted by Osama's nuanced hudna offer with your state, here's how it works in Spain:
MADRID (Reuters) - Police arrested seven suspected Islamic militants in raids across Spain on Monday to foil a planned bomb attack on the High Court, judicial sources said.

The arrests came seven months after train bombs killed 191 people in Madrid.

The seven suspects, including four Algerians and one Moroccan, were arrested in the southern region of Andalusia, the Mediterranean city of Valencia and Madrid.

Further arrests could be made in the coming hours as part of the operation against a radical and violent Muslim network, the Interior Ministry said in a statement.

Crusading Judge Baltasar Garzon ordered the arrests as part of his inquiry into Islamic militant cells in Spain.

The suspects had been in contact with other individuals in Europe, the United States and Australia, the statement said.
So feel free to call for negotiations. Sounds like a good plan to me. Surely his latest tape is evidence that Osama has given up on Andalusia...

Sunday, October 31, 2004

MSMemory Hole Watch

HOLE SPOTTED. Not to worry. I'm sure they go around re-editing their site all the time in favor of W...

ALREADY UPDATED: MUST. PLACE. THIS. DOWN. HOLE. ALSO. ALONG. WITH. BAMIYAN. W. IS. ROOT. OF. ALL. WORLD'S. PROBLEMS. NO. FLOOD. OF. DISPROOF. ALLOWED. TO. RE-EDUCATION. CAMPS. WITH. DISSENTERS.

I can only repeat the painfully great Soviet dissident joke yet again: "The future is known, it's the past that keeps changing."

ANOTHER UPDATE BEFORE THEY THROW ME DOWN THE HOLE: Did I mention that the left suffers no cognitive dissonance whatsoever from their simultaneous assertions that W is in bed with both Israel and the Saudis? Of course, I would suggest that the left suffers from something else but what do I know with my wee tiny brain?

MILITARY IN THE HOLE UPDATE: And you wonder why the majority of the military are hopping mad! If John Neville Kerry wins, the MSM is going to be tarred and feathered by the public when this finally comes out. They have no idea what they've done.

Just remember when you vote: General Giap and Madame Bihn love him -- but 2/3+ of the military and 90% of Vietnamese Americans will be voting against him. But they're just a bunch of baby killers and lackeys so what do they know???

Case Summation -- Straight To The Point

DAVID WARREN: "To replace Mr. Bush with Mr. Kerry in the present circumstances, would be like replacing Mr. Churchill with Mr. Chamberlain while Britain was at war. It is hard to believe that it could happen. I pray very earnestly that it won't."
NEWSFLASH: Tad Devine and Joe Lockhart are NOT -- REPEAT NOT -- part of the Kerry campaign!

So when you see them shilling for Kerry just turn off the TV. K?

Veritas Koppelgate Redux

It turns out that any criticism of Koppelgate may possibly be an exercise in bad faith. So I gladly spew forth some more from the Captain:
Nor does ABC's embarassment stop there, although failing to even interview American veterans and witnesses in discussing a military engagement and favoring villagers whose only qualification is a self-identification that they were there for this one battle, 35 years ago. Bandit notes that staunch Kerry supporter and defender Doug Reese, who was on Bill Rood's boat during the engagement, also disputes everything ABC reported:
Army advisor, Doug Reese, who was on Bill Rood's boat and just happens to be a staunch Kerry supporter and defender has publicly spoken in detail of what he had witnessed of the dead VC guerrilla minutes after he had been shot by Kerry. It should be noted that Mr. Reese works in Vietnamese Tourism out of the Vietnamese Embassy in Washington D.C.
Mr. Reese was kind enough to document the following with Swift Vets for Truth:

"Anyway, we'll never know much about him [VC killed by Kerry], as he wasn't local like the other guys, who lived right there. The survivors -- local guys -- weren't in a good position to see what was going on with the B-40 guy. For that matter, they don't even know his name."

Mr. Reese's statement says it all about the facts surrounding the dead VC, and he should know since was standing over the dead VC along with Sen. Kerry within 5-8 minutes of the shooting. Unfortunately, ABC was not interested in the facts, just any interview they could use to distort the truth to their viewers.
ABC News makes one thing abundantly clear: despite taking the lead on covering Rathergate, they've apparently learned absolutely nothing from it. Their badly-misfired attack piece should embarass everyone who works in their news division.
And check out Beldar as well...
When I played hockey, I never considered it smart to play with a broken stick...

And You Thought There Was Already A Red And Blue Divide

Looks like Osama may have lost something in the initial translation (Hat Tip INDC):
The tape of Osama bin Laden that was aired on al-Jazeera on Friday, October 29 included a specific threat to "each U.S. state," designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming election against George W. Bush. The U.S. media in general mistranslated the words "ay wilaya" (which means "each U.S. state") to mean a "country" or "nation" other than the U.S., while in fact the threat was directed specifically at each individual U.S. state. This suggests some knowledge by bin Laden of the U.S. electoral-college system. In a section of his speech in which he harshly criticized George W. Bush, bin Laden stated: "Any U.S. state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."
This has an interesting relationship to my last post to say the least! If Osama can finally muster a serious attack and it's in RED STATES then he will truly get his wish for the clash of civilizations. And what if Kerry is Prez and is perceived by red governors as having an ineffectual response?

I continue to be truly astounded with the left's racist condescension toward the Arabs and Muslims as being only a "nuisance" that can be licked by "law enforcement". But then why should I be astounded by the truth?

Binny Censored By al-Jazeera???

Roger has the scoop once more:
Officials said that in the 18-minute long tape - of which only six minutes were aired on the al-Jazeera Arab television network in the Middle East on Friday - bin Laden bemoans the recent democratic elections in Afghanistan and the lack of violence involved with it.

On the tape, bin Laden also says his terror organization has been hurt by the U.S. military's unrelenting manhunt for him and his cohorts on the Afghan-Pakistani border.
So it includes both the Dems talking points AND underpinnings for the general tone of requesting a hudna. But somehow the underpinnings get edited out of the original story.

And if you really want an eye opener check out this comment on the post:
It's less than 48 hours to election day. If the terrorists are going to lauch an attack, if they can, they'd better do it soon.

And when they do, the East Coast Democracts will cower at home while the rest of the country votes George Bush into office. I doubt the terrorists understand that even yet.
So if there's no attack on the election then Bush has made us safer and the folks may notice that when they dimple their chads. And if there is an attack on the election then that would facilitate a Bush victory too.

Keep watching F-911 and playing checkers guys...
Blameless and confused. MUST. READ. NOW. (Hat Tip Michelle)

The insanity of the Arabs illustrated in the post is what moderate Dems don't understand. But worse, it is the very definition of their lunatic brethren...

Saturday, October 30, 2004

The Canary In The Coal Mine: Stolen Erieness For Our Stolen Election

I was about to do a post on how Osama seems to have turned into a devotee of the fat oaf MM (and maybe M&M is next come to think of it) himself. And then I read this comment on Roger Simon's blog and realized I had just been saved the trouble. Stolen here for your jaw dropping pleasure:
Copyright John with apologies to DTP:

I doubt there is collusion but damn this eerie:

Democratic talking point 1: Bush lies.

"Bush is still practicing distortion and misleading on you, and obscuring the main reasons and therefore the reasons are still existing to repeat what happened before."

Democratic talking point 2: Bush family/Saudi connection.

"Both parties are arrogant and stubborn and the greediness and taking money without right and that similarity appeared during the visits of Bush to the region while people from our side were impressed by the US and hoped that these visits would influence our countries. Here he is being influenced by these regimes, Royal and military."

Democratic talking point 3: Patriot law takes away our freedoms.

"So he transferred the oppression of freedom and tyranny to his son and they call it the Patriot Law to fight terrorism."

Democratic talking point 4: Bush stole the 2000 election.

"He was bright in putting his sons as governors in states and he didn't forget to transfer his experience from the rulers of our region to Florida to falsify elections to benefit from it in critical times."

Democratic talking point 5: 9/11 and My pet goat story

"Before Bush and his administration would pay attention and we never thought that the high commander of the US armies would leave 50 thousand of his citizens in both towers to face the horrors by themselves when they most needed him because it seemed to distract his attention from listening to the girl telling him about her goat butting was more important than paying attention to airplanes butting the towers which gave us three times the time to execute the operation thank god."
Pretty impressive, eh? No more talking points about Andalusia -- narrowed now to just how Israel is the font of all evil in the world. Did I mention that's a Dem talking point also???

So let's do put on our thinking caps. First, we have this clown -- not sure he's AQ but he seems to be produced by one of their normal production houses -- clearly telling us that it's all W's fault and they're about to make 9/11 seem like small potatoes.

Then we have what appears to be Osama with an October surprise appearance with Andalusian amnesia if not as a living breathing Democratic operative. Of course, there's the seeming veneer statement about not caring who wins but in fact, he's doing such a good job with Dem talking points that the most trusted man in America is convinced that Karl Rove is behind his transformation. (Did I mention that Walter has now officially joined John Neville Kerry in the coveted "nuttier than a pecan plantation" status?)

Even Wretchard thinks that Osama is making a surprisingly straightforward appeal to the electorate:
The American answer to Osama's proposal will be given on Election Day. One response is to agree that the United States of America will henceforth act like Sweden, which is on track to become majority Islamic sometime after the middle of this century. The electorate best knows which candidate will serve this end; which candidate most promises to be European-like in attitude and they can choose that path with both eyes open. The electorate can strike that bargain and Osama may keep his word. The other course is to reject Osama's terms utterly; to recognize the pleading in his outwardly belligerent manner and reply that his fugitive existence; the loss of his sanctuaries; the annihilation of his men are but the merest foretaste of what is yet to come: to say that to enemies such as he, the initials 'US' will always mean Unconditional Surrender.

Osama has stated his terms. He awaits America's answer.
Hooo haw. My ancestors were way, way smarter than anyone could have realized to flee Scandinavia, you betcha!

Sensing seems to be back at least temporarily and thinks they're down and we should take the opportunity to hit them hard while they are. (Now I remember why I missed Donald :) In a similar vein, Roger thinks it's just a hudna offer -- more likely but no reason not to take the Donald's advice!

If Karl Rove didn't write the script then I would guess Beldar is closer to the mark in thinking that Osama has a bead on Kerry:
I agree. But I respectfully disagree, in part, with Wretchard that "[t]he American answer to Osama's proposal will be given on Election Day." Yes, if Pres. Bush is re-elected, bin Laden will have his answer. But I don't think that bin Laden's tape is primarily an attempt to influence the course of the American election next Tuesday. Rather, I think it's a very clear attempt to begin negotiations with a Kerry administration for a "cease-fire" in the Global War on Terror.

Of course, I don't believe for an instant that bin Laden's sincere. Only a blithering fool would trust him. But only a blithering fool would —

  • have listened to the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong's "seven-point peace plan" during the Vietnam War, and have taken it at face value and endorsed it as the course that America should follow.
  • have believed Daniel Ortega's promises to reform his communist government in Nicaragua if only America would stop funding the contras.
  • have believed that a nuclear freeze and sharp cutbacks in America's military and intellligence programs would placate the Soviet Union and win the Cold War.
  • have believed that diplomacy would have gotten Saddam out of Kuwait in the last decade, or out of power in his own country in this one.
  • believe that North Korea will respond more favorably to unilateral negotiations with the United States than to combined pressure in six-way talks that also involve South Korea, Japan, China, and Russia.

One such blithering fool may be elected President of the United States on Tuesday. And Osama bin Laden — like Madame Binh, Daniel Ortega, a succession of Soviet dictators, Saddam, and Kim Jong Il before him — has already begun his sly attempts to manipulate that candidate. So it is that this blithering fool's personal history of enthusiastically swallowing just this kind of bait, hook, line, and sinker — and then trying to base America's course upon it — scares me far more than anything Osama bin Laden could ever say.
Bottom line is that both are true: Osama is going after moderation of talking points (it's a sad, sad commentary when Michael Moore's hateful drivel is considered moderate -- but it's surely true compared to the world wide Caliphate) to sway the voters as well as hoodwink Johnny boy -- who never met a tyrant he didn't support.

Osama thinks we're stupid enough not to notice the missing Andalusian Caliphate with the focus on Israel. John Neville Kerry is either taken in or thinks the coming Caliphate is a good thing -- how to tell which is a mystery. Possibly both are true.

The election has now become a referendum on whether Osama can hide the destruction of the Bamiyan statues.

As the Soviet dissidents used to say: "The future is known; it's the past that's always changing."

PLEASE VOTE. AND DON'T FORGET BAMIYAN. ISRAEL IS THE CANARY IN THE COAL MINE. ALWAY'S HAS BEEN -- ALWAYS WILL BE.


And here's why your vote is important from a comment on Captain's Quarters:
My liberal coworker just informed me that OBL wants Bush to get elected because he knows that if Kerry gets elected that Kerry will come after him and kill him.

How do I respond to something like this? I just quietly shake my head at the ignorance.
Freedom fighters? Really???

Banana Republic Watch

My guess right now is that just as Iraq will be looking to us for an example of how to run an election, we'll be degenerating into a banana republic. Powerline has some great perspective from Joseph Perkins on how we got here:
Richard Nixon would have captured the 1960 presidential election but for five states he lost by 5,000 votes or fewer – Missouri, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico and Hawaii.
Gerald Ford would have retained the presidency in 1976 but for two states he lost by no more than 5,600 votes – Ohio and Hawaii.

Though the 1960 and 1976 elections were close, though they turned on a few thousand votes in a handful of states, the outcomes were faithfully accepted by the American people, by Republicans and Democrats alike.

That's because neither Nixon or Ford demanded that the votes be recounted in the states in which they lost by narrow margins. And neither Nixon or Ford insisted they were denied election because of voting irregularities in some state or another.

Then there was the 2000 election.

[Al] Gore refused to accept that he lost Florida, that he lost the presidency, by so small a margin. He refused to put the national interest before his own selfish interest.
Interesting to note that the hated Richard Nixon chose not to contest even though part of the problem was the Daley machine with corruption as deep as the Marianas trench. And Ohio hardly has a Snow White reputation in Ford's case.

I pray this election is not close. But I have serious doubts my prayers will be fulfilled on this one. (With humble apologies to the Lord, of course.)

Thanks, Al.
Stalking the blithering fool.
A hopeful sign. And jail. For a long time.

Friday, October 29, 2004

Peer reviewed. Uh huh.

Buy Your Black Hoodies

This might also explain why you could talk to lefties for eternity without a positive peep from them about the liberation of women in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Hat tip INDC)

Thursday, October 28, 2004

The Largest Bribery Scheme In The History Of The World

The largest bribery scheme in the history of the world. Surely you can tell me what that would be?

No, I haven't developed a fixation on the Guiness Book of World Records. (Well, my 7-year-old has though ;)

You'd never know it exists reading the traditional MSM though...

(I will post the link tomorrow to alleviate your suffering...)

UPDATE: Read all about it.

QaQaa

(How could I possibly resist such an elegantly titled post? ;)

McQ leverages Peters to eviscerate NYeTCBS's Al-Qaqaa. GO. READ. IT.

Never mind the IAEA's admission in their own reports that stuff could be removed via the ventilation shafts, El Baradei's obvious grudge against W for wanting him out for incompetence.

Did I mention part of the incompetence was letting Saddam keep this stuff beyond 1995 when the weapons inspectors first told him to destroy it?

And now you have a clue as to which Presidential candidate the word was born to describe...

UPDATE: More from Cliff May and Hugh (scroll down a ways). A warehouse 25 miles away??? Oh, brother. As Cliff points out you have Kerry's key foreign policy advisor (Holbrooke) admitting that nobody really knows what happened but Kerry is out there with this as his main attack this week. Pitiful...

Only The Name Remains

Stolen from the Kerry Spot:
THE BRILLIANCE OF THIS STRATEGY ELUDES ME [10/28 03:42 PM]

AP:
"When the Bay of Pigs went sour, John Kennedy had the courage to look America in the eye and say, `I take responsibility, it's my fault," Kerry said, referring to a bungled invasion of Cuba in 1961. "John Kennedy knew how to take responsibility for the mistakes he made and Mr. President, it's long since time for you to start taking responsibility for the mistakes you made."
"You know, mistakes like reminding the Cuban-American community of why they hate the Democratic Party, just five days before an election in which I have staked almost everything on winning in Florida. Mistakes like comparing the popular successful overthrow of Saddam Hussein to a failed coup attempt in Cuba more than forty years ago. Mistakes like that."
Remember "The Greatest Intelligence Failure In History"? (Don't worry the answer is coming soon to a post near you...)

It's all right, I'll wait while you read it. It's short.

Well, the President that's the correct answer is amazingly NOT Kennedy (another big hint for you needless to say). But letting the Russians get as close as they did to seriously operational nukes in Cuba is definitely on the short list of contestants. And I do mean the SHORT list. And the Bay of Pigs as well as the near holocaust of the Cuban Missile Crisis were part of the legacy of one of the best Dem presidents of all time. (Surely I have your guessing compass oriented in the right direction by now?)

On the other hand, Caroline Kennedy's blather notwithstanding, the real J.F.K. was actually a liberal in the best classical tradition of the word -- modulo the Daley machine and a long list of other egregious issues of course.

He was the last outpost of sanity before the Democratic Party was co-opted by the loony left. Kennedy was for spreading Democracy, for staring down communists, for tax cuts, for going to the stars, for bearing any burden ... in short, he was heavily aligned with Ronald Reagan and W!

John Kerry is NOT for spreading Democracy -- in Vietnam, Iraq, Central America or anywhere else I am sad to inform you.

If we lived in a rational world and the lawyers weren't one of the cores of the Democratic Party -- the modern Democrats could be soundly convicted in a trial for fraudulent misrepresentation of goods.

Only the name remains without the brains.

That a boy John! Way to win Florida!

And Al Qaeda Would Vote For

Who Again?
WHOOPS!

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Who is Harold Baer, Jr.? And what did C-BS report about him? RTWT! (Hat tip INDC)

None In A Million

Guess who has some choice words:
Kerry claims Republicans disenfranchised 1 million black voters in Florida in 2000, but neglects to mention that after extensive and expensive hearings, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission failed to name a single one of them. Can you name just one out of that "million," Sen. Kerry? We've found more WMDs in Iraq than we've found disenfranchised blacks in Florida.

Indeed – to the contrary! – in 2000, blacks composed 11 percent of registered voters in Florida, but made up 17 percent of those who actually voted. If that's how Republicans "suppress" the black vote, blacks are better off when Republicans attack them than when Democrats pretend to be nice to them.
Yes, I can see why the Dems hate her so much. She has such an uncool habit of flooding the field with facts...

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

What? You mean Joe Lieberman got buried? You don't say!

Of The Manchurian Candidate

as Neville Chamberlain. Beldar rocks. And follow the links at least through to Lipscomb's article so you can experience scraping your jaw on the floor...

UPDATE: Texas Tech's Virtual Vietnam Archive has now posted the two documents on their public site referenced by Lipscomb's article.

Monday, October 25, 2004

Being Better at Bribery? I'm convinced now he can't even remember last week -- and his staff isn't competent enough to figure out they need to help him...

FLASH! W Too Slow To Invade!

OCTOBER SURPRISE TRIPLE-TWISTING BELLY FLOP: Kerry claims Bush did not invade Iraq soon enough! But he's not smart enough to know that. (I've disallowed myself any further references to Flipper inconstancy, doncha know.)

UPDATE: Did I mention that the Dems are not only mathematically illiterate themselves but projecting that illiteracy onto the rest of the populace? Can you say chasing 0.02% versus facing 2 million tons?

And for the final word -- well that seems to fall to Wretchard quite a bit now doesn't it? As in 'The price of passing the "Global Test" was very high; and having been gypped once, we now show ourselves eager to be taken to the cleaners again.'

And follow the whisker. CASE CLOSED.

UPDATE: It turns out that "opportunistic oppositionalism" doesn't even BEGIN to describe Kerry.

UPDATED AGAIN: Maybe if CBS could get money for stories that they didn't actually publish they wouldn't look so stupid. Luckily, we're not so stupid as to allow it. But why are we so stupid as to give them any $$$ for this pathetic drivel?
D'Oh!

And from the NYeT so it MUST BE TRUE!

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Meeting "With The Entire Security Council" Is "Seared -- Seared -- In Me"

Remember my post on John Kerry's "Christmas in Cambodia" fiasco? Well now we have proof positive from Joel Mowbray writing in the Washington Times that Kerry spewed a whopper in the second Presidential debate about meeting "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein."

But before we get to that, let's summarize what I wrote in "Cambodian Case Closed Conclusively". In short, there are two options. The first -- and far and away most likely -- option is that Kerry was never in Cambodia. His crewmen -- including both his supporters and critics never mind his fellow Swiftie captains -- deny it and nobody has climbed out of the woodwork to confirm it. Zero support from ANY contemporary in Vietnam.

Following this option, by far the most likely timeline -- more on the timeline in the next option -- is that Kerry started fabricating this story out of the whole cloth beginning at the time of his 1979 review of "Apocalypse Now" for the Boston Herald:
JOHN KERRY: "On more than one occasion, I like Martin Sheen in "Apocalypse Now," took my patrol boat into Cambodia. In fact I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real."
Following this he peaked in the attack on Reagan's Contra policy on the Senate floor:
In a 1986 speech on the Senate floor, Kerry said, ‘I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. . . . I have that memory which is seared - seared - in me.
The only problem with this is that even Kerry's hagiographer contradicts it:
Historian Douglas Brinkley’s bestselling Tour of Duty, based partly on Kerry’s wartime journals, places Kerry on Christmas 1968 in Sa Dec, 50 miles from Cambodia. ‘He was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia,’ Brinkley told London’s Daily Telegraph last week.”
However, further years end up with this astounding reportage by the Washington Post from June 2003:
And who is he, really?

A close associate hints: There's a secret compartment in Kerry's briefcase. He carries the black attaché everywhere. Asked about it on several occasions, Kerry brushed it aside. Finally, trapped in an interview, he exhaled and clicked open his case.

"Who told you?" he demanded as he reached inside. "My friends don't know about this."

The hat was a little mildewy. The green camouflage was fading, the seams fraying.

"My good luck hat," Kerry said, happy to see it. "Given to me by a CIA guy as we went in for a special mission in Cambodia."

Kerry put on the hat, pulling the brim over his forehead. His blue button-down shirt and tie clashed with the camouflage. He pointed his finger and raised his thumb, creating an imaginary gun. He looked silly, yet suddenly his campaign message was clear: Citizen-soldier. Linking patriotism to public service. It wasn't complex after all; it was Kerry.

He smiled and aimed his finger: "Pow."
Continuing our almost certainty that Kerry's fabricating Cambodian Christmas, then we are left with options ranging from a Walter Mitty figurine that should be recalled from the Senate post-haste by his Massachusetts constituency -- to something far, far worse. Not to mention that outright lies on the Senate floor to attack Reagan would be an instant disqualification from the Presidency to any voter even feigning rationality.

The only other option -- Kerry is telling the truth about his Cambodian Christmas -- fits on the timeline as follows. (I know you're holding your nose at this point but bear with me!) Remember Kerry's infamous testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee in 1971 where he assassinated the character of the entire military (including my Marine cousin of course)?

Not only does Kerry not mention his Christmas in Cambodia but check out this snippet:
No ground troops are in Laos, so it is all right to kill Laotians by remote control. But believe me the helicopter crews fill the same body bags and they wreak the same kind of damage on the Vietnamese and Laotian countryside as anybody else, and the President is talking about allowing that to go on for many years to come. One can only ask if we will really be satisfied only when the troops march into Hanoi.
If Kerry had been in Cambodia, how could it possibly not be incompetence of simply fantastic proportions not to bring up his Cambodian Christmas at this point in his testimony to suggest that more than helicopter crews are in Laos? He could have gained huge credibility and nearly blown the roof off the room for heaven's sake!

You're telling me that we're going to elect someone this incompetent -- or at minimum a raving amnesiac -- to be President?

So our Cambodian options are liar/fantasist or incompetent/amnesiac.

And now comes the meeting with the "entire Security Council":
"This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," Mr. Kerry said of the Iraqi dictator.

Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in December 2003, Mr. Kerry explained that he understood the "real readiness" of the United Nations to "take this seriously" because he met "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein."

But of the five ambassadors on the Security Council in 2002 who were reached directly for comment, four said they had never met Mr. Kerry. The four also said that no one who worked for their countries' U.N. missions had met with Mr. Kerry either.
In summary, I no longer call him Flipper since "Cambodian Case Conclusively Closed" is well aligned with today's "Council Case of Conclusively Consistent Cr*pola" over an arc of more than 30 years.

But I don't believe his new label should be "Liberal" as W is now touting. It is something far, far worse than that. But I trust I'm in polite company so I won't say it.

UPDATE: Beldar points out that "When reached for comment last week, an official with the Kerry campaign stood by the candidate's previous claims that he had met with the entire Security Council."

And Roger gets the Cambodia link.

UPDATED AGAIN: Not Russia or China, Either.

Projection 102: That's IT -- W Signs Go Up Tomorrow

Here's the Colorado update on voter intimidation. Complete with insights from a German immigrant:
“Somebody with a Bush bumper sticker had their car window broken out,” she says, “and now others are saying they’re afraid to have signs and stickers for Bush.”

The cars of Eagle-Vail resident Gunther Schmidt and his daughter had their Bush-Cheney bumper stickers scratched off, but he just stuck new ones right back on. Originally from Germany, Schmidt knows well the history of Hitler’s fascist movement and says the analogy fits.

“It starts kind of slow and easy with little things but can escalate into something more,” he comments. “I can see people being threatened by it, and becoming afraid that someone will do something to them. I thought we lived in a free country where you could express your opinion in a nonviolent way, without being punished for it.”


Schmidt advises standing firm and defying the attacks. “I would say to continue to show your support for whoever you are supporting – don’t give up because we can’t allow this country to go backwards.”

On the national level, the sign destruction has amped up into the trashing of Republican offices, physical attacks on Republicans, and even hails of bullets through the windows of campaign offices.

[Eagle County Bush-Cheney co-chair] Henri Stone got a powerful message that her views could be hazardous to her health when the couple returned home from a short trip to find the French doors to their bedroom shattered. Nothing was taken, indicating to the Stones that more menacing motives than larceny were at work.
This is too close to home -- a friend and I used to rent a condo in Vail for many years before I got married and settled down. I had been avoiding putting up signs and bumper stickers for W because I didn't want to have my car keyed. Now I don't care after this garbage. And I'm upping my already substantial contribution to W and the other Republican candidates.

The left loves to call the right Nazis. It's not the Dems getting shot at -- this is projection pure and simple.

P.S. Nazi is an abbreviation for "National Socialist" by the way -- not national capitalist. Ugghhh...

UPDATE: Slate's likely readership has determined I'm an asshole. The writer has a bit more insight.
Kerry's REAL "Band of Brothers".

Flippering Around

Turns out the left thinks the CIA is the Oracle of all wisdom. Just forget that little WMD deal. It was all Bush lies anyway.

Woodward Flippered off but facts don't matter so the WaPo endorsement goes to who you would have guessed of course...

Fraudsters for Flipper forge forward fearlessly.

FROM THE DENIHILIST COMMENT SECTION: Oh well. We can "probably" survive having a city or two nuked.

Saturday, October 23, 2004

Encrypted Flipola

Are you being Shinola'ed? The Kerry-Edwards campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

But luckily, we have John Ashcroft to steel -- yes, that's with two e's -- our encryption against Flipola... (UPDATE: I suspect this is one of the places where JNK squandered those 8 out of 100 points the ADA chose not to award him for his voting record, no?)

Friday, October 22, 2004

The Greatest Intelligence Failure In History

Most liberals would confidently identify that as the failure to find stockpiles of WMD in Iraq.

A large subset of those libs would immediately second guess themselves and suggest based on their immersion in the liberal echo chamber that W himself is the great intelligence failure. He's wickedly stupid and never listens to anyone don't you know?

Everything he does is based on faith and we all know how stupid religious hicks are, don't we? Or is he just an unscrupulous liar who's the mouthpiece for college drop-out Karl Rove who's so smart he manipulates us all like marionettes?

Sorry, I seem to get confused easily -- back to the history lesson...

First let's look at a description of one of the universally acclaimed great Presidents. We'll call him X:
X was also an outstanding example of a leader who, although not in any full sense an intellectual (he was a book collector rather than a book reader, and his Harvard grades were of a mediocrity that suggest that today he might have had difficulty in gaining entry to that august institution), ...
Sounds a lot like W's story at Yale, no? So he was easily duped by someone of clearly superior intelligence -- call him Y -- into spending massively to counter a threat that turned out to be nearly non-existant. X was duped so badly that he spent somewhere north of $25 billion on the fiasco.

Folks, this is easy for anyone who has even basic Google skills and understands the rudiments of inflation adjustment.

Can you tell me who X and Y were?

Can you tell me what he (and his successor) did that was the direct result of what was actually the greatest intelligence failure of all time?

And for another hint as well as extra bonus points: Was there a genzai bakudan? Or not? Was that an intelligence failure too? Do you think we'll ever know for sure?

Why are you so sure you know so much about the subtleties of war? Don't you think the answers to this should have required less than a moment's reflection -- rather than panicked Google usage -- if you were capable of decisive and authoritative judgements on intelligence successes and failures? How much have you really studied military history?

Could your accusations of incompetence and stupidity be fueled by projection?

I'm patiently waiting for your answers...
Outing the gay gestapo's ally.

Thursday, October 21, 2004

Cycles Recycled

NOTE: This post can be originally found here. I thought it deserved more prominence on the blog.
I can just imagine exactly this kind of debate going on in Rome right up to the point that the Huns kicked in the gates. It strikes me that any society that has to start asking itself if it is committing “professional suicide” by ignoring the threat posed by barbarians with a completely alien world view and bent on their destruction is already beyond help. Geopolitical navel-gazing must be the last stage in the evolution of a society before it is too morally ambivalent to defend its own sovereignty. (Or, maybe it results from the unwillingness to do so?)
Let me lay it out for you…

Stage 1: We need a revolution to set us free from tyranny!

Stage 2: Hey, what happened to our colonies?

Stage 3: Oh, yeah. Uh. Colonialism is bad. Yeah. That’s it. So, that must mean any use of military force against anyone anywhere is bad. Right?

Stage 4: Oh gosh, we just need to all be more tolerant of other people. And hey, at least all those imigrants always vote our way. Besides, aren't we all really just immigrants on this big old space ship we call Earth anyway?

Stage 5: Didn't we used to have elections this time of year? Hey, where’d all the Barbies go?

Stage 6: Now repeat after the nice man with the machine gun… “There is one God and Mohamed is his prophet.”

Stage 7: GoTo Stage: 1, repeat as necessary.

Or, the alternative evolution...

Stage 5: Hey, didn't there used to be a couple of big buildings right about here?

Stage 6: Jihad? I've got your Jihad right here baby!

Stage 7: Okay, so we got a litte rough there, but they deserved it.

Stage 8: GoTo Stage 3: repeat as necessary.

So you see, all the terrorists would have had to do to take America out of the equation was leave us alone for another 50 years or so and we would have evolved into sophisticated pro-globalization pacifists all by ourselves. But, nothing sets back political entropy like a good old Pearl Harbor style sucker-punch, eh?

Posted by: Dacotti on September 25, 2003 01:07 PM [NOTE FROM BOB: The address is Dacotti -at- hot mail dot com]

Sunday, October 17, 2004

I Approve This Message Without The Darned Change Tracking

I approve this message now that I think I finally turned off that %@#&^! change tracking!

WHEN VOTING IN 2004, PLEASE CONSIDER MY EXPERIENCE

EDUCATION: I attended Yale and joined the same Skull and Crossbones society as George Bush. I wasn't smart enough to get into Yale or Harvard Law so I went to Boston College Law School. But I'm way smarter than George Bush who only got a Harvard MBA - that's why it takes me hours to answer simple yes and no questions.

MILITARY: After my request for a student deferment to study abroad in France was rejected, I joined the Navy since I thought that would be the safest most exciting service. In my first tour, I served on a ship safely far bravely off the coast of Vietnam. Looking over the situation, I determined that by joining the Swift Boats for my next tour I could still be safe a war hero by mostly patrolling off the coast while still being able to make good movie footage to play at the Viet Cong Sympathizers Reunion Democratic National Convention when I ran for President. When just as I arrived, Admiral "Baby Killer" Zumwalt changed the Swift Boat mission to include canal patrols, I began searching for anti-war military doctors to help me game the system journalists to approach in Saigon and explain to them what a quagmire Vietnam was. It was an impossible mission and my aluminum well-armored Swift Boat was under constant enemy fire -- luckily none of my pinpricks wounds even required hospitalization stopped me from rushing back to defend my war criminals fellow soldiers. I was also not in Cambodia at Christmas 1968 when Richard Nixon was not President and was lying about my not being there. This was "seared, seared" in my memory and I showed the Boston Globe I still carry my lucky CIA hat in a secret compartment in my briefcase to prove that I'm nuttier than a pecan plantation. My superior bravery was hardly indisputably proven by hugely exaggerating my actions in after action reports I wrote about myself. So I easily won three Purple Hearts in four months and abandoned departed from my crewmates to go back to the States and finish my service at a desk job as a hero. Luckily, since I was already bragging about being the President some day, I was able to remember to get most of my crew-mates reassigned to safer duty so they'd be are on my side in this campaign. The fact that nearly all my peers and superiors as well as the one crewman who had too much integrity to accept my bribes and coercion a tiny minority of my war criminals fellow soldiers dispute any details of my heroism just shows that the military is completely filled with war criminals and baby killers needs reform.

ANTI-WAR PROTESTER: I am unapologetic about calling the military except the crewmen on my Swift Boat (not including Gardner of course) war criminals. Jane Fonda has apologized but I will not apologize. To this day the Viet Cong people of Vietnam are grateful for my actions helping to install a brutal Communist dictatorship leading to widespread imprisonments in "re-education camps", forcing a million "boat people" to flee for their lives and leaving the way clear for Pol Pot to murder 20% of the Cambodian population. Viet Cong General Giap considered the actions of the anti-war protestors crucial to their victory since they lost nearly every battle they ever engaged in with the U.S. military. And Vietnamese Americans support me to this day for my brave actions - that's why 90% of them will vote against me this November. And somehow I forgot to mention my 1968 "Christmas in Cambodia" during my 1971 testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee even though if provable it would have blown the roof right off the room.

PAST WORK EXPERIENCE: I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I was an assistant DA and Leutenant Governor under Michael Dukakis where I fought against even having civil defense plans. Due to the mentorship of drunken socialist woman slaughterer conservative - compared to me anyway -- Senator Ted Kennedy, I was elected to the Senate from the people's republic of Massachusetts.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS SENATOR: I authored and passed the bill for the relief of Kil Joon Yu Callahan and four other bills that nobody has ever heard of before I am extremely proud of. The arguments that National Journal's ratings of my Senate votes make me the most liberal member of the Senate are completely bogus - that's proven by the near perfect symmetry of agreement of my Americans for Democratic Action rating of 92 and the Conservative Union's rating of 5 - I am the only true conservative in this election! And charges that I am weak on defense are complete lies - that's why I relentlessly attacked Ronald Reagan in every way including advocating a nuclear freeze and cutting virtually every weapons system, lied about "Christmas in Cambodia" to attack him, voted against U.S. participation in Gulf War I (which passed any "global test" imaginable since it was even supported by the U.N. including France, Germany and large numbers of Arab countries including Syria for heaven's sakes), voted to decrease intelligence funding after the first World Trade Center bombing and I was for invading Iraq as long as Bill Clinton was President and that is my completely consistent position other than calling it the "wrong war, at the wrong time in the wrong place".

I believe my accomplishments over the course of my lifetime of marrying money make me uniquely unfit qualified for command. My character is impeccable and Ghandi-like as demonstrated by constantly calling President Bush a liar and branding the military as war criminals.
Alaa has some words on the importance of W to Iraqi freedom.

Friday, October 15, 2004

Moralizing and Bribery -- Teresa Style (UPDATED)

Here is the latest from the Kerry Campaign about how generous Teresa is with her taxes:
Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $798,820 in state and federal income taxes in 2003, approximately 35 percent of her gross taxable income, according to figures and federal tax forms she released today.

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.
Slice 1: We don't include state taxes in the debates about federal tax rates -- they vary from state to state obviously. So forget the $798,820 and make it $627,150. Tax rate goes from 35% down to 27%.

Slice 2: Forget the horsepucky about counting the $2,781,791 separately from the income used to calculate the tax rate. Your EFFECTIVE tax rate is YOUR TOTAL FEDERAL TAX PAID DIVIDED BY YOUR TOTAL INCOME. Period. So $2,291,137 + $2,781,791 = $5,072,928.

BOTTOM LINE: $627,150 divided by $5,072,928 yields an effective tax rate for Teresa of 12.4%. Sorry Teresa, I pay a way higher effective tax rate than you do -- and trust me when I say that I don't have multiple mansions spread around the planet. But just do go on moralizing about how I need to pay more taxes to support the poor so the feds can bribe them with subsidies to vote for Democrats...

UPDATE: Ah, you say. Covering up by not mentioning W's return? Let's take a look at the official press release:
President and Mrs. Bush Release 2003 Tax Return
April 13, 2004

PRESIDENT AND MRS. BUSH RELEASE 2003 TAX RETURN

President and Mrs. George W. Bush reported taxable income of $727,083 for the tax year 2003. This resulted in a total of $227,490 in federal income taxes paid by President and Mrs. Bush.

The President's 2003 income included salary earned as President and investment income from the trusts in which their assets are held.

President and Mrs. Bush contributed $68,360 to churches and charitable organizations, including Evergreen Chapel at Camp David, Tarrytown United Methodist Church, St. John's Church, the M.D. Anderson Clinic, and the Federal Government's Combined Federal Campaign.
That would seem to indicate a tax rate of 31.3%. But what are they covering up in "non-taxable" income? Let's dig deeper by looking at the actual return. Turns out that instead of non-taxable income, W has mostly made charitable contributions as listed in the release that raise his total income to $822,126. So his real effective tax rate is $227,490 divided by $822,126 yielding an effective rate of 27.7%. Over twice Teresa's effective tax rate on less than 1/6th of her income.

Let's face it folks, a flat tax in the 17-23% range would be a cut for some. And interestingly, W would be one of them. But it would be a tax hike on the truly rich like Teresa who play the (legal) tax shelter game for all it's worth. And poor dumb slobs like me would be mostly unaffected...

ANOTHER UPDATE: The NY Post via PowerLine agrees and then some:
Experts on lifestyles of the rich and famous say that $5 million in income wouldn't come close to covering the Kerrys' golden lifestyle with five estates, multiple cars, a $3.5 million Gulfstream V jet complete with plasma TV, gold fixtures and two bathrooms, a yacht worth $750,000 to $1 million and servants in every location.

The Kerrys own a $12 million waterfront Nantucket estate, a $6 million mansion in Washington's tony Georgetown, a $12.8 million mansion in Boston's Beacon Hill, a $14 million estate on 90 acres outside Pittsburgh and an $8 million ski chalet near Sun Valley, Idaho.

The Los Angeles Times, after a detailed study, last June concluded that Mrs. Kerry is almost certainly a billionaire, worth between $900 million and a staggering $3.2 billion. Forbes magazine has estimated her fortune at $700 million.
Oh, yeah -- and they point out that she doesn't pay FICA taxes either. I guess if I was her I wouldn't hire her either.

Kleptomaniacism Redux: Opportunistic Oppositionism

I just lifted this whole thing from Frum (bolding is mine) -- it's just gorgeous in every way:
I am embarrassed to say that it has taken me until now to read the Boston Globe's excellent and careful campaign biography of Sen. Kerry. It is a book that should be of special interest to anyone who might be tempted to believe Sen. Kerry's self-description as a man who "never wavers."

The Globe reporters catch Kerry in vacillation after vacillation. They remind us for example of the damning story of Kerry's sudden decision to give a speech denouncing affirmative action in 1992 just in time to position himself as a "new Democrat" worthy of the vice presidential spot on a Clinton ticket - and then of his hasty and abject retreat when criticism erupted.

Probably no story in the whole book is more telling, though, than Kerry's flip-floping on the first Gulf War.

If ever a war passed "the global test," it was the first Gulf War
. Yet Kerry denounced it at great length on the Senate floor. "There is a rush to war here. [Because we think our military force can overwhelm Iraq], we are willing to act ... with more bravado than patience."

Then, as soon as the war was won, Kerry turned around and denounced President Bush for not driving all the way to Baghdad. Kerry condemned the decision not to shoot down Saddam Hussein's helicopters as they attacked Shi'ite rebels in southern Iraq as "a backhanded intervention in support of Saddam Hussein." And the Globe describe with some humor how Kerry went on to try to organize a Democratic campaign against Bush for his non-interventionist policy inside Iraq: "Bush has had a standstill, misguided policy, not unlike the lack of leadership seen prior to the war."

(All these quotes from pp. 260-266.)

Today of course Sen. Kerry denounces the younger Bush for doing what he denounced the father for failing to do back in 1991.

The overwhelming message of the Globe book is that Sen. Kerry's foreign policy ideas can best be summed up as "opportunistic oppositionism." It's a tactic well suited for a man trying to make his way by mobilizing angry out-of-power constituencies. But the conclusion I take away is that if Sen. Kerry should ever find himself in a position where he has to make the decisions - rather than react to decisions made by others - he would have absolutely no idea of what to do ... and would very likely do nothing at all while blaming others for everything that went wrong as a result of his own inaction.
As I said, it's "An 'F' No Matter How You Grade It".

If it wasn't for the MSM mass brainwashing, Kerry would be headed toward the biggest electoral landslide loss since McGovern. But no -- he still could win. Amazing spelled with an F.

Multilateral Kleptomaniacism

How could I not add this shameless steal from Taranto:
Liberal Democrat Backs Bush
"The No. 2 official in Japan's ruling party sharply criticized U.S. Democratic challenger John Kerry's North Korea policy Friday, adding that he hoped President Bush would be re-elected," Reuters reports from Tokyo:

"I think there would be trouble if it's not President Bush," Liberal Democratic Party Secretary General Tsutomu Takebe told a radio program, Kyodo news agency reported.

"For instance, Mr Kerry wants to handle the North Korean issue bilaterally, which is out of the question. We're now in the era of multilateralism," Takebe was quoted as saying.
When it so eloquently underscores my #4 from "Top Ten Reasons You Might Have Liberal Debating Points":
4) You believe that Bush's multilateral negotiating policy with North Korea makes him a cowboy -- and that it's just a coincidence that the North Koreans support your bid for the presidency
Sigh.

What? Oh yes, Kerry wants unilateral actions within the existing multilateral framework! I'm not nanonuanced enough. And of course that's nothing at all like what Bush did in OIF that Kerry would have done everything different about...
Gay baiting ... uh ... bleating ... K?

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Bodyguards and (French) Corruption

In the "Bodyguard of Lies" I pointed out that Winston Churchill's famous quote that “In war time, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies” probably explains more than we know about what's really going on in the WoIF (War on IslamoFascism).

Today, Best Of The Web points out a very interesting article from the American Spectator that elaborates on this theme in the context of the debates:
Similarly, when Senator Kerry insists that the United States is ignoring the threat of Iran, or that the United States is "distracted" in Iraq when the "real threat" is in Iran, could the President say this?

"What makes you think we're not doing anything about Iran? We already have special forces teams deployed all over Iran working with the democratic opposition to the mullahs. And we're already at war with Iran. It's a proxy war, going on right now in Iraq."

Nope. Can't say that.

Neither can President Bush make the obvious response to Senator Kerry's repeated accusation that the United States has "turned its back on its traditional alliances" and "failed to bring aboard our traditional allies" in the war on terror.

"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?"

Not when the United States still depends on French cooperation for fighting terrorism in North Africa.

When Senator Kerry slams the Bush administration for a "too few troops on the ground" and "failing to win the peace," the President cannot say something like this:

"Senator Kerry, the Fourth Infantry Division was missing from our forces at the time the war started -- and ended. Those are the forces that would have settled conflicts in Northern Iraq, where most of the trouble is now. Why was that division missing, Senator? Because those allies you keep talking about held up Turkey's membership in the EU unless the Turks denied us passage through Turkey for that division. Those are your 'global test' buddies, Senator."

Can't say it, that is, without alienating Turkey and inflaming already difficult relationships with "old Europe."

Now, either John Kerry knows that he's saying things President Bush can't respond to, or he doesn't. In the first case, he's a corrupt liar; he's lying to the American people about what he can do and President Bush can't. He's had intelligence briefings. He knows where things stand. In the second case, he's plain stupid.

I don't think he's stupid.
Oil for Food scandal? Ten billion dollars skimmed? It doesn't exist according to the MSM. Got to elect the new JNK at any cost. And I do mean any cost...

Colorado Corruption Watch

Worthy of utter contempt.

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

The Inconvenient Interview

Liberal Dems would actually sooner you burn in hell than read this interview with Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Sullivan. And no, I not exaggerating by much at all:
CH: Another thing that's very important to me about this war is that it is in effect a war for secularism. President Bush may believe that God saved him from booze and so on. He's quite entitled to that belief as far as I can see, but he must know, and certainly the people in this administration do understand, that our only real allies are secular--that, in Afghanistan, we must hope for even more secularism. It's interesting to me to argue with my leftist comrades. They neither know nor care, really, that the Iraqi left and the Afghan left are thoroughly enthusiastic about the regime change. They know it saved their lives, apart from anything else. They're on our side. This is an irony that's sort of at everybody's expense. I know, exactly, that I'm on the right side about this. I'm for secularism and separation of church and state. Everywhere. I want more of it here, not less, and much more of it there. And it's a perfectly consistent thing. Even if John Ashcroft doesn't realize it, it's objectively--as we used to say in Marxist discussion--true. It's objectively true.

AS: Chris is a militant atheist. I'm actual a Roman Catholic. But I couldn't agree with him more. I really don't believe that people of faith should be leery of secularism. I think the separation between church and state is the best thing for religion ever. And I feel no qualms at all, as a believing person, in supporting secularism.
RTWT! Pronto!

Monday, October 11, 2004

W File

WHOOPS.
WOW.
WACKY.
WRY.
WHERE WE WERE.

What Both Bush And Kerry Want To Bury

Here's a nice little piece to clip out and recite next time you're under demagogic attack:
To state the obvious: not all Hispanics are immigrants, and not all immigrants are Hispanic. Still, there's no mystery here. If more poor and unskilled people enter the country—and have children—there will be more poverty. (The Census figures cover both legal and illegal immigrants; estimates of illegals range upward from 7 million.) About 33 percent of all immigrants (not just Hispanics) lack a high-school education. The rate among native-born Americans is about 13 percent. Now, this poverty may or may not be temporary. Some immigrants succeed quickly; others do not. But if the poverty persists—and is compounded by more immigration—then it will create mounting political and social problems. One possibility: a growing competition for government benefits between the poor and baby-boom retirees.

You haven't heard much in this campaign about these problems—and you won't. To raise them is to seem racist; that's a heavy burden for politicians or journalists. Politicians also risk alienating Hispanic voters. Worse, there's the hard question: what to do? President George W. Bush and various Democrats have offered immigration plans that propose different ways of legalizing today's illegal immigrants. That's fine as long as the future inflow of illegal and poorer immigrants can be controlled. That would require stiffer measures than either party has endorsed. These are tough problems; our leaders give them the silent treatment. This is understandable, but it won't make them go away.
RTWT!!! I'm betting we won't hear about ANY of this during the last debate even though it should be one of the main foci. I hope I'm proven wrong but Bush's answers to O'Reilly didn't give me much hope.

BOTTOM LINE: Dems want illegal immigration for votes (it isn't easy to fight the Republican tide resulting from the "Roe effect") and Reps want them for cheap labor. It's an unholy alliance.

(Hat tip Michelle)
The Septenthian candidate. Or is that the Manchurian candidate? Such subtle distinctions...
A strategery update.

What Did FDR Say When They Bombed Pearl Harbor?

Damn that's a nuisance! Call the police! Too bad we'll never be able to stop the Japanese! But we'll sure put those Kamikazes in jail! Or my name isn't -- uh -- Neville Chamberlain!

Sunday, October 10, 2004

Projection 101: Bad Faith Stickers Out

Before this post gets rolling, you need a refresher on my “Sinful Soapbox: The Local Root Cause”. Here’s the first paragraph to get you enough context to go on (but please read the whole post – it’s one of my favorites):
As I was slowing for the stoplight, I noticed that the car in front of me had a “Defend Freedom, Defeat Bush” bumper sticker from MoveOn.org sloppily taped to the inside of the back window. Ah yes, it’s almost election time and the swing voters might remember leftists in a negative light this November if “Bush = Hitler” bumper stickers keep proliferating. Time to fake center.
Well, this one is going to make your sides hurt so much you may never forgive me! Here we go…

As I was pulling out of church this morning with the boys on our way to get Grandma for a lunch date, I was quickly trapped behind a Jeep at the stoplight with a bumper sticker that read “Bush Is A Moron – And You Know It”. Déjà vu all over again I immediately began to think. Even more amazing, it was in nearly exactly the same place at the same light where I saw the “Defend Freedom, Defeat Bush” bumper sticker a few weeks back.

Then, since we were still right next to the church I noticed that the Jeep’s occupants seemed to be craning their necks and looking at the people and activity that the break between services was generating. The light turned green. Were they making snide comments and laughing at us church-going dim bulbs? No way to tell for sure.

They kept looking. The cars in front of them were gone. And looking. Not moving, that is. Did I mention the light was green?

So I honked for Jesus at the morons.

OK – I’ll wait until you scrape yourself off the floor. And don’t say I didn’t warn you about that pain in your sides.

Of course, the real reason – as was illustrated by my prudential decisions about avoiding dangerous inattention at speed in “The Local Root Cause” -- was keeping the boys safe by avoiding being rear-ended.

But I do know Jesus loves me when I honk for him. And I’ll be voting for W as will anyone who remembers more history than last week. I’m not sure if Jesus is smiling right now at this sinner. I suspect W’s sides would be hurting right now though if he had read this!

And how can I possibly be qualified to identify morons with my tiny little brain? I only have a Mensan IQ and a Master’s degree. In future, I’ll leave it to the experts that drive Jeeps.

But I’ve studied enough psychology over the course of many years to understand what psychological projection is. And large swaths of the left are textbook practitioners of it.

They project a brutal stream of bad manners and personal attacks – while incredibly accusing those of us who practice the golden rule (and also work hard to train our children to do so) of being simultaneously rude, stupid and Machiavellian.

And they project bad faith – possibly because they have no faith themselves.

Unless you’re counting faith in the “Church of the Left” that is.

POSTLUDE: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
- Matthew 7:3 (You did follow that link defining projection didn't you?)

Shocked? NYeT!

Go be SHOCKED and read the update I just added. Tres bien.

An "F" No Matter How You Grade It

First check out the latest pecans from Neville and how they're being roasted. Then check out Hugh's list! Stunning.

And Hugh doesn't even cover what is probably the biggest one of all (see the update at the bottom of "Top Ten Reasons You Might Have Liberal Debating Points"): Alright Mr. Kerry. I couldn't possibly disagree more with your idea of a "global test". But let me be extraordinarily generous and concede that your idea is correct. Then how, pray tell me, could you have possibly voted again Gulf War I as you did? Backed by a U.N. resolution, supported by Saudi Arabia with even Arab troops fighting at our side -- you still voted against.

The Allied coalition in Gulf War I "consisted of 34 countries, including Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Honduras, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, The Netherlands, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Korea, Spain, Syria, Turkey, The United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States."

So that can only mean one thing: for Kerry, even the approval of France is not enough! He only uses that as a smokescreen for something even worse. I'll leave it to you to speculate just what. (Hmmm. The NYeT points out that there are names of U.S. citizens that have been redacted from Duelfer's latest list of Saddam's "Oil For Food" bribees. Hmmm. Just kidding I think. Here's a story by NYeT company IHT that seems to surface the names and JNK isn't on it. So far anyway. But I wonder what Theresa's stock interests are in Chevron, Mobil, Texaco and Bay Oil? Or if she's friendly with Oscar Wyatt Jr.? :)

Here's the best reason I can find:
The question of international military command ha[d] been set aside from the start. According to Chapter VII of the UN Charter the use of force by the UN should be controlled by a Military Staff Committee made up from the five permanent members of the Security Council. But a US diplomat asks indignantly: ‘Can you imagine our guys being told how to fight by a Chinese general?'
I'm quite sure JNK couldn't stomach not having the Viet Cong Chinese in command. Well, in addition to mindlessly heeding Dhimmi party unity of course. What? JNK? Why John Neville Kerry of course!

UPDATE: Check out Cartago Delenda Est for a take similar to my own on Bush's seeming willingness to be a punching bag. And Fast Glass has a comment there right in line with this post.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Allah agrees!

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Flipper Snoots

At least three in the room? Beldar makes an excellent point and chuckle.

But the real story is that it's a snub to his audience. What a condescending, elitist a--hole! And he could tell by looking at the crowd? They didn't look French enough for him? This is risible. I know many folks who way, way outperform flipper's Senate salary and most days you'd never know it the way they dress and conduct themselves.

Stay out there flipping around on your windsurfer Senator -- it's surely the sport of the people.

You Don't Have To Read Scrappleface

And you don't have to laugh out loud either:
:(2004-10-09) -- The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said today it has found what may be a cache of plans by John Forbes Kerry to address the crises in health care, the economy, Iraq and a host of other national traumas.

"We were called in on the case after the plans had gone missing through two presidential debates," said an FBI spokesman. "I have to caution you, however, that it may take several months or more to translate these documents and discover whether they are, in fact, plans. It's still up in the air because the file folders in which we found them had no labels. Apparently, Mr. Kerry doesn't like to label anything."

A spokesman for the Kerry-Edwards campaign refused to comment directly on the FBI discovery.

"Sen. Kerry has said 'I have a plan' and we will leave it at that," said the unnamed source. "The FBI, at the direction of John Ashcroft, is on a fishing expedition to embarrass John Kerry just before the election."

The source noted that "when Martin Luther King Jr. said 'I have a dream' no one demanded that he prove it. Why should Sen. Kerry be held to higher standard?"
Hat tip Powerline.

John Kerry For President -- of France

"Not even French students march on behalf of Zarqawi's beheaders!" VDH rocks:
Meanwhile, Senator Kerry offers neither a plan to stay nor one to leave Iraq, only something "secret." He thinks a country that defeated Japan, Italy, and Germany at the same time as a warm-up to keeping at bay a nuclear Soviet Union and China must fail if she takes on Afghanistan and Iraq at once. His trial balloons so far — beg the Germans and French to come in and give the Iranians clean uranium — have met with polite chuckles. We already know the effect that such warmed-over Carterism will have in Iraq: failure with the added wage of humiliation.

In fact, Kerry's only chance for honest intellectual criticism of the Bush administration might have come from the right: stern remonstrations over our tolerance of looting, inability to train Iraqis in real numbers, laxity in shutting off the borders, failure to control arms depots, tolerance for terrorist enclaves in Fallujah, and sloth in releasing aid money to grass-roots organizations. Yet by putting a tired Richard Holbrook or a whining Jamie Rubin on television, Kerry suggests that far from chastising Bush for doing too little, he believes that the president has already done too much.

The administration's gaffes all share a common theme of restraining our military power in fear of either Middle Eastern or European censure. But once one climbs into a cesspool like Iraq, one must either clean it up or go home, and that means suffering the 48-hour hysteria of the global media about collateral damage in exchange for killing the terrorists and freeing the country. Only that way can we impress the fencesitting Iraqis that we employ an iron fist in service to their own security and prosperity, and thus we — not the beheaders and kidnappers — are their only partners for peace.
Fallujah? Let's roll!

MSM Debate Watch: Advantage Bush

Here's what USA Today/CNN/Gallup's post debate poll shows:
ST. LOUIS — President Bush bounced back from a less-than-stellar performance in his first debate to finish virtually tied with Democrat John Kerry in their second encounter here Friday, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll of debate watchers shows.

Overall, 47% of the 515 registered voters surveyed said Kerry won, while 45% said the edge went to Bush, well within the poll's plus-or-minus 5 percentage point error margin.

And on who could better handle the three key issues of the 2004 campaign — the economy, Iraq and the war on terror — Bush more than held his own.

On the economy, debate watchers said Bush and Kerry tied at 49% each.

But they said Bush came off as better able to handle the war in Iraq, 53% to 46%.

And Bush was rated higher than Kerry on managing the overall war on terror, 56% to 39%
.
So let's think about this. John Kerry's a lawyer and by definition should be a great debater. That's what lawyer's do. But we now have "inarticulate" W up there in a virtual tie with Kerry. And when you look behind the numbers to the issues, Bush is no worse than tied and has the most important issue as a double digit blowout in his favor.

UPDATE: Oh, and John Howard has won! Wretchard has it nailed.

And Bush does this well with memos like this leaking out of ABC -- the network that moderated last night's debate -- and Gibson clearly favoring Kerry with the questions. If it wasn't for the MSM spin, Bush would be trouncing Kerry right now.

Thursday, October 07, 2004

Shockingly Updated: NYeT, NYeT, NYeT!

Plus ca SHOCKED, mais SHOCKED!

UPDATE: A friend points out that the NYeT is busy trying to spin the fact that some U.S. oil companies and individuals took Oil For Food vouchers as proof that the French aren't evil after all. Here's a comment from Roger's blog that holds an X-ray to NYeT's Kerry elves:
Simply laughable, and also totally predictable. When NPR deigned to mention this story Thursday, whom do they interview? France;s ambassador to the US. What's Ambassador Levitte's line? "The suggestion that France was bribed is outrageous! There were Americans who took vouchers as well!" What's the NYT angle today? There were Americans who took vouchers as well!

EARTH TO BILL KELLER: The whole point of the Oil For Fraud scandal is that French and Russian government policy toward Saddam was motivated by a desire for massive economic rewards, both via sweetheart deals for their "national champion" oil companies (TotalFinaElf's W Qurna deal, most egregiously) and for Chirac and Putin's personal associates. And these deals were in violation of the sanctions that Chirac and Putin's governments, as UNSC members, were pledged to uphold! This is fraud, money-laundering, sanctions-breaking and influence-peddling by the governments of France and Russia.

As to the US oil majors receiving vouchers: so what? As I've pointed out a hundred times, every oil company on the planet was in favor of ending sanctions because they wanted to do business with Saddam. XOM, ChevTex, ConocoPhilips: all of them were on record as urging Congress to lift sanctions. This indeed was "blood for oil": the blood of Saddam's victims in exchange for lucrative oil deals for the oil majors.

This was the OPPOSITE of what the US government, both under Clinton and under Bush, favored! The policies advocated by oilmen who couldn't care less about Saddam's slaughterhouse (after all, the oil majors do a vast business with hideous regimes all over the planet) were rejected by Congress.

So the clear, obvious inference is that for the French and Russian governments, commercial considerations outweighed legal and moral obligations. For the US congress and for both the Bush and Clinton administrations, the reverse is true.

Shame on NPR. Shame on Bill Keller and the NYT. This is outrageous, disgusting spin.
Nah. Just another day at the NYeT.

Except for David Brooks, of course. I wonder how much longer he'll last before being sent to the reeducation camp?

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

French Testing Iranian Bribed Inspections End

C'est le Frenchies ala Saddam.

Testing Turkey for missing men.

And today even the (cr)AP gets dangerously close to the truth. Stopped clocks and all that...

Did I forget to mention insufficient bribery? Or that I'm getting nauseous from the wild gyrations?

THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF THE HMUAN MNID

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh?

UPDATE: Of course I assumed you could figure out I didn't write this! Sheeeesh! Found in my email of course...

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

402-2

Charlie votes against his own bill. Hypocrisy knows no bounds...

BUT I Didn't Mean That!

In honor of John Kerry's civil new ads attacking President Bush as a "liar" for suggesting that John Kerry equivocates, I have put together the following little "salute".

The Top Five "Buts" Of John Kerry:
5) "I have nothing but respect for the British, Tony Blair, and what they're been willing to do" -- BUT they've been "coerced and bribed".

4) "I couldn't agree more that the Iraqis want to be free and that they could be free" -- BUT Prime Minister Allawi is a "puppet".

3) Nuclear proliferation is the foremost danger to the world -- BUT we should supply nuclear fuel to Iran since that worked so well with North Korea.

2) Bush wrongly acted unilaterally in Iraq by not agreeing to the demands of France, Germany and Russia -- BUT he should not engage in multilateral talks with North Korea.

1) "But I can do a better job of protecting America’s security because the test that I was talking about was a test of legitimacy, not just in the globe, but elsewhere.”
WHOOPS! Make that SIX! He managed to pack TWO BUTS into that last one!

And he's not actually running for President -- he's actually running to be E.T.!

Monday, October 04, 2004

Deja vu all over again...
NYeT, NYeT, NYeT. Not in the NYeT. Yet.

Guess Who?

"But nobody could say they were interested in oil in the Balkans, or in strategic needs, and the people who tried to say that - like Chomsky - looked ridiculous. So now I was interested."

Sunday, October 03, 2004

10 Best Guesses As To What Kerry Pulled Out Of His Pocket

UPDATE: Preponderance of evidence is now "pen". However, my favorites on the list remain unaffected :)

Shamelessly stolen from Glenn from reader Barry Dauphin:
10 Best Guesses as to what Kerry pulled out of his pocket.

10. Good luck note from Dan Rather.
9. Original Killian memo--on WordPerfect!
8. Directions to Cambodian Christmas party.
7. John Edwards' billable hours on campaign trail.
6. Appointment slip for next Botox treatment.
5. French to English dictionary.
4. Lucky CIA hat!
3. Commitment papers for Theresa.
2. Leaves of Grass.
1. One way ticket to Boston!!!!

I'm going with number 4.
There was just no way I could allow you to miss that. And Glenn's choice is right of course. It does just barely edge #8 though... ^_-

Silly Me

UPDATE: See correction here. But not the integrity part -- pecan plantations referenced below remain in force.
------

Why didn't I think to bring reference materials to my oral exams?

I-N-T-E-G-R-I-T-Y.

And even if I didn't have any there was no way to cheat. Looks like Kerry forgot about the backstage cameras.

Pecan plantations anyone?

And Some Hope To Make Things Glow

Did I forget to mention that there are more natives on the pecan plantation?
C'est le frauder. N'est pas?

Today's MSM Update

NYeT flunks with a CAPITAL F. While Peter and Tom hit bottom and start digging (as Charles would say).

Meanwhile, Dr. Newcomer is about to pulverize the latest Rather/Mapes pygmy into bloody DNA bits on the wall. Dan Rather still believes that there isn't any DNA in forensic document examination doncha know. Sigh...

Wretchard On When To Hit The Gas

My Cambodian Christmas in Baghdad?
While the Sunni insurgency is not an intrinsically large problem and Falluja something that can be recovered with ease; an Iranian bomb or a Kerry victory are situations from which no recovery may be possible. Therefore the necessary (but not sufficient) condition for victory, not just in the Sunni triangle, may be a non-nuclear Iran and the election of a President at least partially committed to victory against terror. We can only say 'faster please' when the car is not in reverse. But as Gerecht implies, we will have to wait until November to see if we have any car left at all or whether Iraq will be the future scene of "My Cambodian Christmas in Baghdad".
RTWT (Read The Whole Thing).